I suppose I feel about Chafee as a lot of democrats on the left feel about Lieberman. And I think I would have more to justify that feeling if I looked at Chafee's voting record compared to Lieberman's.

But you pick your fights and this isn't the right time or place to pick the fight. This is one of the five senate seats the democrats are counting on winning. I would much rather have Chafee organizing with the GOP and voting with them 40% of the time than his opponent who would vote to organize with the democrats and vote with the GOP much less than 40% of the time.

How long do you think Chafee will remain a Republican if we have a 50-50 split? Sorry, guys, this man is a treacherous liberal RINO who has no business in the GOP Senate Caucus.

Go Laffey!

I think the chances of Chafee remaining a republican in a 50-50 split is much higher than Laffey winning the general election or Whitehouse not caucusing with the democrats. For example, Chafee didn't jump when Jeffords did and didn't jump when Talent's special election shifted the majority back. That doesn't guarantee he won't jump in the future, but it sure helps bolster the odds compared to Laffey winning or Whitehouse switching. Further, the odds of there being a 50-50 split go down with Chafee running since he is more likely to win than Laffey.

I'm not a liberal who looks at the world as I would want it to be, but a conservative who looks at the world as it is. Thus my choices are often less to do with what I would prefer in a perfect world, and more to do with the best that can realistically be achieved in the real world.

There was no special election for Talent - other than the special election in the normal 2002 cycle, where the GOP was the winner with 51 seats. So Chafee gets no credit for 'not jumping' since he had no control over the Senate's direction if he had. The GOP still would have 50 at the time.

He also gets no credit for not jumping with Jeffords because Daschle did not offer Chafee a committee chair to do so (like Jeffords) - why would he make such an offer? Jeffords gave the Dems control, that is all they needed.

Speaking of Chafee, his seniority (assuming a win) is about to put him in line to be the chair of the foreign relations committee.

He also does not vote 40% of the time with us anymore. His 2005 rating with ACU was a TWELVE!

He publically expressed his refusal to vote for Bush in 2004, stating he would waste his vote on a write-in for Bush Sr.

I will not be the slightest bit disappointed if he loses - as he is not even a Snowe or Collins and is light years away from being as good for us as Specter.

The conventional wisdom seems to be that only Chaffee can keep that seat in the GOP column. I'll concede that the odds may be better with him, but I'm not convinced that Laffey can't win any more than I believed Pat Toomey couldn't win Spector's senate seat in Pennsylvania. Laffey has been elected and re-elected Mayor of a town where Democrats dominate, so he obviously has some cross-over appeal. And I think its fair to say that part of his poll numbers in a fall matchup can be traced to NRSC ads run against him to support Chaffee. He also appears to be a powerful campaigner, whereas the all but certain Democrat nominee is underwhelming to be charitable. This is one of those races where the GOP has a chance to nominate someone who would be a more reliable vote for implementing a conservative agenda, that could actually win in November. Especially with Governor Carcieri on the same ballot. But should Chaffee prevail next month, I would hope Republicans would close ranks around him, because I'll still take a RINO over a Democrat any day. Unless that Democrat is Zell Miller. And Sheldon Whitehouse, you're no Zell Miller.

Ken