A full roster of elected officials and almost 200 people packed the Rhode Island Democratic headquarters in Warwick Saturday morning to kick off a statewide effort to support presidential nominee Hillary Clinton. The storefront office was standing room only as the governor and our congressional delegation energized attendees with their perspectives on the race and the importance of a Clinton win.

The rally, which began at 10:30, lasted about half an hour, after which many of the attendees pulled out cell phones and laptops and began to make calls for Clinton. Governor Gina Raimondo started off the event by talking about the critical nature of November’s choice.

“There’s more at stake in this election than any I can remember in my lifetime, because the consequences of Trump presidency are so terrible that it’s hard to even fathom,” said Raimondo.

She went on to talk about what she says when asked by voters why she supports Hillary, stressing Clinton’s values and experience. “Hillary’s values are what I believe are the right ones: making college affordable, investing in K-12 education and universal preschool, raising the minimum wage, investing in infrastructure and building an economy from the middle out, not from the top down. And she’s the most experienced person ever to run for the US Presidency.”

Sen Jack Reed picked up on the theme of experience. “She is the best prepared individual to lead this country that I have seen in my lifetime. On the other side, we have an individual that lacks the emotional, experiential abilities to be President. That is obvious for all to see.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse drew on American and Rhode Island history to make his case for Clinton. “People say that we have a divided country. Well, we do. But in our history, we had a country so divided that we were fighting a civil war. And in that civil war, we could not have been more divided. What did the President then do? He called us to the ‘better angels of our nature.’ Donald Trump stirs the darkest demons of our nature.”

Whitehouse continued, “Bigotry is deplorable. Period. And that’s a Rhode Island lesson that goes back to when George Washington, when he was campaigning for President, wrote to a Rhode Island synagogue guaranteeing that it would always be the policy of the United States to give ‘to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance.’” Said Whitehouse, “Tell that to Donald Trump.”

Rep. Jim Langevin (D-2) echoed Whitehouse, saying that Trump draws on some of his followers’ worst impulses. “I hope that when we go to the polls in November that we speak loud and clear as a nation that we reject that kind of politics.”

“This election,” said Rep. David Cicciline (D-1), “is a referendum on the founding principles of this country. We’re a country that was founded on the ideas that everyone should be treated with dignity, free from discrimination, that everyone should have an opportunity to get ahead, have access to quality education, make decisions about their own healthcare, and in so many ways, this is a referendum on those ideas.” He added a pointed personal observation: “Jim and I know first-hand serving in the House what the country would look like if Donald Trump and the Republican Party have their way.”

Democratic Party Chair Joe McNamara (RI D-19) closed the rally by asking the room to finish a few sentences by reading off cards that were handed out to attendees at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. McNamara led the group in a series of powerful and emotional call-and-response prompts. “We know that we are stronger together,” said McNamara. “Under a Clinton administration, all families will…” The whole room shouted, “Rise Together.”

“And we know that bigotry will never prevail,” said McNamara, “because…” “Love trumps hate.”

“And with a President Clinton, we know that we will have…” “A future to believe in.”

As the attendees broke to make calls, a reporter for RI Future asked Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse specifically about the importance a Clinton win for efforts to combat climate change and protect Rhode Island’s shoreline.

Whitehouse cited two reasons that make a Democratic win essential. “First of all,” said Whitehouse, “Trump has gone down the sort of lunatic path of pretending that climate change is a hoax, and that all the scientists and every American scientific society, all the scientists at NASA and NOAA, the scientists at every American national lab, are all wrong or are in on some evil conspiracy. Which is almost creepy as a point of view, it’s so wrong.”

“And then, second, he’ll be representing a party that basically has become the political wing of the fossil fuel industry. So, for both of those reasons, it makes it far less likely that anything will get done if he’s the President. Now, Nature does not forgive, and sooner or later, it will become clear to everybody that we’ve made a terrible, terrible mistake. We just don’t want that realization to come too late.”

