Who might run in Hooley's seat? Some wild speculation.

Kari Chisholm FacebookTwitterWebsite

First, the bad news. As we told you earlier, Darlene Hooley is retiring. Twelve years after winning her congressional seat, and ousting a Republican incumbent, she's calling it quits.

Democrats are right to be worried. The seat has a Republican registration edge of 5000 voters. Until Hooley won the seat in 1996, the seat flipped back and forth between the parties. It's a slightly better district now, but it's easily Oregon's toughest swing district -- and should catapult into the top 10 most competitive in the country.

Next, the good news. It's a good year for her to retire. Nationally and locally, Democrats are fired up and Republicans are demoralized. Big national money will be flowing into Oregon for the U.S. Senate race and the presidential campaign.

Over on the Republican side, Mike Erickson was already prepped to run - but expect the national GOP to try and find a stronger candidate. Erickson's ethical challenges and questions about his past don't likely make him a top-tier candidate (though his bankroll helps.)

One possibility? Kevin Mannix. He's been stymied in two runs for Attorney General and two runs for Governor - but he once represented part of the 5th in the Legislature. The mid-Willamette Valley has always been a strong area for him. Of course, he wouldn't be able to rake in six-figure checks from his sugar-daddy, Loren Parks - the Las Vegas sexual hypnotist.

I'm sure there are other Republicans, but I'm more interested in the Democrats. Who are the plausible candidates? Keep in mind that filing day is March 11 - and we're less than 15 weeks from the primary election.

Oregon5dems[A full disclosure moment: Lots of people mentioned below are current or former clients of my company. The specifics are at the end of the post. As always, I speak here only for myself.]

The most likely Democratic candidates, in alpha order:

Of course, by Oregon law, candidates for Congress don't have to live in the congressional district. You just have to be 25, a citizen, and a resident of Oregon. So, it could be anyone.

Which leads to one more tantalizing possibility:

The bottom line? It's going to very tough for anyone to fill Darlene Hooley's well-worn sneakers - either as a candidate or a member of Congress.

Stay tuned. I'll share more when I hear it.

[OK, my full disclosures: I was on Darlene Hooley's staff in 1996. Best campaign I ever worked on. Brian Clem, Greg Macpherson, and Martha Schrader are consulting clients of my company. Paul Evans and Dave Hunt have used some of our technical services. And Steve Novick is running against another of my clients, Jeff Merkley. No, I'm not working for anyone who is running for the 5th District. Not yet, anyway. As always, I speak here only for myself.]

  • SecofState? (unverified)
    (Show?)

    What about one of the Sec of State candidates? They can't all win. Avakian? Metsger? Walker?

  • Mari Anne (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Jim Hill of course. He knows the district well. Sits on the National NARAL Board. He has good name recognition in the area. Jim would be a great candidate. He could hold the seat for the Dem's. I am truly sorry to lose Darlene but would be wowed if Hill would step up.

  • (Show?)

    Kari, I'm interested in the financial issues you raise, can you expand? First, you say Loren Parks couldn't fund a Mannix run -- is this because of Federal limits on campaign finance that don't apply to state offices like AG and Governor?

    Second, you say that Kroger or Macpherson (and presumably anyone in the SoS race, like Vicki Walker or Rick Metsger, who I think both are in the 5th) couldn't move their funds into a Federal race. What restricts that? State law? Federal law? Constitutional? Statutory?

    Finally, anybody entering this race oughtta be pretty secure in his/her home lifeā€¦if Wikipedia's right, none of the Reps in the 5th have yet gotten through without a divorce! Eesh!

  • RogerD (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I would think there is at least one other tantalizing possibility. Jeff Merkley. The same set of facts that makes Novick a strong possibility would also set the stage for Merkley to make a bid for Hooley's seat. Just to put that out there.

    Disclosure: I am not working for any of these possible candidates, nor am I a decided supporter of any except John Kroger (who will be an outstanding AG).

  • (Show?)

    Fascinating suggestions. None of the SOS candidates live in the 5th, and none of them could take their money with them. So, possible, but unlikely.

    Pete... On the money: The federal individual donation limit is $2300 per election. So, Loren Parks could donate $2300 twice. Which is a far cry from the $300,000 checks that Mannix is accustomed to picking up from him.

    Similarly, you can't move state money into federal because of those limits. A state committee can donate to a federal campaign - I think it's either $5000 or $10,000 - but you can't move the whole enchilada.

  • SecofState (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This might be a perfect time for Metsger to jump in. He seems to be in second place. Has he ever expressed an interest in DC?

  • (Show?)

    I've updated the post above with the news that Dave Hunt is out, and adding Jim Hill as a plausible candidate.

  • SecofState (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Also, I have to say that I love the Novick idea. It's very unrealistic that either Novick or Merkley will beat Smith (not to be a downer, but let's face the facts for a minute), but he would have a great shot at Hooley's seat. People are so impressed with Novick and I'd love to see him in there.

  • BCM (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Kari, I don't understand. Steve Novick is going to be busy running against Sen. Smith, how could he possibly do two races at once?

    Disclosure: I have nothing to disclose. I do not work for or support any candidate in the senate race.

  • (Show?)

    This is going to be a tight race anyway, let's not make it any harder by nominating a carpetbagger. So who actually lives in this district? Presumably Clem, Courtney, Evans, and the Schraders. Looking at a map seems to suggest that most of MacPherson's district is in CD5, but I couldn't be sure (the SoS's interactive map is just awful). I have no idea where Kroger lives, but it seems likely he's in CD1 or 3. As for the SoS candidates, they all appear to be well outside. Anybody got real scoop on who, of the likely candidates, really lives in CD5?

  • (Show?)

    All of the people I've mentioned above live in Oregon's 5th - except Steve Novick.

  • bigblue (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I've heard that former state rep, and former Willamette University president, Bryan Johnston, is considering a run.

  • (Show?)

    Along the same lines as a possible Novick run (i.e., outside of the district)... Ben Westlund might make a good candidate too.

