Novick on the Trail

Steve Novick is out on the hustings - and we've got video.

More accurately, Colin Maloney (of Maloney's Musings) posted a video of a Novick house party, produced by Will Luers of Taylor Street Studio.

Check it out. And as Colin points, watch to the very last second -- it's worth it!

Discuss.

Comments

  • LiberalIncarnate (unverified)
    (Show?)

    What I appreciated the most from this speech was what he had to say about advertising where our tax dollars go. I have been talking about this for years with family and friends. Government would work better if people knew where their money was going and what good it has done. People would become more invested in the future of our nation. Personally, I think that once every quarter the government should run ads saying, "Thank you for your support. This is how we have helped our nation and our people become better, healthier and more productive."

    It is positive PR and it works.

  • PanchoPdx (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Brilliant!

    Especially with all the lost boys wearing hooks at the end. I'm just worried that the Neverland references may be a little too subtle for Joe Sixpack.

    It would have been clearer if they had drawn that connection right off the bat, by having Novick introduced by Tinkerbell.

    In the follow up video, they should try to work in an endorsement from Peter Pan.

    Then, play up how Steve's hand was eaten by an evil crocodile who also voted with President Bush 90% of the time.

  • (Show?)

    That's all well and good, but I think there's another probable U.S. Senate Candidate with his own set of inspiring videos...

    ...(that don't involve gimmicks)...

    Speaker Merkley on YouTube

    See him in action, making our state a better place.

  • pdxskip (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I don't give either Novick or Merkely much of a chance in a Senate race. They are both jumping in over their head. Better to build a solid career in politics and public service. These two guys are rookies with little or no chance of upsetting Gordo.

    Kitzhaber, Blumenauer, DeFazio, Sam Adams, and Kulongoski are all far superior candidates with good track records that they can run on. Hopefully one or more of then will step forward.

  • (Show?)

    I smell a troll....

    34% re-elect, buddy. 34%.

  • (Show?)

    Merkley a rookie? He's been a state legislator for some time now, lead the minority party, and this session he lead the state House.

    He has a long track record and a lot of experience. In my opinion, a lot more than Sam Adams.

    All the other people listed have said they're not interested in running. Kulongoski wants to finish up his term as governor. DeFazio and Blumenauer want to stay in the House. And Kitzhaber is rumored to be looking at a 2010 run for governor.

    Disclaimer: I work on Novick's web site, but I do not speak for the campaign.

  • (Show?)

    Whoa there, Skip...you must not come around here very often. Maybe you don't even live in Oregon?

    Merkley's background, which you can find here, here and here, is hardly a rookie. He's been in the Oregon House since 1999, longer than Sam Adams or Ted Kulongoski have been in their current positions.

    Novick ain't a lightweight either.

    Also, all of your preferred candidates (with the exception of Sam Adams) have explicitly ruled out a Senate bid.

    I'll let Jeff Alworth's forthcoming post speak to the electability argument for Merkley, though. Until then...

  • pdxskip (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Good points Jenni, although seasoned politicians have been known to change their minds. I guess as and older than dirt Democrat I just have a differnt perspective and lean towards seasoned and somewhat moderate Democrats for national office or the Governor's mansion. I think Novick and Merkel are marvelous up and coming pols....I'd just prefer a little more time in the saddle before they raise their sights.

    We have a grand opportunity in 2008 but if Smith is to be defeated, it will take a SEASONED candidate to do it.

  • (Show?)

    Merkley's been an elected official for at least 8 years now. Adams became a city commissioner in December 2004. I couldn't find anything else in his bio about any other elected office.

  • (Show?)

    Skip,

    Did you actually read Jenni's link about Steve Novick?

    He's been around for a long time, and like most people in public service he simply hasn't sought the spotlight. However, paraphrasing the words of my 6th grade pre-algebra teacher, Mr. E., now "it's his time to shine."

    Novick isn't "up and coming," and Merkley has also been around for a long time, in elected office and in the private sector. Don't count either of them out.

    {{ps, thanks to BlueO for the plug...}}

  • pdxskip (unverified)
    (Show?)

    OK, you're right Jenni.....I'll scratch Adams off the list. He can build his resume as the next mayor of Portland.

    I'm getting a sick feeling that Gordo has somehow stumbled into a perfect time to stay in office with dismal approval ratings.

    Maybe we lack some depth of "seasoned" talent in the party at this particular moment....at least seasoned talent willing to run what will be a tough and hard fought campaign.

  • (Show?)

    Maybe this is an opportunity for a brilliant, funny, hardworking progressive who hasn't been very high profile to get his "seasoning" while taking advantage of a weak year for Republicans.

    I'm a big fan of Jeff Merkley. But his job as Speaker isn't nearly done, and I wish he'd consolidate and extend the Democratic legislative victories for all of our sakes.

