Merkleyblogging, Day Two

Jeff Alworth

A cloudy dawn arrived in Medford before consciousness, but I rallied when the alarm went off at 7:30.  First stop on the itinerary: a Alba City Park in downtown Medford at 8:30.  I have to say, as someone who has mainly followed policy development, it’s pretty fascinating to see what goes on behind the scenes in elective politics.  There’s a general sense of momentum, but like a large brain comprised of a neural network, no one has all the info at one time.  Everything is a process of consultation as we gear up to get to a new site: from whether the location is ready to where to park Merkley One plus a million details—where is the coffee; is it okay to plug the laptop in here, etc.  As we pulled into Alba City Park, Jeff saw the gazebo he’d be speaking from and noticed there was no podium.  Whoops—that means no notes for the speech.

What sort of crowd would you expect in a Medford park at 8:30 in the morning?  Advance word at 8:15: six.  But by the time we pulled up at 8:30, the crowd had swelled to around 75.  (Dunno what I expected, but the crowd looked pretty good.)  The speech, which Jeff had to give from memory, deviated from the Portland version in key ways--he emphasized place more, and told more anecdotes.

Noon.  I'm in a Chinese restaurant in Roseburg and Merkley just arrived.  He is speaking on a topic I forgot to mention yesterday, but which is another major theme.  "The land of opportunity."  It is part and parcel of the themes he develops as he talks about his own background.  His own story is one that came from an America Bush and Smith thwart--to reward the already wealthy and already powerful.  The Roseburg crowd is smaller than Medford, but they're responding strongly to this message.  Jeff lived in this region as a kid, and he seems to provoke a native-son response here.

He's taking questions now.  First question: will you support single-payer health care?  Answer: yes, though there are a number ways--actually, the important thing is to make sure all are insured. (In the car on the way to Eugene, campaign manager Jon Isaacs pointed out that he actually didn't say he supported single-payer.  We played back the video--Jon's right.  Merkley said "there are some strong advantages."  I stand corrected.)

Second question: how do you handle Muslim countries that we fund and which support fundamentalism?  Answer: He's offering an Involved, subtle response that he is merging into a comment about habeas corpus.  Q&A is definitely a forum he excels at--the data is right at his fingertips.

Final question: a catch-all.  Answer: Selecting one from the group she asked, he responds,  "I think the government should get out of the bedroom."  Again,  he's offering a survey course on the issues, transitioning from civil rights to a woman's right to choose. Really good in Q&A.

2:30pm.  We're in Eugene, under sunny skies, enjoying a moment before the next event.  I'll keep updating as the day goes on, but I wanted to offer an interesting theme emerging in the Southern Oregon swing. In Portland, the Iraq talk struck a big chord.  But in Southern Oregon, applause lines that really fired up the crowds were health care and opportunity.  Way bigger than Iraq.  They're pretty rabidly anti-Smith, but the reason they oppose his policies are pocketbook.  Further evidence that Smith is weak on a number of dimensions.  Things are probably going to change again now that we're back in a liberal orbit, so I'll keep my eyes peeled...

6:51 pm.  We have concluded the day's events, and I depart the Willamette Valley en route to Newport.  Everyone's a bit punchy, not least me, so this is going to be a quickie.

Eugene was our afternoon stop, and it was similar in feel and interest to Portland--not surprisingly.  Iraq was the big issue again.  Merkley was introduced by Representative Phil Barnhart, with Nancy Nathanson and Paul Holvey standing by.  Eugene Mayor Kitty Piercey was also on hand.  We got to Corvallis at 5:30 and were greeted by the most enthusiastic crowd of the trip.  (Sidebar: it was held at the Old World Deli, which houses the Oregon Trail Brewery.  And the crowd was the most enthusiastic of the day.  Hmmm.)  Sara Gelser introduced Merkley there.  For the first time, no issue seemed to get particular interest over others--they got fairly even and sustained applause. 

There was one interesting sidebar--after Jeff finished his speech and started talking to folks in the crowd, one John Frohnmayer came up and introduced himself.  I have absolutely no idea what to make of it.  Maybe tomorrow, after a good night's sleep, maybe I will.  Now accepting hypotheses.

  • James X. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Ok, really, there's more Merkleyblogging here than on Merkley's blog.

