Barbara Roberts and Ted Kulongoski to chair Jeff Merkley's U.S. Senate campaign
In an email today, former Governor Barbara Roberts and Governor Ted Kulongoski announced that they'll be the co-chairs of the Jeff Merkley for U.S. Senate campaign.
The Governors took note of his leadership of the Oregon House Democrats:
In 2003, Jeff Merkley became the Oregon House Democratic Leader, and he went toe-to-toe with Republican leaders who don't share our values. And in 2007, after Oregonians put Democrats back in charge, Jeff Merkley became the Speaker of the House.With a bare one-vote majority, the 2007 Legislature could have bogged down in partisan bickering. But under Jeff Merkley's leadership, it was the most progressive and most effective legislative session in three decades (and the shortest in 12 years, saving taxpayers nearly a million dollars.)
Read the rest. Discuss.
|
August 13, 2007 |
in the news 2007 | Comments (74 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: puddlejumper | Aug 13, 2007 8:17:08 PM
I like Jeff Merkley plenty, but this does nothing to make me think we're closer to beating Smith.
I think it's a good thing that Novick is reaching out directly to voters, and not relying upon the party apparatus. Especially the US Senate D's, who don't seem to understand Oregon the way Steve does.
Steve will be a force on the national scene immediately, because of his absolutely unique brilliance and talent. Merkley would do good work, but quietly, in the background. Either would be a big improvement for Oregon.
Posted by: colin maloney | Aug 13, 2007 8:46:25 PM
since we're passing off press releases as news these days, i feel comfortable posting Steve's response to the announcement.
"When you're the underdog candidate, running against the insiders' candidate, you expect the insider will have a lot of big names," Novick said. "This doesn't change the fact that the Governor and I have a high regard for each other, and after I win the primary, I know I'll have the Governor's full support against Gordon Smith."as i've, and others, have said, we're going to have a better chance at beating Smith with a "non-traditional" candidate, someone who's a little different. Govs Kulo and Roberts are backing the "safe candidate."Novick said that sports nicknames played a role in the Governor's decision. "As you know, the Governor comes from Missouri, and roots for the St. Louis Cardinals. Speaker Merkley went to Stanford, and roots for the Stanford Cardinal. There's a natural congruence there. But I, of course, am a Duck," said the 1981 University of Oregon graduate, "so to me, this is just water off a Duck's back."
It's unfortunate, since I think they're committing too early. I realize that there's a desire to try and direct potential donors towards one candidate, but I think that this is going to be counterproductive in the long run.
Posted by: puddlejumper | Aug 13, 2007 8:58:21 PM
It's obvious to any casual observer that Steve has had to fight more for his his place in this world than any other candidate. Gordon Smith was handed his life on a silver platter, including being given the family business. Gordon Smith owns a $2 million gold club and a shitload of Ferraris.
Steve Novick's mom was a waitress, and he was disciplined enough and hard-working enough to excel at Harvard Law School. Only Steve knows what it is like to overcome the challenges he faced in order to stake his claim in the world, as they were certainly steeper than anything 99% of us confront.
For Oregon's precious US Senate seat, I want a brilliant person, of uncompromising ethics, who has personal experience living through tough times. We will not find a better person to stand up for Oregon than Steve Novick.
Posted by: Nate Currie | Aug 13, 2007 9:10:56 PM
I think this is going to be a very interesting battle between grassroots activism and the establishment machine. We've seen it play out recently in at least two notable Senate races, but this one will be different for one important reason, Jeff Merkley is no Harris Miller or John Morrison (though his last name does also begin with M). In Merkley, the establishment actually has a good candidate with solid progressive and legislative records. He will likely have a very respectable grassroots following of his own (no, not astroturf, the real thing).
I have to say, I'm really looking forward to this race. I sometimes feel like I'm alone on this board in not having made up my mind yet (and thusly avoided the emerging prickly disposition towards supporters of the other candidate). I feel both are fine people and excellent candidates, and the one who wins will be the one with the best chance to beat Smith. I think Steve is brilliant and capable of anything so I'd never count him out, but Merkley is going to draw enough activists combined with his establishment base that he's going to be very tough to beat. I look forward to seeing the best of both men in the months to come...