An RI Future reporter caught up with Rep. Cicilline to ask about the reticence of some to throw their support behind Clinton, and what he would say to local progressives who are still on the fence.

“Anyone who examines these two candidates carefully, who shares progressive values, frankly, the values of our Party, will see it’s very clear that there is only one candidate who both has a record of getting things done in this area, and also a set of policies that will really advance our country and move forward on many important progressive priorities. Ultimately, elections are about choices, and while I know there was a lot of enthusiasm for Sen. Sanders — and I’m a huge fan of his, he raised some incredibly important issues in the campaign — I think he would be the first to say that the campaign was not about him as a person, it was about a set of issues and a commitment to move forward on those issues.”

Cicilline continued that a Trump win, “Would set back our movement and our country significantly, and this is going to be a close election. We can’t take anything for granted. We need to work hard to vindicate the progressive values we care about by electing Sec. Clinton.”

In many ways, Congressman Jim Langevin and upstart progressive challenger John Hamilton have a lot in common even as they compete in the Democratic primary for the second congressional district seat.

For example, they both think Langevin is a strong favorite to win.

“It’s an uphill battle,” Hamilton said. “He has a lot of money and he’s the incumbent. All the advantages go to the incumbent.”

Langevin said, “I’m hopeful and optimistic about it. I feel good about the race, but never overconfident.”

And both describe themselves as being progressive.

“I’m a progressive from way back,” Hamilton said, “which used to be known as a liberal.”

Langevin said, “If you look at my voting record I think I have a very progressive voting record.”

On policy matters, too, Langevin and Hamilton agree more often than they disagree. Both cited income inequality as the biggest issue facing America.

“To my view concentrated wealth at the top is the problem,” said Hamilton.

Langevin said, “We talk about fighting for a living wage and closing the income gap and trying to create an economic system that the vast majority of American families would benefit under, as opposed to the 1 percent, I’m a pretty consistent vote on all of those things.”

It’s the subtle differences in their responses that shows why Hamilton is challenging Langevin, despite conceding that “we’re both pretty good” when asked where the two candidates find agreement.

“I’m seeking to be a change agent in this election,” said Hamilton, who was inspired to run for congress by Bernie Sanders.

Langevin, the eight-term Democrat first elected in 2000, said, “It is my job to reflect the views of my constituents, the people I represent, and I hope I’ve been doing that effectively.”

Both are voting for Hillary Clinton in November, but Langevin is an avid supporter of hers and Hamilton, who served two terms in the state legislature in the early 1980’s, more reluctantly. He says he returned to politics only because “both parties are taking a wrong direction.” For 30 years, less-than-liberal Democrats helped Republicans and corporations ruin the American middle class, according to Hamilton.

“The Democratic Party took a wrong direction in the 1990’s,” he said. “We had the golden years of economics in America … and what happened? Well, we started cutting taxes for the very wealthy – the billionaires, the millionaires and the corporations – so we had less revenue to reinvest in our country. Then we started doing these trade agreements … and then we deregulated the banks, we did away with Glass Steagall, which was an important separation of investment and regular banking. I call those the triad of middle class destruction. We had job sucking trade agreements, we had bank deregulation and we had the trickle down economics and taxation that started with Reagan and then later in the Clinton era.”

On these finer points, Langevin and Hamilton only partially agree.

Both candidates oppose trade deals, in general, and the Trans Pacific Partnership, in particular. But there is a concerted difference in their words.

“I see TPP as nothing more than a corporate takeover of America and I consider anyone who votes for TPP to be voting against the United States of America,” Hamilton said.

Langevin was more measured, saying, “I’m not a supporter of that right now. I’m waiting to see what is going to be negotiated in terms of an agreement. I have not been impressed with many of the trade agreements in the past, including NAFTA, that have worked well for other countries, it seems, and corporations but hasn’t benefited American workers or American companies as much as it has overseas companies.”