  • (Show?)

    Nate, gotta toot my own horn just a little ā€“ I made maps of state Senate districts, they're on Wikipedia's article on the Senate. Haven't gotten around to the House districts yet. But, I'm pretty sure Macpherson's is in CD5 -- he's in Lake O., which I'm pretty sure is all in CD5. Not sure about others.

    On the R side, I keep wondering if Molly Bordonaro's gonna resurface when she comes back from Maltaā€¦but boy, I hope not.

  • (Show?)

    How about Metro President David Bragdon? He said he's not running for anything, anywhere in 2008, but would he reconsider in light of this retirement?

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Novick as a carpetbagger? Nice try Kari. Evans or Schrader sound like good bets....or Hill if he'd do it.

  • (Show?)

    Hill may be a towering intellect, great fundraiser, and other complimentary things too numerous to list, but by golly, last time he said he was gonna run, no actual campaign ever materialized. Never was able to figure that one out.

    Metsger would have to move, and I'm guessing, given his beautiful homestead in his hometown of Welches, he'd be reluctant to do so.

    I'd love to see either of the Schraders jump in, but if they don't, I'd go with Clem or Evans.

    <hr/>

    Puts me a four favorites.......

  • Tom Civiletti (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Anyone heard from Tom Bruggere recently?

    Since Kari mentioned Novick, how about Merkley?

  • Perplexd (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Maybe Sean Penn should run. I mean seriously people, how about limiting the potential field to people who actually live in the district?

  • (Show?)

    I haven't talked to Brian Clem but his daughter was born about two weeks ago which doesn't really seem to be a indicator for a possible candidacy. But if he did I'd drop out of school to help him out.

    I broke down why everybody else on the list besides the Schraders, Johnston and Evans is a good bet not to run at Forward Oreogn.

    Its a little long so I didn't want to post it all here but essentially, Hunt, and Mac said no already, Jim Hill is still in debt from 06, Kroger's CV plays better as a AG.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Clearly the best solution is to run John Frohnmayer. Take out the senate candidate with the most gravitas and experience.

  • Michael Arrington (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I'd like to see some Oregon style "Joementum" with Joe Baessler from the Bus Project, currently working with AFSCME. Joe's Michigan roots (if I'm remembering correctly) may very well line up with this district that I've spent hardly any time in.

    Joe, if you're reading this, consider me a full time volunteer.

  • (Show?)

    Isn't Frohnmayer currently dedicating his efforts toward ensuring another term for Gordon Smith?

  • Taylor M (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I thought this seemed obvious, but wouldn't Bill Bradbury think about a run? I haven't heard his name anywhere. He lives in Salem and his Secretary of State term is up in 2009. He has statewide name recognition from his 2002 Senate campaign against Gordon Smith as well.

    Also, Kari- if you're going to recommend Steve Novick as a possible candidate for Congress, you should disclose up front that he is running against your client for Senate. I think your connection belongs in the recommendation itself, not at the end of the article.

    And as always, anyone but Kevin Mannix.

  • (Show?)

    I'd like to see some Oregon style "Joementum" with Joe Baessler from the Bus Project.

    RUN JOE RUN!

    Kick-off in a bunny suit???

  • (Show?)

    I nominate Pavel Goberman as the Republican candidate for CD5. He currently lives in Aloha (CD1) but I would gladly pay his bus fare down to Valsetz

  • Ernie D (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Taylor M, Kari did disclose above about working for Jeff Merkley, Steve Novick's opponent.

    Kurt Schrader is not up for election this year and is a good fit for the 5th district, especially with the Republican registration edge.

    It's unlikely Kevin Mannix would rum. He wouldn't have the power he craves being one of 435...and in the minority.

  • Genie Uebelacker (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Tom Civiletti mentioned Tom Bruggere. No one seems to take the bait, but he was the senate contender against Smith once, and was the owner of Mentorgraphics (an offshoot of Microsoft). Good guy, is a strong Democrat. Lives in Wilsonville. Any comments?

  • (Show?)

    I would love the possibility of working on either of the Schrader campaigns. Both are great political leaders. I also would love to see Courtney go for it. As someone who has worked with all three of the folks mentioned, I know how hard each of them would work on behalf of Oregon.

  • (Show?)

    I've posted an update. Macpherson is out. I've also added Bryan Johnston, who is reportedly considering a run.

  • (Show?)

    I thought this seemed obvious, but wouldn't Bill Bradbury think about a run?

    Bill Bradbury is a resident of Bandon, Oregon - which is in DeFazio's district, and where he served as a State Senator.

    Of course, that doesn't preclude a run, especially since he (like many statewide officials) has temporarily relocated to Salem for the duration of his term in office.

  • (Show?)

    As others have said before, anyone not currently living in the district will not be well received by the voters. It is tough enough being a Democrat in the district let alone a 'newbie'. Same goes for most of the progressive names like Novick. This is a district that needs a lot of "down home" sensibilities and a long history as a resident. Evans, Schraders, and Clem meet that requirement.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Here's a comment

    "Anyone heard from Tom Bruggere recently?"

    OH PLEEEASE! Do you really want Mike Erickson in Congress?

    Bruggere ran one of the most incompetent campaigns I have ever seen. Why do you think we have Gordon Smith in the US Senate?

    As someone who worked on the very first 5th District primary (one of the most issue-oriented, civil primaries I can remember) I want to second this:

    Posted by: John Calhoun | Feb 7, 2008 4:41:26 PM

    As others have said before, anyone not currently living in the district will not be well received by the voters. It is tough enough being a Democrat in the district let alone a 'newbie'. Same goes for most of the progressive names like Novick. This is a district that needs a lot of "down home" sensibilities and a long history as a resident. Evans, Schraders, and Clem meet that requirement. <<

    Paul Evans would be my first pick, Kurt my second, not sure that Brian Clem the father of an infant would want to run, never met Martha Schrader. Peter Courtney ran before over 20 years ago and I supported him back then.