Posted by: Stephanie V | Aug 13, 2007 9:26:32 PM
I think either candidate could win a fair and vigorously contested primary.
I just hope we are allowed to have one.
Posted by: puddlejumper | Aug 13, 2007 9:26:43 PM
Without intending to dominate this thread, nor to disparage Merkley...I think Merkley has tremendous potential, but he's jumping into this too quickly. He would be well served to serve another term as Speaker, and do more to solve some of our intractable problems. In the meantime, he can develop his political skills.
Novick is already a wizard when it comes to tearing up the BS and spin of the partisan Repubiclan hacks who run Gordon Smith's operation. The Smith people have grown fat & rich, while Steve Novick has kept his eye on the prize: fighting for fairness for all of us.
Posted by: Carl Fisher | Aug 13, 2007 10:19:47 PM
Ah, good, I haven't missed the endorsement parade yet. I wonder who will be on the next float.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 13, 2007 10:59:49 PM
Stephanie wrote... I think either candidate could win a fair and vigorously contested primary. I just hope we are allowed to have one.
Agreed. I'm hoping that both sides are able to keep their daggers and their spitballs holstered - in the interest of keeping their own positives up, and not giving Gordon Smith any ammo for the fall.
Whichever candidate we wind up with, we'll all need to unite around in May. So, here's to keeping it above board -- both from the campaigns, and from their supporters.
I'm hoping for a vigorous debate on the issues here at BlueOregon, not on the personalities and other silliness.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 13, 2007 11:48:56 PM
Whichever candidate we wind up with, we'll all need to unite around in May. So, here's to keeping it above board -- both from the campaigns, and from their supporters.I'm hoping for a vigorous debate on the issues here at BlueOregon, not on the personalities and other silliness.
I really think Stephanie was worried more about those not "in" either campaign, but attempting to influence the primary's outcome from the sidelines. We're ALL trying to influence it in one way or another, of course, and other than timing certainly no one begrudges the governors their choice. But there are others who don't necessarily deserve the right to push our choice. If Novick supporters see that and call foul, I feel confident this would not be labeled "negative campaigning," right? Simply being the beneficiary of undemocratic (little d) practices doesn't make you dirty, but bringing it up can't be squelched on the basis of it being a "personal attack."
That's my concern for fairness. I trust the kids in the debate; it's the parents and the coaches (and the league office) I'm worried about.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 13, 2007 11:59:54 PM
But there are others who don't necessarily deserve the right to push our choice.
I disagree. You're talking about the DSCC, I presume, and that's a debate we've had in many venues. We've agreed to disagree.
I think any American has the right to express their view to Oregon voters. That's what democracy is all about. But like I said, we can disagree - and I'm OK with that.
(I suppose I should full disclose again here: I built JeffMerkley.com, but I speak only for myself.)
Posted by: East Bank Thom | Aug 14, 2007 6:53:45 AM
We've agreed to disagree.
What's this supposed to mean? Who are "we" and where can we read of this agreement? If you don't want to talk about the issue of the DSCC meddling in Oregon's primary, then i don't expect to see you chiming in.
Not being a signatory to this gentleman's agreement, i'd like to say that a candidate's stock goes down for me when i see them becoming beholden to Chuck Schumer and these high profile establishment endorsements only reinforce the notion that we're talking about an insider here.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 14, 2007 7:27:00 AM
"We" equals me and TJ. That's it. Nothing more.
Posted by: WaitingAndWaiting | Aug 14, 2007 8:25:40 AM
Merkley has been announced now for just shy of two weeks, and as of this morning his website still does not have a single concrete statement of his positions on issues. It is nothing put hype about his supposed cred as a representative for work-a-day folks and those even less fortunate. This is supremely disrespectful of rank-and-file Democratic voters who deserve to know his actual positions on the range of issues. It is also unsurprisingly vintage Merkley, as anyone who tried to get any info out of his office what his specific position was on any number of bills, and why he wasn't demonstrating any obvious leadership this past session.