  • trishka (unverified)
    (Show?)

    ha! it's true.

    and still not word one about novick calling for impeachment. now, novick may have chosen today to roll out his press release, in attempt to steal some of the lefty limelight from merkley on his RV tour, but still. that doesn't seem cause to ignore it, especially considering what a hot topic of discussion it (i mean impeachment) has been here on blue oregon.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    And nothing on the new female candidate. What's up with that?

  • (Show?)

    trishka,

    Having enjoyed Steve Novick's visit to Medford way back in March when he was exploring his run for US Senate I can tell you he will get a column from me after he campaigns again in Medford on October 20. Jackson County Dems want full exposure to their candidates before voting in May.

    Step back, let BO report. Jeff hit the right note, it is fascinating to some of us wonks to see what goes on behind the curtain. The internal workings of any campaign is really complicated. It takes several volunteers, staff and long hours to pull off every aspect of a campaign.

    Expect a good mix of reports from BO. I'm betting Steve Novick would appreciate support from his supporters who post about his policy statements and positions more than pounding the keyboards about how much coverage is going on or not. A couple of bloggers ride along and report and a County Chair shares her impressions of a campaign stop...not to worry. I guessing Steve Novick isn't worried at all.

  • Bill Bodden (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I just can't wait to learn where Jeff has dinner. What is he wearing? Does he take breaks to go to the bathroom? Is accompanied by a guard to make sure somebody from Idaho doesn't make a pass at him? What color is his RV? How is the traffic on I-5? Are clouds threating rain? Thanks for keeping us posted on these important details so I'll know how to vote in the primary.

  • trishka (unverified)
    (Show?)

    paulie, actually i'm not technically a novick supporter in that i am undecided at this point which candidate i'm going to support in the primary. in fact, as posted in the other topic, i intend to go to the merkley dog & pony show in my town after work today.

    however, i'm just saying that when there is an issue of substance on the table by one candidate, it would be nice if it were opened up for comments and discussion here at BO. today all we're seeing are puff pieces on merkley's road trip. i'm fine with learning more about his positions on the issues, but that's not even being covered much.

    i hope his speeches today cast more light. because right now i'm feeling a little frustrated.

    paulie, i realise you took quite a berating in the other topic for glitching on the by-line thing, so maybe you're feeling a little tetchy about blogging for merkley today. i don't have a problem with your submission; just something to balance it out from one of the BO editors at least acknowledging novick's press release would be nice.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Who is the woman running for Senate and where can I read about her? Thanks.

  • Taoiseach (unverified)
    (Show?)

    People, if you want more coverage of Novick (or any other subject), you have the option of contributing! This blog is the work of many minds. Look at the top right hand corner:

    "Guest Columns--So, You Wanna Write? We want a diversity of voices 'round the water cooler. Submit your guest column here."

    And if you want to read more about Candy Neville, newcomer to the Democratic Primary for U.S. Senate, you might read OPB's news website.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Taoiseach

    Thanks!

  • trishka (unverified)
    (Show?)

    taoiseach, not all of us feel the inspiration of the muse as needed to come up with an entire guest column.

    is it possible to just do a simple "in the news" blurb like was, for example, just posted about novick's impeachment speech via the "guest column" function?

    i'm not familiar enough with the technical logistics of this blog site to feel comfortable trying to put something up on my own, to be honest.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Really, Kari should have put a link to the story about Neville, "in the news." Just sayin'.

  • (Show?)

    As I'm about to update this with yet more content, I should offer this defense: this is an experiment in blogging for me, and I will make the offer right now to travel around with any of the campaigns for a couple days. I'm hoping to try to give the sense of what these things are like and what the experience of politics is on the trail. Also, it's instructive to see how the different crowds respond to the same speech--you see how the interests of constituents differs by region.

  • (Show?)

    Jeff, i hope you weren't surprised by the enthusiasm of Corvallis. person for person, there's no bluer place in Oregon. the energy there for great Democrats is unmatched. lots of deaniacs who got involved in local politics after 2003; Sam Sappington, the Benton Dems Chair, was one of them. and in a plac the OWD (where the very first Dean for America Meetup was held in March 2003, half-a-dozen of us meeting and wondering why we felt compelled to come out for a man we knew almost nothing about except he had the guts and wisdom to loudly oppose Bush's war), the noise does ring out.

  • Bill Bodden (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I, and most likely others, would like to know how much Merkley is committed to toeing the DLC line. What kind of deal, if any, did he make with Chuck Schumer for DSCC support? I'm already committed to Steve Novick since he has given many indications of being his own man and has commendable credentials, so in the unlikely event Merkley explained his commitment to the party oligarchy it wouldn't make much difference to me, but others might still be trying to decide which of the two is the better candidate.