    To win in the 5th District, one needs to appeal to Salem and Marion County, to Clackamas County, and way over to the coast. Even if Steve Novick owned a home in the 5th District I would advise against a run because he comes across as more Portland than 5th District.

    Yes, it is true about the marriage thing. Denny Smith divorced and remarried while in Congress, Kopetski divorced, in one term Jim Bunn divorced and then married the chief of staff who he paid that high salary, and Darlene divorced.

  • E4 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I've heard rumors that BOLI Commissioner Dan Gardner was interested in running for Congress if Oregon were to get another Congressional seat. This could be an opportunity for him to get a seat without having to wait.

  • Tab (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I'd like to think that during a time when the first female president is more than a possibility that a list like this one could have a few more women on it. The Portland city council looks like it's going to stay all male, Multnomah county has turned in that direction. Now the entire state congressional delegation?

  • (Show?)

    Another update: John Kroger is out, per his campaign manager.

  • (Show?)

    Tab... I agree. Any suggestions?

    The two women legislators in the 5th District are Jean Cowan and Betty Komp. I've been told that it's unlikely that they're interested -- though I haven't confirmed that directly.

    E4... Dan would be a great candidate. At the moment, he resides in Blumenauer's district. Though, as I've noted above, that's not a legal impediment.

  • PolkCo. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    We definitely love Paul Evans and Rep. Brian Clem here in Polk Co. and Salem generally.

    Paul was a great candidate, Mayor and community leader. He has lots of volunteers and donors from his last race, great national connections and has the fire in the belly!

    Brian also had both a great grassroots and well funded campaign and just recently was the main spokesperson appearing on behalf M49 in Marion/Polk/Yamhill counties, all of which passed the measure with 60%+ of the vote.

    Our county farm bureaus in the Mid valley are all alot happier with the local Democrat office holders than the Republicans at the moment due to M49 and could be crucial to winning in November.

  • Harry (unverified)
    (Show?)
    <h2>"The two women legislators in the 5th District are Jean Cowan and Betty Komp."</h2>

    What about the woman State Rep from Corvallis... no, not the meth addict, her replacement... Gesler? Is that part of Corvallis inside the district?

  • (Show?)

    Some outside updates to the speculation:

    The Oregonian reports that both Kurt and Martha Schrader, as well as Paul Evans are all indeed considering a run. On the republican side, interested parties include Mannix and Reps Boquist and Brunn.

    PolitickerOR reports that Dave Hunt has talked with the house dems in the district; Macpherson, Clem, and Komp, and supposedly none of them are interested in running. As noted above, Johnston is said to be interested.

  • (Show?)

    What about someone like Larry Galizio, who holds down a very swingy Tigard district?

    Obliquely calling for Novick to drop out of the race by March 11--classy!

  • JTT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I'm surprised that Kitzhaber hasn't been mentioned yet...

  • (Show?)

    Sara Gelser is in DeFazio's district. Larry Galizio is in Wu's district. Either would make an excellent member of Congress.

  • (Show?)

    Kitzhaber represented Douglas County, DeFazio's district, in the State Senate. Today, he's registered to vote in SW Portland, in Wu's district.

  • (Show?)

    I'd rather see Kitzhaber as Surgeon General or in another cabinet post. Or as governor in 2010. His talents would be somewhat wasted in the House, IMHO.

  • (Show?)

    Sara may actually live in CD5; she's north of Corvallis a few miles, on the way to Crescent Valley HS. the 4/5 dividing line is really weird; they do a yin-yang thing in Corvallis so Hooley gets OSU and Defazio UO -- they didn't want both in 1 district.

    Sara's kids are way too young anyway. it's tough enough being a State Red (now Asst Majority Leader). she's likely to be governor at some point, but i think she'd like her family to grow up first. or at least all get thru elementary school.

    Major Paul Evans. in January 2009, he would be there to make sure our troops were coming home -- and that there'd be no need, i hope, to send the 3500 Oregonians scheduled to go over next March -- including my son.

  • sloppy (unverified)
    (Show?)

    What about Brian Newman, the ex-Metro councilor who left to work at OHSU? Congress pays pretty well, right?

  • verasoie (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Kitzhaber? No way.

    He already didn't want to go to DC as a Senator when the job would have easily been his, there's no way he'd go as a "lowly" congressman.

    Nope, but there's a very strong chance he'll be Governor again in 2010.

  • chris (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Go Mike Go!!!

    For the first time in over 12 years the 5th district have a wonderful opportunity to see a true leader represent them in the 5th district.

    The fact that no top tiered Democrat candidate is rumored to be willing to run against Mike, shows weakness on the part of the DPO. Kind of reminds me of the current US senate race.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "True leader"? Darlene wasn't? Mike Kopetski wasn't?

    "Go Mike Go" for an unknown (what has Mike done?) isn't convincing at least to this person who has been actively involved in multiple 5th Dist. campaigns.

  • verasoie (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Mike Erickson will be the Mitt Romney of the CD5, he's going to spend a pile of his own money and not even end up as the nominee!

    Word is that Brian Boquist and another Republican legislator from the district are going to jump in, and they have a much stronger constituency than Mike does and will beat him on that alone.

    And neither of them can self-finance, so the NRCC will end up having to shell out tons of money to lose a close race (just like what will happen with McCain, though I don't expect the Presidential election to be especially close).

    This may end up being a gift in disguise, diverting NRCC and other Republican money into a losing cause, and possibly costing them a couple of state legislators in the process.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    My respect for Josh Kardon's political savvy just declined. This was on Jeff Mapes blog:

    "This is probably the only race where their bench comes close to ours," said Kardon. "The only potential candidate we could run with high name recognition across the district is Steve Novick and I have no idea if he has any interest."

    Oh, Steve lives in the 5th District and not in Portland? Democrats are a team with a "bench" and the residents of the 5th District need not be consulted because people at the national level will choose the candidate from the "bench"? Isn't that the sort of nonsense which gave us Bruggere as a nominee and Gordon Smith elected US Senator the year Darlene was first elected to Congress?