They have stronger differences on reinstating the Glass Steagall, which historically prevented lending banks from also being investment banks but was repealed in 1999. It is a favorite policy prescription of  many progressives looking to reign in Wall Street..

“Not that I’m opposed to reinstalling the provisions of Glass-Steagall,” Langevin said, “but the Consumer Protection Division that we just created, I do want to give that a chance to work to see if that could be more effective.”

Both said gun safety and gender equality are important areas for Congress to act on next session. Hamilton is solidly pro choice and Langevin more pro life when it comes to abortion, but it’s hard to imagine legislation that would divide them as Langevin often votes against anti-abortion bills sponsored by Republicans. Langevin voted with Republicans last session on a bill that would have made it more difficult for Syrian refugees to come to the United States and Hamilton criticized him for it. But, for the most part, if Republicans control the House of Representatives again, which Langevin said seems likely, he and Hamilton would probably often vote the same way.

But there are big differences between Langevin’s style and Hamilton’s – and nowhere is that difference more acute than in their approaches to the proposed Burrillville power plant.

“That plant is not needed in Burrillville,” Hamilton said. “If there is any politician who hasn’t come out against it and stood with them against this power plant, they need to send that message that they are never getting their vote again.”

Langevin isn’t taking a position on the issue.

“I think everyone recognizes that we have to do more to meet our state’s energy needs and help bring down the cost of energy and some feel that the Burrillville power plant is something that will help in that area but we also have to mindful of the environmental impacts,” he said. “That’s why I support the whole process and fact finding that’s happening right now. Although it’s not a federal issue, it’s local and state, I’m certainly monitoring the issue very closely.”

Hamilton, whose first political awakening came when protesting against a proposed nuclear power plant in Charlestown in the 1970’s, called Langevin’s hands-off approach “unacceptable.” Remembering how they stopped the proposed nuclear power plant from being developed where Ninigret National Wildlife Refuge is today, he said, “John Chafee and Claiborne Pell did not remain neutral on the Charlestown nuclear power plant.”

“Sometimes you have to break the rules to stand up for something really important,” said Cicilline, who predicted the Democrats will eventually get the Republicans to vote on the ‘no fly, no buy’ gun safety bill they are angling for. “Sometimes these fights require finding a way to get in the way. Sometimes it’s the only way you can both bring attention and galvanize people to move forward and make change.”

Langevin called the sit-in, “among the most meaningful, impactful and inspiring days of my entire time in Congress. We are demanding a vote and we are not going to go away until we get one.”

If you couldn’t make it to the yesterday, here’s the video of the entire event, which also featured Shannon Watts, the founder of Moms Demand Action, Providence Mayor Jorge Elorza, Providence Public Safety Commissioner Steve Pare, General Treasurer Seth Magaziner, representatives Aaron Regunberg and Teresa Tanzi as well as several others.

Congressmen David Cicilline and Jim Langevin both supported an amendment to the House military spending bill that would stopped the United States from transferring Textron-made cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia.

It was narrowly defeated by 12 votes, 204 to 216. Neither of Rhode Island’s congressman could be immediately reached for comment. But Congressman Hank Johnson posted a news release about the bill and his speech before the House Armed Service Committee (Congressman Cicilline can be seen in the background).

“Earlier this year, the Saudi led-coalition dropped cluster bombs in Yemen’s that struck a rehabilitation center for the blind – which also has a school for blind children,” Johnson said. “The destruction of the school and the injuries sustained by the children were unbearably gruesome. This deliberate and reckless use of cluster munitions by Saudi Arabia highlights their complete disregard for the welfare of innocent people. This is unacceptable. We cannot ignore our duty to protect basic human rights values here and around the world. There is something fundamentally wrong with preaching human and civil rights here at home while we export death abroad. Rather, Congress must step up our efforts to keep such internationally reviled weapons out of the hands of those that would misuse them.”

