Sen. Lincoln Chaffee (R-RI) trails his Club for Growth-sponsored, sure-loser primary challenger Steve Laffey by 51-34. Unlike the Lieberman race this ideological purge actually will have the effect of changing the party affiliation of that seat, assuming that the CT for Lieberman party keeps its promise to caucus with Dems. The self-destructive pathology behind this purge adds that extra layer of meaning which should bump this up to a top-tier news story right? Um, no.
Some days I wonder whether many in the news media personally identify with Lieberman, so that his defeat is theirs. They certainly seem to overlap in perspective on the Iraq war (count the war critics on major Sunday chat shows, 2002 until today. you might need both hands). That would explain why they follow some primary races with a consuming passion and ignore others, even though the basic narrative is more or less the same.
(*) The actual role of bloggers in the Laffey challenge is minimal. But so was their role in Lieberman’s loss, as is shown by the many blogger-backed challenges that have gone nowhere. That hardly stopped major outlets from presenting the blogs as an inflexible ideological ratchet that singlehandedly drives moderates out of the party, a description that interestingly enough fits the Club for Growth to a T.
Ugh
But there was no Bush on Senator lip-lock in Chaffee’s case, therefore nothing to see here.
Punchy
Doesn’t “Club for Growth” sound like a sub shop?
Darrell
Tim, why when a conservative Republican knocks off a more liberal Republican challenge you refer to it as a “purge”, but when a more liberal Dem knocks off a more conservative Dem, well, that’s just a “race”?
The Other Steve
Someone needs his mommy.
Anyway, it should be noted that the Club for Growth has a pretty bad track record. They’ve supported many primary challengers over the years, and have seldom ever won a race.
They have had some limited success with ballot measures, and loyalty oaths(er, no-new-taxes pledges), but that’s about it.
Doesn’t stop them from continuing to try though.
Mac Buckets
They have Sunday shows in Tim’s Bizarro-World? But they’re on Wednesday night, right? “Me Russ Timmert! Today me have many guests, all for war…”
Tim F.
Darrell,
The Club for Growth has made no bones about its purpose here. They think that Laffey lacks ideological purity and must go. The ideological nature of the Lieberman race is actually much less clear relative to the question of character. After all, the Dems have plenty of politicans to Lieberman’s right. Large numbers supported the Iraq war and made off without a primary fight. Harry Reid, minority leader, opposes abortion. You have to look at Lieberman personally to understand why he did such an effective job of alienating his CT base.
For a start, think about why you like him so much. That should tell you something.
Darrell
I don’t like him so much, so it tells me nothing. But thanks for playing!
Tim F.
Mac,
You might be surprised to know that the baleful anti-war media mostly exists in your head. Check the actual numbers of serious Iraq critics from 2002 through, say, 2005 and get back to me.
Darrell
Now that is funny.
Tim F.
Glad to finally find a GOPer who says that. That makes you a very uncommon Republican and definitely at odds with the top leadership at RNC and in the White House.
Tim F.
The appeal to incredulity fallacy seems to be popular tonight. Who’s up next? Is PaulL out there?
Mac Buckets
Your right, Tim. If only we could get the pro-war media to stop only reporting the GOOD news from Iraq! Why do we only get story after story about how 77% of Iraqis think that the war in Iraq has been worth it to remove Saddam, and how 2/3 think Iraq is moving in the right direction? What about the bad things that happen there? You never hear about them!
Tim F.
Link it, Mac. I’m sure that you are citing a recent poll.
Mac Buckets
You would know that I was, Tim…if the “pro-war” media had reported it, right?
Pb
I’m sure that at some point removing Saddam seemed “worth it” for some Iraqis–especially if they weren’t Sunnis–but given the current levels of sectarian violence, it might not look like such a great idea right now.
But actually I’d be interested to know quite a few more details about how a scientific, representative poll of all Iraqis would be conducted–I think it’d be pretty difficult. Certainly not by telephone, I’d assume?
John S.
So far as I can see, Mac is too good to link to an actual poll. Therefore, we can only assume he pulled these numbers from his ass until otherwise verified.
demimondian
Save the snark, here, Time — he is citing a recent poll.
Recent, at least, it was recent in the cosmological sense.
Tsulagi
No doubt that poll was taken in the comfort of the secure Pink Zone, the Fox newsroom. MOE ~100%.
Funny thing was I did a Google search on Iraq poll 77% and the first hit I got was a Zogby poll from February. In the poll, 72% of the troops then serving in Iraq said we should exit that country within a year. Goddamned Nazi appeasers!
Rusty Shackleford
Some nights, when its clear and the wind blows just right, I can actually hear Mac Buckets clapping. Recently its been getting louder and louder.
demimondian
You should get that looked at. Auditory hallucinations are nothing to trifle with, whether or not they’re accompanied by disturbed thinking.
Tim F.
Back up a minute. Do people still think that? We’re talking about the old story about a media conspiracy burying the GOOD news out of Iraq, right? I thought that even the NRO gave up on that line. This has to be some inspired sort of self-parody.