    It would be very interesting if the nominees turned out to be Evans and Boquist--2 Iraq vets of different parties. And if Kardon doesn't know Evans is the former Mayor of Monmouth who taught Jackie Winters what a truly contested election is like (look at the Polk Co. results) and that Boquist ran for Congress once before and gave a speech on a House resolution which makes me want to put him in a room with McCain and have him respond to the McCain soundbites like "have to stay there for 100 years" or "failure in Iraq would be catastrophic", that just means Kardon is out of touch with Oregon's 5th District. And if anyone who reads this knows Kardon, please let him know that remark sounds clueless!

  • (Show?)

    Sara may actually live in CD5; she's north of Corvallis a few miles.

    Not according to the voter file. She's in 4.

    Brian Newman. We have a winner! He's in the 5th District, though I suspect he's very happy in his dream job at OHSU.

  • (Show?)

    The fact that no top tiered Democrat candidate is rumored to be willing to run against Mike, shows weakness on the part of the DPO.

    Puh-leeze. Obviously, you're not hanging out where the rumors are running rampant. There are plenty of Democrats considering the race. (Did you even read the post above?)

    As for the Republicans... I just posted my speculations.

  • (Show?)

    Kari,

    Your attempts at downplaying Steve Novick's ability to obtain the Democratic nomination (as opposed to your employer) for Senate are unproductive and fracturing for the Democratic Party. Yes, it is important for Oregonians to run a solidly Democratic contender in the 5th CD. Yes, it is important to beat Gordon Smith in 2008.

    What you are ignoring is the fact that Steve Novick has beaten Jeff Merkley in every poll taken during this race, and that he continues to build uncanny grassroots support (as opposed to pretend grassroots support) around not only the state, but the entire country. As I have said before, I would have absolutely no hesitation in supporting Jeff Merkley for the United States Senate, were Steve Novick not running.

    But he is running. He is ahead in the polls. He is working his ass off for the nomination. He is pounding pavement around the state. And he is going to take on Gordon Smith in a big way. We finally have a candidate who will fight for the things we have been wanting our elected officials to fight about for too long. Steve Novick will be a senator who will pour his heart and soul into every piece of legislation he sponsors. He will fight for the issues that are important to Oregonians. I have no reservations about supporting Steve Novick for the United States Senate. None at all.

  • (Show?)

    I forgot to add a great debt of gratitude to Congresswoman Hooley. She has represented those within and without her district for years as a potent and integral voice on the Hill. I wish her the best in her future endeavors and I express my greatest hope that a strong Democratic contender steps up to fill her sneakers.

  • (Show?)

    OK, I've so far ignored all the potshots taken at me about the Novick thing.

    But I'll just say this: The state capitol was running wild with speculation today about whether Steve Novick could/should/would run for Hooley's seat.

    I didn't make it up, or pull it out of my ass. I would have been remiss in writing this up for our readers if I didn't include the one candidate on everyone's lips in Salem.

    Frankly, I would LOVE to see both Jeff Merkley and Steve Novick in Congress. Wouldn't you?

  • (Show?)

    I'd love to see Steve Novick in the US Senate, personally.

    If Jeff Merkley wants to move to Lake Oswego and run for Congress I will be happy to send him a contribution.

  • Pat Malach (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "(Novick) would also likely get lots of support from individuals and organizations that would love to see an end to the primary battle in the U.S. Senate race."

    Translation:

    If you let Jeff Merkley have a free ride to the Senate nomination, we'll help you try and carpetbag a Congressional seat.

    Is that really what the Democratic "brains" are thinking and the way they do business.

    That explains a lot. Thanks for that insight, Kari.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Which person is the most progressive and would be most likely to push Pelosi and the gang to do the right thing? Which candidate will be the most likely to cave to the pretend Democrats. Which candidate is the most like DeFazio or Earl?

    Thanks for the information!

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Kari, you may not have pulled the idea out of your ass, and you may be just trying to lay out all of the possibilities. But give me a break. Did you grow up in this state like I did? Did you grow up in a mid-Willamette Valley mill town, for example? The politicos and their staff down in Salem might get all worked up over this possibility, but it is politically ridiculous. If I still lived down there I'd tell any Portland candidate to shove it. Not. An. Option. And very offensive to those who live in the District.

    So please move on. I really don't know much about these candidates and would like the new person to go out to Washington and kick butt, not cave to the blue dogs. Which candidate is the most progressive? Thanks.

  • (Show?)

    would like the new person to go out to Washington and kick butt, not cave to the blue dogs. Which candidate is the most progressive? Thanks.

    I, on the other hand, would like a good solid progressive that can actually get to 50%+1. In my mind, that narrows the field considerably.

    So again, Schraders (either of the two). Both are pretty well known and liked by their constituents.

    Paul Evans. The relationship to the Hooley org, the military and civilian record of service, and the look and feel.

    I've had a chance to work with the Schraders over the years, and have followed Evans with interest, and have also done Walkies for him in the last cycle. Any of the three would be very good for the state, for progressives, and would build on Hooley's carefully crafted record of achievements.

  • (Show?)

    Hey, I'm not pushing Steve Novick here. I'll leave that to others. I'm just reporting what the conversations are.

    There is one bit of information that's worth adding to the conversation. Steve Novick lives exactly twelve city blocks from the 5th Congressional District. I won't reveal his home address on a public blog... but he literally lives twelve blocks away.

    How far north does the 5th Congressional extend? Put it this way. When you ride the OHSU tram, when you board at the bottom of the hill, you're standing in Hooley's District. (At the top, you're in Wu's.)

    Sure, the district goes all the way south to Corvallis and all the way west to Tillamook, but it includes a big chunk of Portland, too.

    (And, frankly, that's the part of the district that would allow it's U.S. Representative to be more progressive.)

  • Faolan (unverified)
    (Show?)

    To be fair Kari It would have been better if you had said that either Novick or Merckley could legitimately go for the seat.