If passed, the bill would have further limited Rhode Island-based Textron’s market for cluster bombs. Located in downtown Providence, Textron, a defense industry conglomerate, is the last North American manufacturer of cluster bombs, which have been banned by 119 nations but not but the United States and Saudi Arabia. The US is known to have sold Saudi Arabia Textron-made cluster bombs and Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International as well as local peace activists have called upon Textron to stop making cluster bombs.

“It’s an important program for us,” Textron spokesman David Sylvestre told RI Future in February. He could not immediately be reached for comment today.

Human Rights Watch in a post published today mentioned the grassroots effort in Rhode Island to convince Textron to stop making cluster bombs.

“Public pressure seems to be mounting against Textron,” wrote Mary Wareham, advocacy director for Human Rights Watch. “Outside Textron’s headquarters in Providence, Rhode Island, local activists have been demonstrating for weeks – demanding that the company cease its production of cluster munitions.”

The FANG Collective and the American Friends Service Committee have led efforts to call public attention to Textron cluster bombs. Members of the groups and other peace activists participated in another protest outside Textron headquarters in downtown Providence today.

Singapore recently stopped making cluster bombs and Wareham wrote, “Textron should follow the example set by Singapore Technologies Engineering and commit to stop making these indiscriminate weapons as a way to assure the public that it is responsive to global concern at civilian suffering.”

Read RI Future’s full coverage of Textron’s cluster bombs here:

• Human Rights Watch condemns use of Textron-made cluster bomb (Feb. 24)
• Textron still makes cluster bombs despite downward global, US trends (Feb. 29)
• Textron sold cluster bombs to seven foreign governments (March 4)
• What US company made the bomb that killed 97 civilians in Yemen (April 8)
• Quaker group to protests Textron for selling cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia (April 11)
• Textron plays leading role in Middle East violence (April 11)
• CODEPINK, peace groups join campaign against cluster bombs (April 15)
• Peace activists call attention to Textron cluster bombs (April 19)
• Anti-cluster bomb activists arrested for chaining themselves to Textron headquarters
  •  (April 21)
• Human Rights Watch finds evidence of Textron cluster bomb in Yemen (May 6)
• Anti-Textron actions to happen weekly in Providence, RI (May 16)
• Quakers, radicals, others protest Textron cluster bombs (May 19)
• Amnesty International targets Textron, locals target Textron investors (May 24)
• Pia Ward’s personal connection to cluster bomb casualties (May 26)
• Textron’s Scott Donnelly is 2nd highest paid CEO in RI at $12.2 million (May 27)
• Report says US to stop selling cluster bombs to Saudi Arabia (May 28)
• Peace activists educate Providence residents about Textron’s cluster bombs (June 2)

The president is also largely at odds with Rhode Island’s congressional delegation on fast-tracking a potential trade compact with 12 Pacific Rim nations. Of the Ocean State’s four elected officials in Congress, three have now spoken out against giving Obama fast track authority. Only Senator Jack Reed is still holding his cards close as the Senate Finance Committee considers granting the president trade promotion authority today.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said he opposes fast track authority for the TPP deal, he told RI Future exclusively today.

“It would be a mistake to provide fast-track authority for trade agreements that could further undermine American wages, manufacturing jobs, and our environment,” he said in an emailed statement. “We need the opportunity carefully review any proposed trade agreements to ensure we’re not repeating the mistakes of past free trade deals.”

In February, Whitehouse gave a speech against trade agreements in general on the Senate floor in February, saying: “I start with a state that has been on the losing end of these trade deals. People say that they are going to enforce the environmental and human rights and labor and safety requirements of these agreements. I haven’t seen it. And I gotta say I don’t like the process very much either. It is secret, we are kept out of it. Who’s in it is a lot of really big corporations and the are up to, I think, a lot of no good in a lot of the deals.”