Of course, the DSCC and an establishment "I support the Iraq War" Democrat like Kulongoski would support Merkley, he's the "I won't rock the boat" establishment's boy. He hasn't made waves, done their bidding adequately, and they are rewarding him by advancing his career. I voted for Roberts' way back when, and never regretted the vote, but I have only felt profound sadness for her in recent years in her struggle to demonstrate political relevance.
Novick is interesting, but still has to prove himself. It's rapidly becoming obvious that the only way that can happen, to the advantage of us all, is if he demonstrates political skill by exposing by politely, but pointedly, exposing Merkley, and a lot of you for that matter, for the utter drag on advancing a truly progressive Party agenda that he and you actually have been so far.
Those who claim Merkley "works behind the scenes" are just making excuses for him. When you're Speaker, you job is to work up front and behind the scenes because that is what leadership is about. It is his own words and actions thus far that make the case against him, not anything I or anyone else argues. By any fair measure Merkley has been a disappointment as a leader who has acted like he is above-it-all, and the condescending message his nose-thumbing, vacuous, "don't dare ask me for my specific positions" website sends to us stands right now as people's exhibit #1.
Posted by: Portland Dem | Aug 14, 2007 8:40:50 AM
How is this news? Are we gonna start posting DPO Healthy Kids emails as news next?
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 8:50:09 AM
I disagree. You're talking about the DSCC, I presume, and that's a debate we've had in many venues. We've agreed to disagree.I think any American has the right to express their view to Oregon voters. That's what democracy is all about. But like I said, we can disagree - and I'm OK with that.
You misread, Kari. I agree any American has the right to express their view. Shoot, any human does, period--remember the British people who wrote letters to Ohio telling them how they should vote? That went over well.
What I said was I don't believe some DESERVE to have that input. Nor do I find it ultimately productive.
In any case that wasn't the point of my comment. I know we disagree on the propriety of the DSCC's influence. What I said was that in the future, if and when it occurs, I sure hope it is not labeled as "negative campaigning" or a "personal attack" to note what is being done on one Democrat's behalf in order to squeeze out another Democrat.
Posted by: paulie | Aug 14, 2007 8:55:07 AM
Governor Kulonoski quietly and quickly informed himself about the War in Iraq. He has attended every Oregon soldier's funeral, he personally visted Iraq, he searched for and firmly decided he is oppossed to the war in Iraq.
Merkley's campaign just got keys to their office last week. Several venues have been selected for Representative Merkley to do Q & A's through out the state.
Merkley didn't make up the story of growing up modestly in Mytle Creek. His "up-by-the-boot-straps" tale is genuine just as Governor Kulongoski's working in steel mills and joining the Marines so he could pay for his education is genuine.
Smith has his opposition research machine on overtime. It behooves Merkley to get everything in order for this opportunity to finally take out Gordon Smith.
Democrats will work very hard to support the winner of the primary between Merkely and Novick. In the mean time, like Kulongoski on Iraq, we'll inform ourselves, we''ll listen respectfully, we'll ask questions and hope that the best candidate emerges to become the Democratic Senator of Oregon.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 14, 2007 8:56:42 AM
W&W... as the guy responsible for building that website, let me just share a little behind-the-scenes for you.
Jeff Merkley told the public that he was going to spend July figuring out what he was going to do. He said he'd decide by July 31, and announce that decision on August 1.
About a week out from there, as the guy that hosted his old State Rep. website, I was asked to pull something together. A face-lift, a volunteer form, and a donation mechanism.
On August 1, true to his word, Merkley announced his intentions. The official "announcement" or campaign roll-out is happening in early September.
As you can imagine, he's still getting staffed up. We debated whether to hold the website until the fall, to wait until we could get all the materials together that you're asking for -- or whether we should start with a minimalist site, and grow it from there.