    When you only mentioned Novick it seems like a totally politically motivated nudge. You should be above that. Just disclosing who you work for is not enough. You need to act fair as well.

    In fact, please inform me if I'm wrong, but isn't that Merckley's district?

  • Taylor M (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Re: Novick

    Kari-

    I don't think anyone's surprised that Steve Novick's name would be floated for Darlene Hooley's C-5 seat. Like you said, there are good (albeit not convincing) reasons to consider him: he's presently in a statewide primary campaign against a more traditional Dem, he's got federal money in the bank, etc. But I think a lot of us just felt that the way you mentioned him as a C-5 candidate seemed like a way to stuff your client's exciting, progressive, and viable challenger into a non-competitive box. Like I said before, the disclosure that you work for Merkley belonged with the suggestion for Novick itself- when you suggest other jobs for your opposition, it's that important.

    The bottom line is that although Novick for C-5 makes sense for Merkley and Democratic Kumbaya-ing, it doesn't make sense for Steve, and it doesn't make sense for the district. Steve is a flourescent and quirky guy who is custom made for liberal, urban NW politics. C-5 covers some of the most rural and suburban areas of Western Oregon, and the fact is that it's a swing district that needs someone from the area to pose an honest, homegrown challenge to the local GOP candidates.

    Lastly, not only does a Novick to C-5 scenario not make sense for him and for the district, it doesn't make sense for the Democratic Party. A lot of us are looking forward to a Senate primary contest between Jeff and Steve. I think the two of them respect each other and are ideologically separated enough to have a great discussion about the future of the Oregon Democratic Primary. Personally I'm looking forward to it.

  • (Show?)

    Neither Novick nor Merkley live in CD5. Both are in Blumenauer's district. Just wanted to clear that up for those who weren't sure.

    Part of CD5 is in Multnomah County, though. The bulk of the county is Blumenauer, but we have portions of Hooley's and Wu's districts as well.

  • Robert G. Gourley (unverified)
    (Show?)

    It is curious why Jeff Merkley's face isn't among those seen above - after all he was talked into the Senate race which means giving up the pleasure of a strong Democratic majority in the legislature. Seems like such a gamble deserves a better chance to win.

  • Faolan (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Never mind. My bad. Merckley is in Multnomah county. Not sure why I thought he was from further south.

  • (Show?)

    backbeat12: The politicos and their staff down in Salem might get all worked up over this possibility [of Steve Novick running for Darlene's seat], but it is politically ridiculous.

    If it's so politically ridiculous, why is it any less ridiculous for him to run for Senate? The C5 district may not be the absolute heart of Portland, but it ain't Pendleton either.

    So yes, it's clear Steve has a much better chance of winning it than he does the whole State.

  • (Show?)

    Steve:

    Maybe because Steve doesn't live in the district, which wouldn't be received well by voters.

  • (Show?)

    Another update: Brian Clem is out.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Steve M, with all due respect, if your member of Congress dropped out, would you want Peter Buckley or Sara Gelser or Jean Cowan to move to your congressional district? In saying Steve should move into a district where he does not currently live to run for Congress, that is what you are saying.

  • (Show?)

    I think you misread my point, LT. Steve Novick does indeed have a better chance of winning the 5th CD than he does the State.

    1% is more than 0%

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    OK, Steve, point taken. But look at the new post Kari did with the maps on his "fighting 5th" topic.

    It is time for people who don't live in the 5th district to have a little geographic awareness.

  • (Show?)

    So Steve, if Novick's chance in the state is 0%, does that make Merkley's shot less than zero, considering that he seems to be running behind Novick, if anything? IIRC the Riley breakouts right, even with a high undecided vote, on the coast and in east OR, the ONLY Dem respondens said they favored was Novick. Nobody even mentioned another candidate.

  • (Show?)

    I know you really like to hang your hat on that poll, Mark, but it's about 1/10th as accurate as a Zogby poll, if that.

    When people are polled about something they really don't know about, they still feel compelled to come up with an answer. They strain to find any response that might seem even reasonably plausible for fear of seeming stupid otherwise.

    That's just human nature.

    That's why polls so far out are unreliable, why Rudy Giuliani led the GOP nomination race for over a year. And why the Riley poll you love so much (because it gives the answer you desperately want to believe) came out the way it did.

    But guess what? When it comes time to vote, people read the voters pamphlet. About 35% of them use no source of information other than it. And it is going to tell three stories: Gordon Smith, a Senator pretending to be a moderate. Jeff Merkley, Speaker of the State House with a tide of legislative accomplishment to point to. And Steve Novick, Portland lawyer whose sole government experience is laudably winning an anti-pollution lawsuit. In New York. More than 20 years ago.

    I understand you really want to believe that the majority of Oregon voters believe as you do, that the majority of the Democratic party is too conservative. (I think "corporatist" is the new in-word going around these days.) But guess what? Voters in the rest of the state aren't even in the same ballpark as you are. They worry about the Democratic party being too liberal, not vice versa. Above all, if they're going to take a risk in voting for someone other than the devil they know in Senator Smith, they want someone who actually has experience in a similar role. Like a successful legislator, for instance.

    We've gone around this argument far too many times for me to ever delude myself into thinking I can talk any sense into you. But after your strongly held beliefs run into the concrete wall of reality in the primary, I hope you'll make a resolution to be a little more realistic. You know, realize that there is more to Oregon than the weirdest part of Portland.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    " if they're going to take a risk in voting for someone other than the devil they know in Senator Smith, they want someone who actually has experience in a similar role. Like a successful legislator, for instance."

    People who think it would be cool to see the current Speaker of the House run against the US Senator who was once St. Sen. Pres. because there goes the experience card ("Gordon, you became a US Senator after being a legislative presiding officer, and my experience prior to the legislature is better than yours because...", Merkley could say) are not going to vote for Steve simply because he runs clever commercials and has worked behind the scenes in politics. They are more likely to trust someone they know who has seen Steve in person. And no blogger or campaign staffer can control that conversation.

