Primary Reactions: Cranston Mayoral Race Takes Center Stage

In the Sept. 13, 2024, episode of “A Lively Experiment,” moderator Jim Hummel and his panelists discussed their reactions to the results from the Republican mayoral race won by incumbent Ken Hopkins against challenger Barbara Fenton-Fung.

Joining moderator Jim Hummel were political contributor Don Roach, Rhode Island GOP national committeewoman Sue Cienki and political contributor Bob Walsh.

You can watch the entire episode here.

The primary elections in Rhode Island are now in the rearview mirror, with more than a dozen general assembly primary races decided. Statewide the turnout was slightly above 10%, but the race that got the most attention in Rhode Island was the Cranston mayoral Republican primary race between incumbent Ken Hopkins and state representative Barbara Fenton-Fung.

Hopkins won the race by more than 18 points against Fenton-Fung. Roach said the margin of victory by Hopkins was not a surprise.

“I don’t know if the margin is as surprising as it would be for me a few months ago, just because the race became so contentious,” Roach said. “And Mayor Hopkins has been in the city for years.

“He’s very well known, his family’s well known. Mike Farina tried a similar strategy against him a few years ago and it didn’t work.”

Roach added that the contentious race between the candidates addressed corruption more than the issues that are faced in Cranston.

“And that’s where I think (Fenton-Fung) she may have gone awry,” Roach added.

Cienki agreed.

“I think it became a nasty campaign on her part,” she said. “I think that Ken held back a little.

“He’s very well-liked, he’s very popular. I think it was a colossal error on her point to even run against the incumbent mayor that’s very well-liked. There was no upside to her running at all.”

Cienki added that Fenton-Fung was in a general assembly seat that she “could have stayed in,” but Cranston voters began looking at her voting record and realized that she was not embracing “Republican ideals” and was leaning to the liberal side.

“So I think that that exposed what she was actually all about and it was just a colossal error on her part.”

Cienki said that Fenton-Fung and her husband, former Cranston Mayor Allan Fung, may need to step away from politics for now.

“I think the telephone call has rung and it’s the private sector (that) is answering,” she said.

Walsh, a Democrat, said he watches Republican primaries — particularly when they are contentious and divisive.

“When the Republican elephants fight, the Republican grass gets trampled,” he said.

Walsh added that the primary helped Robert Ferri, the Democratic candidate for mayor in Cranston because there “were enough hard feelings” between Hopkins and Fenton-Fung.

“Barbara Ann Fenton-Fung on election night did not endorse Mayor Hopkins,” he said. “I’m sure she’s thinking long and hard about whether she can, given some of the issues that she raised.

“I mean, you can say they’re political attacks, but the press deserves, and the public deserves real answers to those questions wherever they may lead.”

Walsh’s advice to Ferri is to “stay out” of the GOP infighting.

“Let them pick on each other,” he said. “But the real advice for most municipal positions, there’s not a Democratic or Republican way to run a city.

“You listen to the people, you listen closely to what they have to say, and you respond. And you don’t play favorites.”

The panelists also offered their opinions on the Sept. 10 presidential debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump.

Walsh said it was “mission accomplished” for Harris.

“As you know, I’ve done debate prep with candidates, you know, at the local and state level for 30 years. And she achieved all her goals,” Walsh said. “We saw a future president on that stage, which was goal No. 1.

“And even beyond that, (Trump) took the bait on everything. She played right up against him and he followed her lead down a lot of rabbit holes he never should have done.”

Cienki said that Harris said a lot — “No substance, with confidence.”

“I think he fell for some bait and he had a lot of missed opportunities,” Cienki said. “I think she was of course very well prepared.

“She was well prepared with standard answers, but no substance with a lot of confidence.”

Cienki conceded that Harris had been given “a low bar” to succeed against the former president.

“I think everybody was watching to see how many gaffes that she had and the fact that she was very well rehearsed, shocked people,” she said. “And that’s a low bar for president.”

Walsh added that “your guy” said that people “are eating cats and dogs.”

“Guess what, and that’s a cultural thing,” Cienki said. “People do do that.”

Roach said that the simple answer was that Harris “crushed” Trump, adding that Trump’s current stand that he does not want another debate was good strategy because she would win a return match.

“And she took the approach that was the right approach against someone who is, for me a fear monger as I believe Donald Trump is ... you just stay above the fray and you make the other person look like the lunatic,” Roach said. “And she did that very effectively.

“Still, I think the big thing that I found coming from the debate is that 14% of the people are reconsidering their vote,” he added. “That’s a big number in a very tight race.”

“It doesn’t seem like a big number, but in a really tight race that’s big.”