  • (Show?)

    "We have a grand opportunity in 2008 but if Smith is to be defeated, it will take a SEASONED candidate to do it."

    I think the opposite is actually true. People don't want the same old crap--Republican OR Democrat--anymore.

    (not that Jeff is necessarily the 'same old crap,' but his campaign certainly wouldn't be a wellspring for people dissatisfied with the status quo of politics.)

  • BlueNote (unverified)
    (Show?)

    If the poll showing Gordo with only 34% support is legit and the trend continues, does anybody else suspect that Earl B. or Peter D. will suddenly discover that one of them can free up enough time on his busy schedule to run for the Senate? No career politician in his right mind is going to turn down a chance for a "cake walk" into the US Senate.

    I hope Gordo is on the ropes, but my suspicious mind wonders if the Dem Senate Campaign Committee is using this new 34% poll as a tool to try and entice a top tier candidate into the race.

  • LiberalIncarnate (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The disappoval ratings are only half of the picture for Gordan Smith and the Senate Race. You only have half the equation! Bush's numbers were mediocre going into '04 and he still won... yes, it was stolen, but he still won.

    These numbers will firm up once we get closer to the primary and people are asked who do you think would be a better candidate over Gordan Smith. Then, you will see truer numbers. If Novick polls well here, then any doubt will be relieved. Otherwise, despite bad poll numbers, Gordan Smith will win because people would rather have "the devil they know, then the devil they do not."

  • (Show?)

    My last installment on Merkley is just about done, but as a teaser--and support for Steve, Jeff, and any other Dem who might have the fortune to face Smith next year--anyone care to guess what the record for Dems is in the last 12 statewide races (including Presidential races)?

    And most of those happened in the shadow of 9/11.

  • (Show?)

    If the poll showing Gordo with only 34% support is legit and the trend continues, does anybody else suspect that Earl B. or Peter D. will suddenly discover that one of them can free up enough time on his busy schedule to run for the Senate? No career politician in his right mind is going to turn down a chance for a "cake walk" into the US Senate.

    Part of the reason why they won't run is that they go from being in power positions in the House, which Democrats haven't had in a decade, to being a freshman Senator. I think they'd like to spend some more time in the House getting things done on their Committees and sub-committees rather than becoming a newbie in the Senate.

  • (Show?)

    Whoops, the disclaimer got deleted by accident...

    Disclaimer: I work on Novick's web site, but I do not speak for the campaign.

  • (Show?)

    I'd have to say 11-1 as well.

    2006 KULONGOSKI - Gov GARDNER - BOLI CASTILLO - Sup't

    2004 KERRY - President WYDEN -Senator BRADBURY - SoS MYERS - AG EDWARDS - Treasurer

    2002 KULONGOSKI - Gov SMITH - Senator GARDNER - BOLI CASTILLO - Sup't

    There you have it, 11 out of 12, or an 11 to 1 win-loss record.

  • (Show?)

    Actually, by that listing we'd be 10-2: the 2002 U.S. Senate race (Gordon Smith) and the 2004 Presidential race (George Bush).

    Unless I'm just too tired and am reading things wrong... which wouldn't surprise me.

  • (Show?)

    "Bush's numbers were mediocre going into '04 and he still won... yes, it was stolen, but he still won."

    Bush was in the high 40s in most polls, and just about even in net approval. He was nowhere near 34% a year out.

  • (Show?)

    TJ:

    Plus they were able to take that election by stealing two states and rigging elections in red states since they knew we wouldn't be watching there. They wanted to ensure the electoral college and the popular vote.

    It's going to be a lot harder to do something like that in Oregon where we have so many people watching the polls. Every major election cycle in recent years we've had a large number of poll watchers. That number increases dramatically in presidential years. In 2004 we had more poll watchers than we had room for at Mult Co Elections.

    Disclaimer: I work on Novick's web site, but I do not speak for the campaign.

  • (Show?)

    Jenni:

    John Kerry did in fact win Oregon's 7 electoral votes in the 2004 presidential election, and they were counted for him in the electoral college even though George W. Bush eventually won that election nationwide.

    Statewide, however, Oregon voted for Kerry. In 2000, Oregon's electoral votes went to Gore. In fact, Oregon's voted for the Democratic Presidential Candidate every time since 1988 (Dukakis).

    The Democratic Senatorial candidate is in a great place to capitalize on these trends in Oregon.

  • (Show?)

    See, I was thinking of it as who won the race, not who won Oregon. That was my problem. Told ya I was tired!

    Guess I need more than 6 hours of sleep every 2 days. ; )

  • (Show?)