    And old timers might just want Steve to answer the question "Having worked on the Bruggere campaign, what lessons from that loss have you applied to your campaign?".

  • Grant Schott (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Peter Courtney actually did run for the 5th CD in '84 and almost beat Ruth McFarland in the priamry. SHe had been the nominee in '82 againsts SMith. Having won time and again in Republican Marion COunty, he would have a good base, but 65 might be a little old to start a congressional seat. Maybe not, though, looking at McCain's age.

    Although Paul Evans didn't win in '06, he ran well in a tough district and had over 1000 donors plus countless volunteers.

    EMILYS List has pumped a ton of money into this seat, first for Catehrine Webber in '94 and then for Darlene's races, and they will want to keep it. Martha Schrader is probably their favorite.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    If it's so politically ridiculous, why is it any less ridiculous for him to run for Senate? The C5 district may not be the absolute heart of Portland, but it ain't Pendleton either.

    So yes, it's clear Steve has a much better chance of winning it than he does the whole State.

    Well, because the Senator represents the whole state, and the congressional person represents their district. Did you grow up in this state like I did? Do you think someone living near Wah Chang really wants to be represented by someone who does not live in the district? It is just crazy talk. The rep should live in the district. Period.

    I'm not saying Novick can win the state for Senate. I've got no idea. I'm leaning Novick right now but frankly I think Frohnmayer would be the best man to represent the entire state. Especially if he is sincere about universal health care being in the Constitution.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    First, Steve, let me say that I agree with you that Merkley is going to win the nomination, hands down. And I'll bet cash money that Merkley loses the general to Smith. Why? Because this isn't true:

    Above all, if they're going to take a risk in voting for someone other than the devil they know in Senator Smith, they want someone who actually has experience in a similar role.

    They aren't going to abandon Smith for someone who is just like Smith, except a Democrat. I don't mean that disparagingly, because Merkley is going to be a fine Democratic Senator if he can get elected. But he's way too vanilla to beat a well-financed, moderate incumbent. Even with the collapse of the Republican party, that's not enough to beat Smith.

    Would Novick beat Smith? Probably not. But in my view, he has a better chance than Merkley because the only way to beat Smith is with a quirky, off-beat campaign. Smith wouldn't even take Novick seriously until it was too late, until Novick's intellect and humor had become so infectious that people just rallied him to a victory of, oh, about 300 votes.

  • (Show?)

    Well Steve, I see after pulling the figures 1% and 0% entirely out of your ass, and having those figures exposed as, well, stupid--you appear to have learned your lesson by simply throwing more unsubstantiated claims and numbers out there, in a poor attempt to obscure unfortunate conclusions.

    but it's about 1/10th as accurate as a Zogby poll, if that.

    Considering that Riley uses AAPOR-approved methods and Zogby doesn't, you'll have to find something to back that up, Pancho. I assume you mean his internet polling anyway, since the Reuters/Zogby traditional phone polling has actually been doing OK in the primaries.

    When people are polled about something they really don't know about, they still feel compelled to come up with an answer. They strain to find any response that might seem even reasonably plausible for fear of seeming stupid otherwise.

    Human nature being generally the same no matter who is polling them, I'm not sure what your point is here. Certainly it's not that undecideds were pushed too hard; a 73% undecided rate makes that clear (and mirrors earlier polling by other sources that put those unclear about Novick and Merkley at around the 70% range). Unless you are trying to say that Novick voters are willing to speak up but Merkley voters aren't, I don't see how this affects the distribution of responses, such that it presents an even race at best, one in which Merkley is behind at worst.

    "That's why polls so far out are unreliable,"

    Well, no--that's not why they're "unreliable;" they're "unreliable" because they're not SUPPOSED to be reliable for the tool you want to use them for: forecasting. They are not future predictors; they are reflections of the point in time in which the surveying was done.

    But you pointedly avoid making any assertions as to the quality of the Riley poll, and its ability to reflect a point in time status of the race. That makes your own fulminations a bunch of baseless assertions, doesn't it?

    I don't know what you're attempting to project as my view of the Riley survey, but it sure looks wrong. What I've said is that the overwhelming conclusion is that the race is wide open, and if anything Merkley is running behind Novick (since we know with 95% certainty that Novick could be up by as much as 17 points, or Merkley up by as much as 11, and the majority of outcomes favor Novick). This result mirrors previous polling, which ALSO shows an advantage for Novick, albeit within the margin of error.

    And Steve Novick, Portland lawyer whose sole government experience is laudably winning an anti-pollution lawsuit. In New York. More than 20 years ago.

    If I'm not mistaken, Steve spent time working in the Oregon State Senate 10 years ago, and for the state Department of Education shortly after that. Perhaps you should go read a bio before tossing around baseless accusations like that.

    I understand you really want to believe that the majority of Oregon voters believe as you do, that the majority of the Democratic party is too conservative. (I think "corporatist" is the new in-word going around these days.) But guess what? Voters in the rest of the state aren't even in the same ballpark as you are. They worry about the Democratic party being too liberal, not vice versa. Above all, if they're going to take a risk in voting for someone other than the devil they know in Senator Smith, they want someone who actually has experience in a similar role. Like a successful legislator, for instance.

    I'm sure you have citations for at least SOME of this? Cause otherwise it looks an awful lot like more anal leakage, source wise. And you seem to have the trend for "change vs experience" pretty much backwards. I'd be happy to show you very recent polling data showing a strong momentum among Oregon voters for change.

    But after your strongly held beliefs run into the concrete wall of reality in the primary, I hope you'll make a resolution to be a little more realistic. You know, realize that there is more to Oregon than the weirdest part of Portland.

    Thank goodness pollsters are smart enough to ask questions outside of Portland! Otherwise we'd be left to the substanceless ruminations of folks like you.

  • (Show?)

    "Merkley is going to win the nomination, hands down."