Look, the guy has been a U.S. Senate candidate for two weeks. It's not really fair to expect him to have fully-detailed twelve-page policy proposals on health care reform, tax reform, the War in Iraq, etc. Heck, some of our presidential candidates who've been running for years don't have that stuff up yet. Jeff's a "get it right" guy, not a "get it up fast" guy.
The primary election is in nine months. Rest assured that we'll have lots more details for you, long before then.
Meanwhile, I encourage you to look to his record if you'd like to understand his values and his vision. This is a guy who fought the Republicans tooth and nail when they were in charge, and yet was able to make the transition to the Speaker's chair, holding on to the 1-vote majority, and getting lots of progressive stuff done.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 14, 2007 8:58:47 AM
Merkley's campaign just got keys to their office last week.
Actually, no. Still working on finding an office.
Posted by: WaitingAndWaiting | Aug 14, 2007 9:36:58 AM
Sorry Kari, no one wants to be insulted by the excuse making of an establishment hack for a politician like Merkley and the website. Merkley has a long record and has been a pol for a long enough time he can't whine about inexperience. And it is HIS campaign. A leader would have had made sure his positions, if he had conviction in them, were on the site when it switched over. This is the era of Web 2.0 when everyone knows the importance of the web, and no one needs keys to a brick-and-mortar office to make sure the information is out there if they want it out there. He didn't do that, and that is the important reason enough to ask questions what this guy really is all about.
paulie - Kulongoski took a long time to voice something sounding like "opposition" to the war. The fact is, he "opposed" the war as being poorly run - a position that he continued to voice up until at least recently when I quit listening to this self-serving blight on the Democratic Party. Kulongoski has been a disgrace to the Party as a failed leader who has not stood up consistently and forcefully for Democratic Party values. That Merkley chose him as his campaign chair speaks volumes. I'm wondering if we will look back at this decision as being symbolic of Merkley's lack of principled leadership style.
And by the way paulie, you claim "Merkley didn't make up the story of GROWING UP MODESTLY IN MYTLE (sic) CREEK". His 'up-by-the-boot-straps' tale is genuine".
His own website says:
"I began my life in the small town of Myrtle Creek, Oregon, where my dad was a millwright at a lumber mill. When the mill closed, WE MOVED TO ROSEBURG, a Southern Oregon town where wood products were king. Like people in so many towns throughout Oregon, folks in Roseburg knew the value of hard work, honesty and strong families.
WHILE STILL IN GRADE SCHOOL, my dad got a job as a heavy equipment mechanic IN PORTLAND. He took me to the grade school and said ..."
Sounds like Merkley's growing up as a son of millworker story, while not strictly factually incorrect, doesn't quite present the full story. There are plenty of folks who start out modestly, but seem to forget that when they have the chance to grab the brass ring. Kulongoski and Merkley have placed the question on the table by the records and behavior.
Merkley flaks need to learn real clearly that there are informed Democrats out here who pay attention to the facts, and who aren't impressed with excuse making, loose-with-the-facts spin, or Merkley's lack of forthrightness in asking for our support. We want to know now if Merkley, and you, are condescendingly scamming us, and at least early on there is a factual basis for being very, very suspect. His words not withstanding, Merkley has actually comported himself so far in his career as just another politician, the fact he is (supposedly) on our side doesn't make him any better.
Posted by: Logan Gilles | Aug 14, 2007 9:44:02 AM
If we're going to attack people on here, can we at least post our real names?
Posted by: Jeff Alworth | Aug 14, 2007 9:48:55 AM
I'm going to offer a little push-back on what has become conventional wisdom, blogosphere style: Jeff Merkley is the "establishment" candidate who won't have the balls to speak truth to power (either his own party or the GOP).
Steve Novick's bona fides on this point are well-established, and even though I'm pulling for Merkley, there seems no great reason to get in a pissing battle about them. But let's be clear about one thing--Novick is untested in a political campaign and the idea that his backers know he'll be the most effective truth-teller is based on a lot of speculation.