Rusty Shackleford
*CLAP* *CLAP* *CLAP* type type type *CLAP* *CLAP* *CLAP* type type type…
Mac Buckets
So it must be an old poll, a Fox News biased poll, a made-up poll. Notice not one of you could come up with a poll that disputes the figures I quoted. I mean, if I had said that 77% of Americans think George Bush is doing a hell of a job, you’d have had no problems posting a poll to show I was making that up.
So why would you guys doubt that 3/4 of Iraqis really believe it was “worth it” to get rid of Saddam? Why would you doubt that 2/3 think Iraq is going in the right direction? Why would that strike you as nonsensical?
Could it be that the constant all-bad-news reportage that Tim’s imaginary “pro-war” media has promoted over the last few years has created an image in your minds of Iraq as a hellhole where everyone walks around smelling the stench of doom, death and despair? It must be worse now than in Michael Moore’s happy, kite-flying days of Saddam, right?
How can the polls of Iraqis be so at odds with the Western media/anti-war depictions of Iraq? Or, as the BBC put it after a similar poll earlier this year:
Shocking.
demimondian
And then, Mac cites a poll taken immediately after the election last winter.
Priceless, and valueless, all at once.
chopper
what i also find shocking is that mac thinks that it’s still 2005.
Zifnab
Wait… 2000-what? Oh shit! I left my oven on!
Zifnab
linkage!
Zifnab
Oops! Maybe that was a bit old.
Pooh
Well, many of know several places to find current polling data on Presidential approval. I don’t see how your next point follows at all:
Why would we doubt an uncited poll when we have no off-hand knowledge of where to find this or any related poll? I’m not sure as it strikes as as non-sensical so much as non-true. And citing to a December 2005 poll doesn’t do much for your credibility…
Pooh
Yup, polling data is only good for 8 months and 19 days.
Zifnab
This, however, is a fun poll. And is about as new as it gets: Thursday August 31st, 2006.
Zifnab
In Mac’s defense:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/PollVault/story?id=1389228
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4514414.stm
Both published Dec 12, 2005 presumably refering to the same poll. According to that poll at least Iraqis were feeling brighter and happier. But I suspect the 8 months since then have changed things rather dramatically.
chopper
actually, if you click the link, they take you to the same data they collected in december 2005. i think the date you’re citing is the current date, added by the website to the page you’re viewing.
Barry
Tim F: “Some days I wonder whether many in the news media personally identify with Lieberman, so that his defeat is theirs. ”
It’s the corruption, and the arrogance. Most of these ‘jounalists’ had and have little problem parroting the administration’s line – they sold out long ago. So has Lieberman, otherwise known as the 1 Democrat who can be counted on to stand with a couple hundred Republicans to make things officially ‘bipartisan’. When the ‘journalists’ see one of their fellow prosties getting what he deserves, it makes them nervous.
Arrogance – Lieberman acted as if he owned that Senate seat; he couldn’t accept accountability. Similarly, many of the ‘journalists’ don’t feel that the views of peons should count. They only want to hear from their fellow elites.
Pb
Zifnab,
Check the date on the bottom, that probably *is* the poll data Mac was (selectively) citing, and it’s from January.
Zifnab
Gak. My bad.
Zifnab
On topic with the post, I am a bit confused. Did Chafee eat a baby or something in the past month. I’ll be honest, I haven’t been watching this race too closely, but given the powerful negative GOP stance on Laffey I assumed this was to put nails in his coffin, not tame the savage right-wing ninja.
Besides, I thought Chafee was a Gang-of-14-er and a rather lukewarm supporter of the President. Why is the GOP so adamant about saving this guy? I don’t get it.
demimondian
Zif — they aren’t. In fact, they’re feeling decidedly lukewarm about him, too; they’d be a lot happier with his Republican opponent in the Senate. Unfortunately, his Republican opponent is infinitely unelectable in Rhode Island, and they’d rather see Chafee than any Democrat.
Otto Man
Actually, there used to be a brothel in Atlanta that went by the name of the Center for Personal Growth. You’ve got to love hookers with a sense of humor.
demimondian
Wasn’t there some 1990’s scam called the “Hair Club for Men”, or some such? For some reason, “Club for Growth” makes me think of them.
The Other Steve
Looks like Mac Buckets wants his mommy.
Tsulagi
In the Zogby poll I linked to above, only 23% of the troops serving in Iraq, with presumably some first-hand insight gained there, agreed with the president’s position that we should stay there without an end date. The remainder thought we should leave exiting from now to no later than the end of 2006. Those polled face to face were Army, Guard, and Marine.
What’s their problem? Oh, I know, it’s the dearth of happy news. That evil Soros funded media cabal keep pounding them with negative news right in country so they can’t correctly see with their own eyes! Wow, though evil, you do have to admire that level of competence. Hey, how about Fox sending Geraldo and O’Reilly immediately to Iraq to show those misguided Nazi appeasers the error of their thinking. I’m sure they could tour the country straightening the troops out while enjoying Disneyland ME.
