NationStates Jolt Archive

From the Guardian. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4502634,00.html)


By BROOKE DONALD

Associated Press Writer

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) - Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee said Monday he plans to support his party in November but may write in a candidate instead of voting for President Bush.

The Rhode Island lawmaker, known for moderate views that often run counter to the Bush administration, said he was going to vote for a member of his party even though he disagrees with the president on many issues.

``I'm a Republican,'' said Chafee, who was appointed to the Senate in November 1999 to fill the seat when his father, John, died.

Chafee also said that Democratic Sen. John Kerry's lead in Rhode Island is so commanding, according to polls, that his vote won't affect the outcome.

``Practically, I come from Rhode Island. I hear Kerry's got 70 percent or so,'' he said. Asked if that meant he thought his vote didn't count, Chafee replied, ``Yes.''

Chafee was responding to questions from southern New England reporters and editors meeting at The Providence Journal for a workshop on environmental policies and their effect on the election.

Chafee has opposed the administration's push to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and has criticized Bush's handling of the postwar reconstruction of Iraq. He was the only Republican senator to vote against the October 2002 resolution that gave Bush the authority to invade Iraq.

The Republican said the party's direction in the future will determine his political career as well. He said he's ``not OK'' with the conservative platform from the Republican convention, but would not say if he'd consider switching parties in his next election in 2006.

``It wasn't that long ago that moderates had more of a voice,'' Chafee said. ``It's a cycle that I hope will come back.'' I agree completely with you, Senator Chaffee. I hope it does as well.

Yes, and not all Democrats are voting for Kerry, your point?

Lincoln Chafee's been my favorite Republican Senator ever since he voted against the Iraq War Resolution.

I'm certain that Zell Miller won't be voting for Kerry this year...of course, it's questionable whether Senator Miller is truly a democrat, but my point stands.

I'm certain that Zell Miller won't be voting for Kerry this year...of course, it's questionable whether Senator Miller is truly a democrat, but my point stands.
i don't know what Miller is, but he's not a Democrat. he's not a Republican either. some sort of exotic shrieking monkey, i'm guessing, possibly carrying rabies.

i don't know what Miller is, but he's not a Democrat. he's not a Republican either. some sort of exotic shrieking monkey, i'm guessing, possibly carrying rabies.

Just because he wanted to challenge the hardball guy(Mathews?) to a dual doesn't mean he doesn't have all his marbles! ;)

Yes, and not all Democrats are voting for Kerry, your point?
Just that it's interesting to see that a moderate Republican thinks his President isn't worth supporting. I wonder how many other moderate Republicans feel alienated by this administration.

Just that it's interesting to see that a moderate Republican thinks his President isn't worth supporting. I wonder how many other moderate Republicans feel alienated by this administration.
Add Ed Koch to the list of big-name Democrats voting for Bush. As for regular people, many more Dems are voting for Bush this year than there are Republicans voting for Kerry.

Add Ed Koch to the list of big-name Democrats voting for Bush. As for regular people, many more Dems are voting for Bush this year than there are Republicans voting for Kerry.
We'll have to see about that. I'm content to wait and see the breakdown on November 3. Doesn't matter to me who gets more of a crossover vote as long as it means we get a new President in January.

Just that it's interesting to see that a moderate Republican thinks his President isn't worth supporting. I wonder how many other moderate Republicans feel alienated by this administration.

You are looking at one. Granted, I'm not a true Repu9blican, but I am an independent (not the party) with some very republican leanings. I don't like Bush or Kerry, but since I disagree so strongly with some of Bush's policies (and not so much the Iraq war as his handling of it), I can't vote for him.

And since, in this system, not voting is the norm, it makes more sense for me to cast my vote for the other side, in the hope that the Republican party will reform and become more moderate so that I can vote for. No one owes any party any loyalty, and if you becomes disillusioned with a party you shouldn't not vote, but should vote for the other side as punishment in the hope of reform. As long as your vote doesnn't go to their opponent most of the time they couldn't care less if they've lost your support if you aren't one of their base supporters.

Apologize for any mispellings, I have to read about 30 pages for Foreign Policy tomorrow and it's a bit late (I'll admit that I procrastinated in order to win $35 in a game of poker :)) so I really need to get started and stop trawling the boards.

We'll have to see about that. I'm content to wait and see the breakdown on November 3. Doesn't matter to me who gets more of a crossover vote as long as it means we get a new President in January.
You see, we actually agree on ocassion. I think the only poll that counts is on Nov 2nd...but you have to admit, things are not looking good for your side.

I don't think Kerry is done just yet...but the pop-up thermometer in that turkey is starting to loosen up.

Nah, Kerry is done. It looks like his campaign was working with CBS to push the forged memos. The other media outlets will not let this one lie.

Nah, Kerry is done. It looks like his campaign was working with CBS to push the forged memos. The other media outlets will not let this one lie.
Shhhh, don't tell the libs that. Then they might try to pull a late switch like they did in New Jersey in 2002.

Shhhh, don't tell the libs that. Then they might try to pull a late switch like they did in New Jersey in 2002.

Oh man, that was a outrage. My school had a lot of Jersey Democrats and I had a great time tearing them up for defending that obviously illegal substitution.

Nah, Kerry is done. It looks like his campaign was working with CBS to push the forged memos. The other media outlets will not let this one lie.
Point one--the Kerry campaign had nothing to do with the memos. Point two--Kerry is far from done. If you want to believe that, be my guest. I'll be laughing in November.

Point one--the Kerry campaign had nothing to do with the memos. Point two--Kerry is far from done. If you want to believe that, be my guest. I'll be laughing in November.

HAHAHA. http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+CBS+arranged+for+meeting+with+Lockhart&expire=&urlID=11703685&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fpoliticselections%2Fnation%2Fpresident%2F2004-09-20-cbs-documents_x.htm&partnerID=1660

Bob Schrum, going 0-8 this November!

HAHAHA. http://usatoday.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=USATODAY.com+-+CBS+arranged+for+meeting+with+Lockhart&expire=&urlID=11703685&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usatoday.com%2Fnews%2Fpoliticselections%2Fnation%2Fpresident%2F2004-09-20-cbs-documents_x.htm&partnerID=1660

Bob Schrum, going 0-8 this November!According to that very article, "Neither the Democratic Party or the Kerry campaign had anything to do with the documents."

Did you miss that part?

According to that very article,

Did you miss that part?

They had contact. I'd guess there is a good chance that the Kerry campaign worked with CBS. I will not post on the issue any more until more evidence emerges.