    Those hands are going to have to come from somewhere, and right now they're being sat upon. Even in a room full of machine politicians, the straw poll at DPO Super Tuesday was an essentially even affair--just five votes separated them. DC is not impressed.

  • David Bragdon (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Not me. Brian Newman!

  • (Show?)

    A bunch of Portland activists are "machine politicians" ! A straw poll is in any way believable. Mark, you crack me up. Spin that any harder any you'll throw out your back along with your logic.

    All that straw poll showed was that Mr. Novick couldn't even win in the most liberal, least pragmatic, territory in the entire state. What, he couldn't get an extra dozen people to throw the thing his way?

    I mean geez, even Ron Paul manages to win internet polls.

  • (Show?)

    Why exactly does mentioning Steve Novick represent some kind of covert slam against him? I'd really like to hear that tortured logic. Folks, you're starting to look seriously unhinged.

    As for the seat, it will be an interesting test of Democratic strength. A number of the names on the list are very strong, and despite what should be a pitched battle in the fifth, we should be able to win it.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why exactly does mentioning Steve Novick represent some kind of covert slam against him?

    Simply because Merkley wasn't mentioned for the same seat, even though they're both outside the district. No more, no less.

  • (Show?)

    Kurt Schrader is a perfect fit for the 5th.

    Both he and Martha are really nice people though and I'm not sure I'd wish the congressional lifestyle on them.

  • A woman's place is in the House (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why is this list so short on women? Do we really want an all male federal delegation?

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    All those discussing a current US Senate candidate running in the 5th District, imagine this.

    Paul Evans and Kurt Schrader and a US Senate candidate (I won't get into a debate about which one) in a town hall setting in Salem or Molalla or Dallas or somewhere in Lincoln County.

    The US Senate candidate (who is from Portland) would do a better job understanding the concerns of the local 5th District residents than either Paul or Kurt because....

    If you can't complete the sentence, please keep the debate over US Senate candidates out of this discussion of the 5th District.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I've never met Martha Schrader, and I don't know of any other woman who would have the experience Darlene had when she ran for Congress. The issues are federal, the campaign schedule grueling, and if you win you get the joy of coming home from DC most weekends. If "woman's place" has someone to suggest, go ahead.

  • (Show?)
    Would Novick beat Smith? Probably not. But in my view, he has a better chance than Merkley because the only way to beat Smith is with a quirky, off-beat campaign.

    Miles, perhaps you ought to talk to some folk who are right-of-center and take the time to actually try to understand what motivates them before trying to claim that there's only one way to beat Smith.

    Just about half an hour ago I was talking with some friends over pizza at Godfather's and we were talking politics for part of the meal. Except for one guy's wife, I was the only progressive person at the table.

    An older guy, a self-declared conservative NAV, sitting across the table from me stated bluntly that he'd voted for Smith twice and that he is going to vote for Merkley this year. Not because of Jeff's politics per se but rather because he feels that Smith lied to him - says that Smith's statement about the need to get out of Iraq was pure BS and nothing more than a political stunt. His reasoning for wanting to vote for Jeff was mostly about Jeff being competent and a viable candidate. He knows who Novick is, btw.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Miles, perhaps you ought to talk to some folk who are right-of-center and take the time to actually try to understand what motivates them

    What makes you think I haven't? You think there are 50,000 people like the guy you had pizza with. I think there are 50,000 people like the ones I have pizza with. That's all.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why exactly does mentioning Steve Novick represent some kind of covert slam against him? I'd really like to hear that tortured logic. Folks, you're starting to look seriously unhinged.

    No Steve, it is just patently ridiculous. I mean, how DARE Kari not mention the truly perfect candidate for the job, Ted Kulongoski? No wait! How about Darcelle? What about Mayor Potter? Oh....Thara Memory!!! The perfect guy to represent the district!

  • (Show?)

    Why is this list so short on women? Do we really want an all male federal delegation?

    A good damn question. Any suggestions? The only other women legislators in the district are Betty Komp and Jean Cowan. I've been told that they're not interested - though I haven't confirmed that.

    I'm not clued in to the politics of the Marion, Tillamook, Lincoln, or Benton County Commissions -- any Democratic women there?

    And of course, this entire list is made up of elected officials. No reason an activist, business, or community leader couldn't run and win. Or even someone completely unheard of. (Just ask David Wu.)

  • (Show?)

    "A bunch of Portland activists are "machine politicians" !"

    Were you there? The activists were sorely outnumbered by the Democratic Party establishment, although quite obviously both attended. At $50 a head, however, this was an insider's gig.

    In any case, this seems an odd response for you to direct as an answer to my questions of you, to support your previous assertions on polling science. It makes one think you don't have an answer, thus you simply move on to a different set of unsupported, baseless assertions as a way of avoiding that truth.

    So how many polls showing Merkley doing no better than Novick--at best!--do you need before you come to accept it? Would three be enough? Or to put another way, how many will it take without even ONE to support your position, before your position becomes too embarrassing to maintain publically?

  • (Show?)

    "Why exactly does mentioning Steve Novick represent some kind of covert slam against him?"

    Because it's a ridiculous think to suggest. WHY on EARTH would he quit a competitive Senate race to start a House race in a district where he doesn't even live? There is no practical purpose to suggest it, unless what you'd really like to see is Novick out of the Senate race. The obvious implication is the suggestion that he's not qualified to run for Senate--or, alternately, that he's TOO qualified and threatens to upset some folks' precariously positioned apple carts.

    The slam was fairly overt. What's covert is the discomfort Novick must be giving Team Merkley, for them to start floating ideas to get him out of the race. What's next, a concerned call from Howard Dean?

  • Robert G. Gourley (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Benton County Commissions

    All Democrats, two gals and a guy.

    We want to keep 'em in harness.

    I looked, and Merkley's picture still hasn't shown up above. Probably doesn't want to be seen to close to that good lookin' guy, Steve Novick.

  • (Show?)

    Let's put it this way: it's pretty damned patronizing and borderline dishonest to say to a US Senate candidate in a competitive primary, "Here, check out this House seat in a district you don't live in! You stand a much better chance of winning THAT!"