Proud Liberal
MacBuckets as usual is going on and on about some ancient poll in Iraq. Lets look at a more recent poll in Iraq shall we? Some snippets:
.
Proud Liberal
and as far as the “We’ll stand down when they stand up” theory, this doesn’t bode very well:
Zifnab
You fight a quagmire with the soldiers you have, not the soldiers you wish you had Tsulgai.
Pb
Tsulagi,
I don’t think Geraldo would be welcome, considering why he was kicked out last time (revealing troop movements and all that…). As for O’Reilly–has he ever been to Iraq? Good luck getting him over there in the first place.
DougJ
No sympathy for the Lincster here. Fish or cut bait — switch parties or start being a real right-winger.
Tom in Texas
Well the lovely Ann Coulter has weighed in on this one. Her post where she (shockingly) supports Laffey over Chafee is entitled They Shot The Wrong Lincoln. Isn’t the whole assassinating a politician joke kinda overdone, especially for her?
Now, which party was it claimed a mandate after winning by a fraction? It’ll come to me in a moment I’m sure…
You know, I’ve often wondered if some mandyke ditched Ann at the proverbial alter during her days in the liberal hotspot of Ann Arbor. It would account for her seething hatred of gays and the left.
Yes she ridiculed a man for following his family into politics — yet she supports a man who followed his father everywhere (in fact some might argue he couldn’t survive without his dad).
All in all, a rather uninspired effort from Ann. I wonder if she’s lost it. This is just stale. It’s neither original, or truly offensive (as compared to Ann’s prior work, not as to what a decent human would find offensive. The two are not related in any way).
Mr.Ortiz
Rats, I’m late to the flame war. Oh well, I’ll say it anyway:
Mac, if Iraqis are optimistic about their future it’s because they’re patriotic and not willing to accept defeat just yet. The poll you cite shows some confidence in the Iraqi military and police force, a slight majority approving of the new Iraqi government, and a whopping 80% claiming little or no confidence in the occupying forces.
So it seems like the basis of their optimism is “once the Americans leave, things should get back to normal”. The longer we stay, the more they believe we have no intention of leaving, and the more pessimistic they become, as evidenced by the poll Proud Liberal cited.
The Other Steve
I am very afraid that Rumsfeld may be right.
I think if we leave Iraq precipitously, the Fremen will band together under Maud’Dib and ride the sandworms out across the world, bringing death and destruction!
Either that, or Iraq will become a base of operations for Cobra Commander.
Either way, things will be very bad.
mrmobi
Sandworms… I hate ’em!
John S.
Thanks, Betelgeuse.
Tsulagi
Yeah, a bit empty shrill for little tranny Annie. Maybe because she’s a little confused. Global Warming is shrinking the polar ice caps while Global Stupidity is shrinking her base. She’s melting.
vetiver
Tim F: Check the actual numbers of serious Iraq critics from 2002 through, say, 2005 and get back to me.
Mac B: Your right, Tim. If only we could get the pro-war media to stop only reporting the GOOD news from Iraq!
Today’s date is September 1, 2006 — i.e., not part of 2005, nor any one of the previous three years. You might want to update your calendar accordingly.
If you doubt that the media tilted pro-war in the time period Tim specified, go read Judith Miller’s greatest hits, for one influential example. What’s she up to these days, anyway?
(Also — “you’re” not “your,” which is an easy mistake to make in a rush. Damn homonyms.)
mrmobi
John S.: you recognized me!
Jay C
Actually, looked at objectively (if that’s possible here) the Chaffee-Laffey race in RI does have a number of similarities between the Lamont-Lieberman contest: a Party regular (ideology notwithstanding) facing a more ideological primary challenger, with the possible loss of a Senate seat in the balance – but in news terms,it’s like being the second guy to do something record-setting. The Connecticut election seems to have drained much of the drama from the story: but the reasons the Republican Establishment is backing Chaffee (loony-leftist though they may see him as) shouldn’t be surprising.
However “fringe” he might be ideologically, Chaffee is still a “mainstream” Republican, will caucus with them. and has R seniority (a lot) – most Democratic honchos turned out to boost Joe Lieberman (though with varying degrees of
enthusiasm) in his race: that’s what “Party regulars” are supposed to do: and if Steve Laffey does win the primary, it’s doubtful the GOP will back off supporting him – especially as that would put the RI seat in significant jeopardy: and the Repubs are going all the retentions they can muster to keep control of the Upper House next session.
John S.
Betelgeuse 2008.
Where can I sign up to work for the campaign?
Vladi G
I wonder, did the people who conducted Mac’s poll ask all of the dead Iraqis what they thought? I’m guessing most of the dead people aren’t in favor of the war.
Zifnab
When all our dead soldiers join them, they’ll be greated as liberators.
Wickedpinto
Chaffee would never be the VP nominee of the republicans.
the democrats accepted lieberman, and then turned on him. It shows the fickle nature, and the fundamental will to power that is the only motivator of the democratic party.
Kimmitt
Again, we are not leaving Iraq. We have very large, very expensive bases we have built there, and we are not abandoning them.