Conversely--and the reason I'm for Merkley--Jeff has spent ten years in the trenches proving he can speak truth to power. He is definitely the front-runner, but to argue that that somehow means he's a moderate, Liebermanesque Washington milquetoast isn't supported by any of the facts. He's liberal, he's a tough campaigner, and most importantly, he sticks to his values. Look back through his record as a politician and see if there's evidence that he's the "establishment" candidate he's quickly being pegged as.
It's cool to back Steve and advocate strongly that he's the better candidate. But I hope his backers will take a page out of his own playbook and recognize that Merkley, if he emerges from the primaries, is a hell of a candidate and a great replacement for Smith.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 9:54:13 AM
"Conversely--and the reason I'm for Merkley--Jeff has spent ten years in the trenches proving he can speak truth to power. He is definitely the front-runner,"
Based on what is he the front runner? I'm not saying these things can't change, but he currently has less money, less name recognition, and does no better in polling against Smith than Novick. He's winning the governor-endorsement race so far, that's it.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 9:57:45 AM
You want to hear truth being spoken to power?
If Gordon Smith simply said, "In a contest between farmers and fish, I want farmers to win," you could almost respect the guy. But he won't say that. Instead, he will ignore science, reinvent history, believe whatever he has to believe to escape the implications of his policies.That's not acceptable. Oregonians might re-elect an intellectually honest, well-informed, genuine conservative. But I don't think we'll re-elect someone who doesn't bother to learn simple facts that a United States Senator worthy of the title really ought to know. I don't think we'll re-elect someone who makes false pronouncements on issues of fact without, apparently, having made any effort to check the facts first. I don't think that that we'll re-elect a Senator who, like George W. Bush himself, consistently puts ideology and politics before science and responsible government.
What's Jeff's take on Klamath?
Posted by: pdxskip | Aug 14, 2007 10:28:29 AM
Here's hoping Jeff stands with the farm families of Southern Oregon if he wants to beat Smith.
Picking the damn fish will lose the election. The urban far left in Portland and Eugene will love ya, but most moderates around the urban suburbs and rural communities around Oregon who have families to support will turn away in droves. They probably won't vote for Smith....most will just sit the race out.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 10:53:38 AM
Picking the damn fish will lose the election. The urban far left in Portland and Eugene will love ya, but most moderates around the urban suburbs and rural communities around Oregon who have families to support will turn away in droves. They probably won't vote for Smith....most will just sit the race out.
Do you think the fish just hop out of the lakes and rivers and onto dinner tables around the world? It's not "picking the fish;" it's picking the commercial and tourism fishing INDUSTRIES, either of which is worth more to the state than a number of potato farmers on arid land in the lower Klamath. There are THOUSANDS of people who have families to support that do it from fishing.
Posted by: pdxskip | Aug 14, 2007 10:59:39 AM
I agree with all of that diatribe Joe....every word of it. But to the average lightly engaged potential voter, the political type casting and evening news sound bites still come across as "people vs fish", "people vs owls", etc etc.
It's a losing proposition...and has been for 25 years.
Posted by: kari | Aug 14, 2007 11:11:45 AM
Let's just hope Governor Kulongoski doesn't influence Merkley's environmental platform. The Governor has a wretched record, especially when it comes to wildlife. Merkley would do well to ensure that the Govenor's anti-wildlife policies don't infect his campaign for the U.S. Senate. Otherwise many pro-environment Democrats like me will stay home. I would not support Merkley if he adopts the Govenor's short-sighted, cruel, and misguided wildlife policies. The Governor does not care about protecting our state's precious wildlife. He has reinstated hound hunting of cougars and continues to ruthlessly kill bears simply because they peel bark from trees on corporate timberland.
Hopefully, Merkley will act like a real Democrat instead of mimicking the Governor, who really is a Republican when it comes to the environment.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 11:26:43 AM
"It's a losing proposition...and has been for 25 years."