Congressman David Cicilline is against it, too. He wrote this op/ed in the Providence Journal last month.

“Any agreement that promotes fast-track trade to advance the Trans-Pacific Partnership without thorough review and Congressional input is a bad deal for Rhode Island workers,” he told RI Future yesterday. “Congress should play an important role in making sure trade policies are fair for American workers, businesses, intellectual property holders, and consumers. The fast-track model undercuts oversight of trade agreements and makes it more difficult to protect the interests of working families. We should be working to promote American manufacturing, implement flexible workplace policies that benefit middle-class families, and finally raise the minimum wage so everyone has an opportunity to succeed.”

Also yesterday, Congressman Jim Langevin reaffirmed his opposition to a TPP deal. In February he and Cicilline signed onto a letter opposing it and yesterday he emailed this statement to reporters:

“The United States has been working with TPP negotiating partners for more than three years. This agreement could greatly shift global trading patterns and accordingly deserves the highest level of scrutiny to ensure it does not displace U.S. jobs or undermine our country’s competitiveness. While I favor expanding global trade, it is important that any free trade agreement places American workers and companies on an enforceable level playing field with foreign trading partners when it comes to labor rights, environmental regulation, intellectual property protection and other critical issues. For that reason, I am opposed to passing Trade Promotion Authority legislation with respect to the TPP.

“Congress has the responsibility to set trade policy, and ‘fast track’ procedures largely circumvent this important review. There is a better way to make decisions of this magnitude that significantly impact America’s place in the global economy, and that must include robust debate and discussion from all partners, including Congress. I will continue to work to ensure that trade agreements protect American workers and consumers and do not undermine America’s ability to compete in the global market.”

Reed, on the other hand, isn’t as vocal, according to spokesman Chip Unruh, who said Rhode Island’s senior senator “will take a look at the Finance Committee’s proposal, but he wants to ensure any trade agreement benefits Rhode Island consumers, workers, and businesses.” Unruh noted Reed rejected such TPA authority in both 2002 and 2007.

According to the Washington Post “most Congressional Democrats are opposed” but Oregon Senator Ron Wyden is pushing for a deal that he says has benefits for liberals.

In March the New York Times reported the “ambitious 12-nation trade accord pushed by President Obama would allow foreign corporations to sue the United States government for actions that undermine their investment “expectations” and hurt their business, according to a classified document.” The Nation called the TPP proposal “NAFTA on steroids” in 2012.

The biggest surprise in the Cicilline v. Doherty slugfest is not that the race has seemingly tightened (polls typically do as the election gets closer), it’s that Doherty has perhaps managed match Anthony Gemma in ugly and untrue campaign accusations. While Doherty hides behind the fact that some of the worst ads weren’t paid for by him, he’s certainly setting the tone. Case in point: his campaign defends the often untrue TV ads by saying that Cicilline started it by going negative first. That’s uncommon integrity in the same way that Oliver Twist possessed uncommon wealth … uncommon because of its dearth. Ian Donnis has a nice piece on the new dueling Doherty ads that hit the airwaves yesterday.

Also from the WPRI poll: Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and Congressman Jim Langevin are still expected to walk to victory over their Republican challengers. “…the big thing is Collins is drawing 9% of the vote,” pollster Joe Fleming told WPRI. “That is very high for an independent, and in turn Michael Riley can’t get any traction going because Mr. Collins is drawing votes away from people who don’t like Jim Langevin.”

Remember on Sunday when I postulated that hurricanes could be called progressive natural disasters because they disproportionately affect the rich and powerful? Well RIPR reports that both our US Senators and the governor are still without power. I don’t know where Sheldon lives, but Jack Reed lives in a coastal neighborhood in Jamestown and Gov. Chafee lives right on the water in the Potowomut area of Warwick. According to folks I know in both those neighborhoods, Reed got power back yesterday around 3 p.m. and Chafee’s street is still without electricity.

