A point to be made. The decline of the NE Republicans has not been due to the party running more Conservative candidates. The Party did everything its power to save Chafee who didn't even back their nominee, has made no real moves against Snowe and Collins until recently, and is running Rob Simmons in Connecticut. Furthermore I think the party would be grateful for a Ed Brooke.
The real problem is that the increasing regionalization of the national party is making liberal voters less willing to vote for any republican no matter how liberal. An article in Bay Windows(the Boston Gay and Lesbian Newspaper) endorsing the Democrat Steve Lynch in the 2001 special election for the 9th District in MA comes to mind. Though Lynch opposed even civil unions, while the Republican, State Senator Jo Ann Sprague supported them and had a 100% rating from gay rights groups, they endorsed the Democrat because it was important to have a democratic majority.
As long as people in New England care more about having a democratic majority than they do about the candidates and identity of their congressman and Senators, it doesn't matter who the GOP runs or how liberal they are. They will still lose.
In this sense I understand why Conservatives think it would be better to target places that want the GOP in the majority but have Democratic representation rather than chase fool's gold in NE.
This is interesting, because it sounds as if you completely agree with Torie on the diagnosis but disagree on the cure.
I don't disagree necessarily with his cure. I just think it will be ineffective. There are larger forces at work, and if the defeats of Chaffee, Shays, and Smith reveal anything, its that individual candidates matter less than the national forces. I don't think Ed Brooke would win in MA today if he were to come back to life and run again.