    Steve's call for an impeachment investigation is another indication of his independence. If Oregon voters want a senator instead of a DLC agent to represents them, then the choice is clear.

    However, if Merkley gets the nomination, he gets my vote against Smith. I'm sure Merkley supporters will have a reciprocal attitude if Novick gets the nomination.

  • East Bank Thom (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I should offer this defense: this is an experiment in blogging for me, and I will make the offer right now to travel around with any of the campaigns for a couple days.

    Jeff, that's like a Faux News offer to shadow a Democrat's campaign so that they can give a "fair and balanced" report. No' gonna happen!

    Posted by: Jeff Alworth | Aug 31, 2007 9:13:10 PM A last comment on BlueOregon neutrality: we're not.

    Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Aug 21, 2007 9:40:59 AM I am not unbiased. In fact, I am very biased.

    ///We return you now to your regularly scheduled Merkley coverage...

  • Tyrannocaster (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Robocalls

    Today's front page story by the Oregonian explaining the robocall I got from Merkley's campaign a few days ago has me fuming. Not at the Oregonian, either (unless the story is a lie, I mean). If Merkley actually voted to ban these damn things but is using the tissue paper excuse that "But they're legal until next January" I have a problem with that.

    This is sleazy rationalizing at its worst. It's not a crime, legally. Yet, anyway. And the excuse that "Everybody else is doing it" won't work, either. I wonder if everybody else IS doing it, though. I haven't gotten any of these on behalf of Steve Novick yet.

  • trishka (unverified)
    (Show?)

    t.a. were you at the OWD last evening? i was there, but unfortunately missed a good portion of merkley's speech due to my toddler deciding to go into meltdown mode. v. disappointing. :( :( :(

    jeff merkley seems like an incredibly nice, decent man.

  • (Show?)

    Steve's call for an impeachment investigation is another indication of his independence.

    Should read:

    Frohnmayer's call for an impeachment investigation is another indication of his independence, and Novick thought it useful to get on the bandwagon.

    Which would be a sentence that most closely fits the facts here........

    I'm just sayin'........

  • (Show?)

    and Novick thought it useful to get on the bandwagon.

    If you look at Steve's statement, it is far more extensive and different in focus than anything that previously came out of Frohnmayer.

    Steve openly acknowledged at the end of his statement that he had been skittish about taking this position because he did not want to be accused of recklessness, and he THANKED Frohnmayer for his courage in taking the lead. But he went out of his way to itemize the Administration's impeachable offenses in a way that went far beyond Frohnmayer's statement. Bandwagon? I'm not sure they're even on the same wagon, although they are clearly headed toward the same destination.

    Finally, I would like to thank John Frohnmayer for raising this issue in this campaign. If an underdog Democratic candidate had been the first to raise the issue, I have no doubt that I would have been accused of partisanship and recklessness. Perhaps I should have done so in spite of that. But independent John Frohnmayer’s courageous statement put the issue squarely on the table, and made it impossible for any candidate, myself included, to sweep it under the rug.

  • (Show?)

    trishka, no i'm in Pdx now. i went to Jeff's kickoff on Monday; it was great to see Barbara Roberts again. i remember in 1988, days before Dukasis finished kicking that election away; as we waited near PSU for him to show up, she spoke to the crowd and was hilarious. and then some time later, after the murder the Ethiopian student (i'm sorry, i forget his name), she spoke at the march & rally in his honor, and her passionate, compassionate side came out. it's such a pity that between M5 and the religionists who were then running the Leg that she only got one term. she, and Oregon, deserved better.

    tomorrow, Steve Novick officially opens his HQ here in Pdx. i'll be there, being a Novickian, where they won't just have people talking -- they'll have food! w00t. i can't wait til Steve & Jeff debate and demonstrate to the state what's it's like when a party has so many great people, it can spare 2 of its best to run for a single seat. i'm hoping they'll look to bring out the best in each other.

  • (Show?)

    hey t.a.! I look forward to meeting you tomorrow.

  • (Show?)

    Funny, Merkley stated before John announced or Novick called for impeachment hearings, that investigations and hearings should take place and impeachment should never be off the table some two weeks ago at the Drinking Liberal gathering at the Lucky Lab.