    You all don't need me--but yeah, 11-1, with the sole outlier being Smith (Kerry lost the election but carried Oregon). I think it's time to correct that obvious oversight!

  • Rick Hunter (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This video is AWESOME.

    And Katheryn Firestone should smoke more.

  • (Show?)

    don't encourage Kathryn to smoke more, she smokes enough as it is...

    ;) to you Kath, if you're reading this...

  • Charlie Foxtrot (unverified)
    (Show?)

    These comments lead me to repeat what I said in response to the Alworth column and then point out one other thing that most seem to be ignoring.

    1. There is every reason to believe a good, articulate Democrat can beat Smith, particularly with significant DNC/DSCC support. There is, however, as in most things in life, no guarantee.

    2. But which Democrat? Perhaps any one of several. So the question comes down to who can/will win the primary. At this point we have some insight on Novick's position on federal issues. As a member of the general public as opposed to a party insider I have no knowledge of Merkley's position on such issues. Absent such information I lean towards Novick; at least he's had the gumption to stick his neck out and try to solve the important problem of replacing Smith rather than waiting for party coffers to be thrown his way.

    3. This is why we have primaries. Let's find out who is the "best" Democrat, at least in the minds of registered Democrats. National funding should be there for the ultimate winner. And the primary would afford two (or more) candidates the opportunity to explain what they would have done, or not done, if they had been in Smith's position and how they would go about addressing the problems created by the Administration with Smith's ready assistance. A contested primary in this case would be a very good thing and would draw a lot more public interest and attention than a Party designated heir.

    As stated before, most of this is irrelevant until such time as Markley says he is going to get into the race

    The thing we seem to be ignoring is the fact that the Senate is by and large a rich old boys club. Last time I looked Smith was about sixth wealthiest in the Senate and hae $1MM in outside annual income. People really need to be aware that he has very little in common with them, and has voted accordingly. Class Warfare? Hell,yes! What have the Repugs been conducting continuously. They only cry about it when someone wants to remove their unconscionable tax cuts.

    We need representatives with good sound ideas and energy but not smart enough to know when to quit. Congress is full of "experienced" public officials (including Pelosi and Reid) and look what that's got us!

    Bottom line is that the majority of voters in this state don't think "Smith is doing a pretty good job and there is no reason to change." The majority in fact would like a change and the object here is to give them a better choice. To my mind, it doesn't mean a candidate out of the old school who learned to go along to get along.

    Novick clearly is a better choice for this state and the nation. Perhaps Markley is as wel, or even better. Question is: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO MAKE IT HAPPEN?!

  • Charlie Foxtrot (unverified)
    (Show?)

    These comments lead me to repeat what I said in response to the Alworth column and then point out one other thing that most seem to be ignoring.

    1. There is every reason to believe a good, articulate Democrat can beat Smith, particularly with significant DNC/DSCC support. There is, however, as in most things in life, no guarantee.

    2. But which Democrat? Perhaps any one of several. So the question comes down to who can/will win the primary. At this point we have some insight on Novick's position on federal issues. As a member of the general public as opposed to a party insider I have no knowledge of Merkley's position on such issues. Absent such information I lean towards Novick; at least he's had the gumption to stick his neck out and try to solve the important problem of replacing Smith rather than waiting for party coffers to be thrown his way.

    3. This is why we have primaries. Let's find out who is the "best" Democrat, at least in the minds of registered Democrats. National funding should be there for the ultimate winner. And the primary would afford two (or more) candidates the opportunity to explain what they would have done, or not done, if they had been in Smith's position and how they would go about addressing the problems created by the Administration with Smith's ready assistance. A contested primary in this case would be a very good thing and would draw a lot more public interest and attention than a Party designated heir.

    As stated before, most of this is irrelevant until such time as Markley says he is going to get into the race

    The thing we seem to be ignoring is the fact that the Senate is by and large a rich old boys club. Last time I looked Smith was about sixth wealthiest in the Senate and hae $1MM in outside annual income. People really need to be aware that he has very little in common with them, and has voted accordingly. Class Warfare? Hell,yes! What have the Repugs been conducting continuously. They only cry about it when someone wants to remove their unconscionable tax cuts.

    We need representatives with good sound ideas and energy but not smart enough to know when to quit. Congress is full of "experienced" public officials (including Pelosi and Reid) and look what that's got us!

    Bottom line is that the majority of voters in this state don't think "Smith is doing a pretty good job and there is no reason to change." The majority in fact would like a change and the object here is to give them a better choice. To my mind, it doesn't mean a candidate out of the old school who learned to go along to get along.

    <h2>Novick clearly is a better choice for this state and the nation. Perhaps Markley is as wel, or even better. Question is: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO TO MAKE IT HAPPEN?!</h2>
elsewhere

connect with blueoregon