Standing on the wrong side to try to appeal to a phantom belief, as opposed to using the power of persuasion, is not the answer. It's what Democrats have been doing for 25 years, and it's got to stop.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 14, 2007 11:33:22 AM
To whoever "kari" is... could you please use a last name, or an identifier of some sort - so that you don't get confused with me?
A last name is best, from "Kari from Beaverton" or "Kari X" would be fine too. Thanks!
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 14, 2007 11:36:52 AM
Do you think the fish just hop out of the lakes and rivers and onto dinner tables around the world?
TJ, that's hilarious. I'm gonna steal that line, my friend. I'm rolling around on the floor laughing!
Posted by: David English | Aug 14, 2007 12:01:10 PM
Nate,
Certainly your not the only one undecided. There are many people on here with concrete views on which of the two candidates they will support, but I for one haven't decided.
Personally, I consider myself one of those people who you might refer to as a early decision maker in terms of who I will support as a candidate. However, I too have a lot of questions and want to find out more about both candidates. The May primary is still a long ways out.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 12:29:54 PM
"TJ, that's hilarious. I'm gonna steal that line, my friend. I'm rolling around on the floor laughing!"
I hope everybody steals it. It's an important distinction.
Rolling around on the floor? Are you perhaps also flopping like a fish? :)
FOTFL!
Posted by: Stephanie V | Aug 14, 2007 12:31:52 PM
Do you think the fish just hop out of the lakes and rivers and onto dinner tables around the world?
TJ, that's hilarious. I'm gonna steal that line, my friend. I'm rolling around on the floor laughing!
All I can add to that is, good thing they're salmon and not sturgeon.
Posted by: Miles | Aug 14, 2007 12:56:17 PM
I'm hoping for a vigorous debate on the issues here at BlueOregon, not on the personalities and other silliness.
Kari, I hope you're not suggesting that it's wrong to cast a vote based on personality. I don't think that should be someone's primary decision point, but the personality (and character) of our leaders is important. And let's face it, there isn't going to be a debate on the issues between Merkley and Novick. Their platforms may differ on the margins, but substantively they're going to be nearly identical. Beyond policy, two issues come to mind: 1) Electability against Gordo, and 2) Impact on the Senate and the national polity. Both have a lot to do with personality.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Aug 14, 2007 1:10:37 PM
>Beyond policy, two issues come to mind: 1) Electability against Gordo, and 2) Impact on the Senate and the national polity. Both have a lot to do with personality.
Yes, they do, especially if when you say "personality" you include style, approach, etc.
In 2008, in Oregon, do you beat Mr. Establishment with Mr. Establishment Lite? Or do you beat Mr. Establishment with a brilliant outsider who has the rhetorical tools to call out all of the contradictions and the breaches of faith, and persuade the voters to focus on them? And as to the second issue, pause for a moment to imagine the immense karmic transfer (for want of a better phrase) that would result from Oregon's replacing Gordon Smith in the US Senate with Steve Novick. All progressives should be giddy with excitement at the prospect, and working as hard as they can to achieve it.
Posted by: pdxskip | Aug 14, 2007 1:33:31 PM
Stephanie....I have no doubt Steve Novick is a bright, witty, and energetic guy with passion for the progressive causes closest to his heart. My uneasiness is that I don't think he's electable in that particular race.
Maybe he can get elected to Jeff's former seat in the legislature, gain some name familiarity, and go on to bigger and better things own the line.
Posted by: trishka | Aug 14, 2007 1:37:50 PM
nate, i'm another one who is undecided.
pdxskip wrote:
...the political type casting and evening news sound bites still come across as "people vs fish", "people vs owls", etc etc
that's why, AFAIC, it's the job of both merkley & novick to hammer away at reframing the issue as "fisherman vs. farmers". the candidate who can successfully do this, and only that candidate, has the chance of beating smith.
Posted by: Tom Civiletti | Aug 14, 2007 1:43:51 PM
A few observations:
Both Novick and Merkley are both very bright people. Merkley is quieter, so his smarts are less obvious.
Fishermen are as American as farmers, even if they do live on the coast and venture into international waters at times.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 2:12:18 PM
"My uneasiness is that I don't think he's electable in that particular race."