Think about this for one second: as a result of little more than simply growing up in an affluent suburb, I know neighbors – and friends – of probably most of our state officials … journalists who grew up in West Warwick and Central Falls don’t enjoy that advantage. It’s just one of the many benefits of being raised around affluence. And why if society doesn’t work hard to level the playing field between the haves and the have-nots it can quickly spiral out of control, as we’re currently witnessing…

Speaking of the socioeconomic divide in America and why we should mitigate against it, consider this NPR headline: Want To Be Rich? Be Lucky, Know The Right People.

And speaking of Hurricane Sandy, every storm that the Ocean Mist survives is a gift. Check out this ProJo photo and you’ll see why. We won’t have this iconic beach bar forever, so enjoy it while you can…

And speaking of the Ocean Mist, I know a guy who used to moonlight as a bouncer there so he could make ends meet while working for a municipal public works department during the day. He worked throughout the dangerous winds and even more dangerous surf of Sandy all Monday and into early Tuesday morning, just so the world would be a bit safer for the rest of us. This is the kind of person who is getting their retirement security slashed by pension reformers.

If you think gerrymandering has become too political, read about how Nevada became the 36th state, which happened today in 1864.

Happy Halloween, everybody … did you know you can watch the horror classic “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” on YouTube?

Langevin would continue the consistent and competent job he has done representing Rhode Islanders while Collins would instantly be among the most liberal members of Congress. Both have their benefits.

Langevin will continue to amass clout in the Congress, and by and large he’s done well by progressive Rhode Islanders.

On economic matters, which are of the utmost importance this election, he’s proven almost, but not quite, as progressive in his voting record as either Senator Sheldon Whitehouse or Congressman David Cicilline – the standard bearers for representing Rhode Island’s liberal base inside the beltway.

On social issues, Langevin has moved left during his tenure in Congress, and I’ve got a lot of respect for politicians who are open-minded enough to evolve. He’s a practicing Catholic who has done a great job of standing up the bully tactics of Bishop Tobin, and I’ve got a lot of respect for that too.

Langevin now believes all couples should be able to marry, which wasn’t always the case. While he’s anti-choice on abortion issues, it’s hard to argue with his very personal reasons – because of the accident that left him wheel chair-bound since he was 16, he wouldn’t wan to deprive anyone of a chance at life. Besides … given how far to right the House has shifted on social issues, Langevin can generally be counted on to vote with the good guys on the choice issues that do come up.

Collins, on the other hand, is not a compromise.

He’s what progressives should want their politicians to think like. He’d fight for a fairer tax code, and we already know from his service at the State House that transportation issues are tantamount to him. He’s also a tireless advocate for the environment, sustainability and civil liberties. These are arguably the most important issues for the country grapple with if we’re to fix our economy in a meaningful way.

His downside is he’s still a little politically naive, and the Collins campaign has been something short of a well-oiled machine. Some of that has to do with money, and a lot of that has to do with his lack of party support, but some of that also has to do with leadership and Collins would have done well to have learned the ropes a little better before running for U.S. Congress. My biggest beef with Abel is he could have been an effective state legislator if he would have run for a seat there this year.

Thanks in large part to Mike Riley’s lackluster campaign, I’m confident enough in a Langevin landslide to throw my humble support behind Abel Collins, but if he were running in the First District, I’m not sure I’d be writing the same thing … That said, I firmly believe it would be great thing for both Rhode Island and the progressive movement if he could pull off an upset.

Jim Langevin may not be the most progressive member of Congress, but he could be a whole lot less liberal too. John Mulligan, the Providence Journal’s Washington corresponden,t sums up Langevin’s place on the political spectrum well in this graph:

“…he has built a voting record that makes him solidly liberal on most issues by national standards, though somewhat to the right of such Rhode Island Democrats as Rep. David N. Cicilline and former Rep. Kennedy. That is due in part to his positions on abortion and other social issues. He has made news during the current Congress, however, by moving to support gay marriage.”