    Just sayin'

  • (Show?)

    it's funny (to me) but because of blogging here at BO, people know me. they recognize my face. and so far, no one has hit it. i had somebody really run down the whole blogging world the other day, but i managed to get her to agree that it's the anonymous ones who are problematic (chicken, i say). the others are real people and when they don't hide, and you get to finally meet them, they turn out to be terrific. 2 weeks ago it was EBThom; tomorrow i'll meeting Stephanie and who knows who else. (but i'll be late; i have to check out a house so i can move into the city at last.)

  • (Show?)

    why would anyone think Merkley would toe a DLC line? the DLC is GOP-Lite, and they are the ones who did the most to turn control of Congress over the Rs. their brilliance turned Al Gore's campaign into an embarrassment -- and a disaster for America. the "C" in DLC is for Corporate, and i'm not sure when Merkley ever came out in favor of corporations over the people.

    yes, he's the DSCC's choice, but not their first choice. Schumer, 3000 miles away from what is going on in Oregon, decided a "nobody" like Steve Novick had no chance against Smith and finally got a "name". it turns out that name is also a terrific candidate, and someone who will disappoint Sen Schumer rather frequently, i think. (well, he would if he beats Novick in the primary, but no one is conceding anything yet.)

    feel free to oppose Merkley on the issues or something relevent. but don't get dirty and accuse him of hanging with the DLC. that's just mean.

  • East Bank Thom (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Funny, Merkley stated before John announced or Novick called for impeachment hearings, that investigations and hearings should take place

    Not sure if you were there, Lestat. In a follow-up question, Merkley specifically sidestepped calling for impeachment hearings, a formal step toward drafting articles of impeachment. He left himself the wiggle room to simply be happy with committee work.

    and impeachment should never be off the table some two weeks ago at the Drinking Liberal gathering at the Lucky Lab. Just sayin'

    I had expressed my hope that the Speaker would "help to put impeachment back on the table." I don't recall him doing that at the Lucky Lab. Just like i don't recall him actually demonstrating at a peace vigil he ostensibly showed up to support. I'm seeing a pattern here. Just sayin'

  • (Show?)

    impeachment hearings, a formal step toward drafting articles of impeachment.

    Not exactly. You have "impeachment hearings" after the articles are drafted and introduced as legislation. You'd have oversight hearings up until that point.

    Remember: bill drop, hearing, markup, passage. That's the basic order. You don't have hearings on a bill until it's been introduced, whether it's a bill of impeachment or porkbarrel spending.

    And yes, Steve Novick just caught up to where Merkley was at Drinking Liberally -- impeachment isn't off the table, and oversight hearings should proceed, and if the facts lead to impeachment, then so be it.

  • (Show?)

    And yes, Steve Novick just caught up to where Merkley was at Drinking Liberally -- impeachment isn't off the table, and oversight hearings should proceed, and if the facts lead to impeachment, then so be it.

    That's not the conclusion I've come to. I agree with Thom, and all three of us were sitting at the same table Kari, that Merkley sidestepped the issue.

    Steve has presented well thought out rationales as to why Impeachment is warranted, not just repeated Dem Establishment approved talking points to appease those of us who are pushing for Impeachment. Blumenauer, Hooley and Merkley all came out with very similar sounding statements regarding "investigations" around the same time. My guess is that there was a "green light" given to allow the to the Impeachment crowd to "win something" without actually promising anything.

    We've already had "regular-type" investigations, and there's been a predictable pattern to them. The Dems in Congress request documents or people to testify, the Bush Administration stonewalls, the Dems hold press conferences and give up.

    I think a lot of us are looking, specifically, for Impeachment proceedings to begin. Contempt of Congress could be among the charges. Steve's position is far more detailed than anything Merkley has put his name to, or even alluded to at the Drinking Liberally event.

  • (Show?)

    Colin... I just went back and re-read Steve's statement. The call for "impeachment investigations" is a little off -- since you'd have investigations first, then draft and introduce articles of impeachment, then have committee hearings (and then a committee vote, and a House vote.)

    But it does seem that Novick has gone one step further; without quite saying it, his statement seems to imply that he's ready for the hearings that come after the articles are drawn up and introduced.

    It's not quite clear until you get to the second-to-last paragraph.

  • East Bank Thom (unverified)
    (Show?)
    <h2>I was going to go back to Merkley's statement and re-read that, but... gosh. Well, as soon as Kari adds it to the campaign site, we'll know where he really stands on impeachment (unless he says something different on the stump).</h2>

connect with blueoregon