Why is it you think that, honestly?
Posted by: trishka | Aug 14, 2007 3:15:30 PM
the other thing that i think we need to keep in mind is that there are different kinds of intelligence - there is the wonkiness, bookish, academic sort of intelligence and then there is political savvy. bill clinton is, for better or for worse, the embodiment of someone who demonstrated ample gifts in both areas.
we know that steve novick for sure has the former sort of intelligence, and merkley is by all accounts a bright guy as well. but the degree of political intelligence that each of them has is what, i think, is going to emerge over the next few months of this campaign.
Posted by: Miles | Aug 14, 2007 3:28:42 PM
My uneasiness is that I don't think [Novick's] electable in that particular race.
My uneasiness is that I don't think Merkley is electable statewide against a polished, well-funded, moderate Republican. (And before TJ jumps all over me to insist that Smith is not moderate, let's just agree that's how he is going to portray himself and how the Oregonian and all media outlets outside Portland will portray him.) If someone forced me to bet $1,000 today on Smith versus any Democrat, declared or not, I would put it on Smith. I think the only way to beat a strong incumbent is with a maverick.
One thing we can probably agree on, though, is that electability is only proven through . . . elections. If Novick can't get by Merkley, he won't beat Smith. And vice versa for Merkley. So, there is a reason primaries exist after all.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 14, 2007 3:30:00 PM
As I said on KPOJ this morning, Jeff Merkley certainly has some insider to him -- after all, he's the Speaker of the House! But so does Steve Novick... he's the consummate insider's insider. Worked on senior staff for the Governor, for the Supt of Public Instruction, for a policy shop funded by Oregon's leading unions, etc. (And I say this as a compliment, so don't misunderstand me.)
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 3:44:33 PM
Kari, I think he's the outsider's insider. He's been on staffs and been a part of the system, but he's never been OF the system. That's what's so appealing to me. Unlike a typical electoral novice who really doesn't know what it's like on the inside, Steve knows exactly what it's like. He even has a little edge on Jeff in that sense, since he's already been a part of a federal administration in DC.
But Steve can take the good part of that--the knowledge of how things work on the inside--and not stay beholden to the requirements of staying in that system. He doesn't have to answer to anybody but the voters.
Steve's been in the system. Jeff IS the system, at the moment.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Aug 14, 2007 4:20:45 PM
>farmers vs. fishermen
More like a handful of farmers vs. the entire Oregon fishing and tourism industries.
Posted by: Steven Maurer | Aug 14, 2007 4:40:54 PM
The only thing I have to say after reading some of the comments here is this: I'm glad both Steve and Jeff are classier than their fanboys. Especially Steve. He's much classier than many of these posters - who seem to think that they're the ones who get to decide who is a "real" Democrat and who is not.
If all you can do is just express juvenile alienation and trash good Democrats (both Steve and Jeff), just put a sock in it. We have a hard choice to make, between two absolutely superb progressives. No matter who gets picked, we're getting someone good. And anyone who doesn't recognize that is an absolute idiot.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Aug 14, 2007 5:28:07 PM
I haven' t noticed anyone accusing either candidate of not being a real Democrat.
Pointer, please?
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 14, 2007 7:31:25 PM
He even has a little edge on Jeff in that sense, since he's already been a part of a federal administration in DC.
So has Jeff. He was a policy analyst in the Pentagon in the early 80s, figuring out how to "trust but verify" nuclear arms control treaties.
Then he came home and ran Habitat for Humanity. Now that's some range.
Posted by: torridjoe | Aug 14, 2007 7:37:55 PM
"So has Jeff. He was a policy analyst in the Pentagon in the early 80s, figuring out how to "trust but verify" nuclear arms control treaties."
Hey cool, I didn't know that! Thanks.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: James X. | Aug 13, 2007 5:29:03 PM
As maloney asks over at Loaded O, where's Kitzhaber? Staying out of the primary, or holding an announcement for a later news cycle?