I’m pretty satisfied with Langevin’s record on economic issues – watch his new ad here to hear him defend the middle class and castigate Mike Riley for being a Wall Street hedge fund manager. On social issues, I’m very impressed with his willingness to evolve. It shows he has an open mind, perhaps the most important characteristic for a politician to possess.

That’s not to say I’ll be voting for Langevin over Abel Collins, a progressive to the bone who is a very long shot to win the seat. I still haven’t made that decision, but promise to keep you informed of my thinking…

“’Tis the season when state lawmakers running for reelection get to hand out checks to their local senior centers, American Legion Posts and Little League teams, courtesy of the state taxpayer,” says the ProJo Political Scene team. Nobody confuses legislative grants with good government, but they sure make for effective politics…

Romnesia: when you can’t remember what was previously on the Etch-A-Sketch.

In WPRI’s debate between Mark Binder and Gordon Fox, Tim White asks an interesting question of Binder, who accuses the Speaker of the House of shady politics: “Can you back up your charges of quid pro quo with evidence, or is your real issue here with how this country’s campaign finance system works?”

Of course, quid pro quo politics and our campaign finance laws aren’t in any way mutually exclusive of each other. Quite the opposite, in fact! It’s interesting to note that pointing out the way the system works has become a strategy for running against an incumbent.

A beautiful picture of a Providence student painting a mural at a local elementary school.

No reason you can’t take in the ProJo’s third and final Publick Occurances panel on the local economy tonight and still be home by 9 in time to watch the third and final Obama/Romney debate.

Speaking of the POTUS debate tonight … Romney will focus on Benghazi, while Obama can pretty much parade out a litany of other victories: he ended the war in Iraq and killed Osama bin Laden. The president will also likely point out what a disastrous dope Mitt has been on foreign affairs during the campaign.

And speaking of foreign policy, today in 1962 President Kennedy announces to America that he has ordered a blockade of Cuba after learning the Russians were moving some nuclear weapons there.

And speaking of Cuba, The New York Times reports it seems as if the infamous revolutionary is still alive after all.

It’s only 20 minutes long, and if you’re a voter in the Second Congressional District or a fan and/or pundit of politics (state or national, actually), it is well worth a watch. Collins may not be the most viable candidate in the race, but his ideas have great merit.

Here’s a link to WPRI’s debate, to compare and contrast.

Collins campaign manager Dave Fisher said he “absolutely” thought his candidate would poll better, but critiqued the methodology of the poll, saying it relies on people who have landlines and thus overly-samples conservative voters, a theory pollsters deny.

“I would have liked to have seen us in the high teens,” Fisher said, noting that if internet users were better represented, Collins would be doing much better.

Incumbent Jim Langevin received 49.4 percent support in the poll and conservative Mike Riley got 31.5 percent support.

While Collins only got 4.7 percent support, that’s enough to be included to the WJAR debate. The poll has a margin of error of 6.3 percent. WJAR’s debat inclusion rules require a candidate get at 10 percent support.

“Once people see Abel on stage next to his opponents, a lot of people will change their minds,” he said.

The Brown poll is the fifth since the primary to show Congressman David Cicilline enjoying a 5.5 percent lead over his Republican opponent Brendan Doherty.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse did the best among congressional candidates getting 58.6 percent support. His challenger Barry Hinckley only got 29.7 percent.

“Voters also favored President Barack Obama (58.2 percent) over Republican Mitt Romney (32.3 percent) with 9.5 percent of voters still undecided in that race,” according to a press release on the polls results. “Among all registered voters, Obama received a 53.7 percent approval rating, with 45.6 percent disapproving of his performance. A similar number, 55.2 percent, approve of the way Obama is handling the economy, while 39.5 disapprove.”

Here’s a link to the full list of questions for the poll, and the responses.