    I mean, COME ON. Sure it would be convenient for Jeff Merkley if Steve Novick decided to run for something else. Guess what? It would also be convenient for Steve Novick if Jeff Merkley decided to run for something else. That's obvious.

    Of the two, why does only Steve's name get floated for that scenario? That's obvious too: because it's Jeff's internet guy doing the floating.

    For once in your life you're completely transparent, Kari. I'm not sure you intended it, but congratulations.

  • woman's place is in the house (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This points to the poor job we do of recruiting and encouraging women to run. Surely there are at least as many smart, capable women in the Fighting Fifth that happen to be Democrats as men. There are some smart, capable women on the R list. Without a woman on the D side, some Ds might cross party lines to keep a woman in the delegation.

    LT writes: The issues are federal, the campaign schedule grueling, and if you win you get the joy of coming home from DC most weekends.

    And why is a woman less suited for that than a man, LT?

  • Robert G. Gourley (unverified)
    (Show?)

    For once in your life you're completely transparent, Kari. I'm not sure you intended it, but congratulations.

    Yeah, I'm wondering when we'll get the real full disclosure, "Okay you got me!" Probably not a good idea to hold our breath.

    That's nothing compared to the dilemma facing my union, which to endorse? Steve's family, both brother and father working for our union - brother's tragic passing last May - Steve's helped us a lot in our battles with those who want us gone.

    Jeff, a stalwart supporer of our issues, working cheek and jowl with some of our most deserving members. I'm not sure if he'd be in this race if he hadn't been pressured by the national folks.

    What to do? This is a very tough choice for us.

  • (Show?)

    Robert, Stephanie, the reason why most of us think mentioning Steve Novick for this position is complementary is because we simply don't think it's a competitive primary - any more than the Jim Hill/Pete Sorenson challenge was competitive 2 years ago against Ted Kulongoski.

    Do you remember that race? I do. BlueOregon was filled with purity trolls blaming Ted for managing us through a recession. They wanted to focus fire on him instead of Karen Minnis and the GOP caucus, and were able to simultaneously embarrass both the Governor and themselves by flooding a Multnomah Democratic CC meeting with followers to endorse his rivals.

    Thank goodness, the damage they did wasn't enough to keep us from reelecting him or flipping the House. If it had, everything they claimed to be for, wouldn't have been possible last session.

    It's just the same today, except that Gordon Smith is an even tougher opponent. It's quite possible that Steve Novick's run, which has absolutely no chance of being successful, will still pull just a shade of momentum from Jeff to bring him shy of knocking Gordon off in the general.

    I'm reserving judgment though, to see how Steve handles himself after the primary. If he pulls the same childish stunt Jim Hill did, refusing to endorse his rival for the general, he might as well change his registration to the WFP.

    . . .

    Oh, and Mark, yes I was at the DPO party. While there were several Democratic luminaries in the room, the vast majority were regular people and PCPs, most from Portland. So the only way you could call them "machine politicians" is by counting PCPs as part of the "machine". Is that what you think of me as? LOL.

  • Grant Schott (unverified)
    (Show?)

    First, regarding other women in the district, Lynn Peterson is obviously a Clackams commissioner, but is running for commish. chair, and would likely defer to Martha Schrader on this race.

    Darlene's colleague on the board in the 90s', Judy Hammerstad , is (or recently was) Lake Oswego mayor. However, she is in her late 60's and likely doesn't want to launch a congressional career at this point.

    When I interned for Ed Lindquist for 5th CD in '94, most observers thought of Ed as the front runner largely because of his base in Clackamas County, which he did win. However, Marion Co has (or then had) almost as many voters in the 5th as Clackamas, and Marion and Polk voted as a block for Catherine Webber, which gave her a 10 point win.

    Looking at geography, Clackamas is still a good base and the Schraders, Hunt etcā€¦, would be good candidates. However, based on '94, I almost think that a Marion/Polk candidate like Courtney, Hill, or Evans might have an edge in the primary.

    Some would say, though, that Webberā€™s greatest advantage over Ed and the other three was her support from EMILYS List. That gave her a huge financial and organizational advantage that was hard to overcome. EMILYS List support also helped Darlene Hooleyā€™s late starting campaign in ā€™96 raise a ton of money that gave her an advantage in both the primary and general elections.

  • (Show?)

    I think there are 50,000 people like the ones I have pizza with. That's all.

    Miles, Kevin's point of view is hugely important to the reclaiming of the progressive vision for the country and your response is (perhaps purposely) dense.

    Of course your 50,000 will either vote for the Democrat, whover that might be, just like Kevin and I will. Your other alternative is to throw your weight behind a Nader, Frohnmayer, or some other perceived Purist Spoiler of the Week.

    And, undoubtedly, many solid Lefties will do just that, because they have goals that are wildly different from mine, and my fellow travellers in the progressive wing of the Dem Party.

    The 50,000 he's talking about may well not vote for the latest KBOO/IndyMedia wet dream in any race at all. They feel betrayed by Smith, and Bush, and their Right Wing talkers, (and incidentally, McCain), but they still hate and fear them durned pseudo-inellechuals.

    We want those guys in the general, guys like my dad, who at 76 years old, has never voted for a Dem and is now seriously considering Obama. So when you say:

    Would Novick beat Smith? Probably not. But in my view, he has a better chance than Merkley because the only way to beat Smith is with a quirky, off-beat campaign. Smith wouldn't even take Novick seriously until it was too late.....

    I seriously doubt it.

    The subtext here seems to be an old one. We will turn out all of the correct thinking people and ridicule the benighted Righties for their stupidity in not seeing our Revealed Truth, and All will be Well.

    Haven't we tried that a couple of times, starting back in about '72 with the First Children's Crusade?

  • Robert G. Gourley (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Robert, Stephanie, the reason why most of us think mentioning Steve Novick for this position is complementary is because we simply don't think it's a competitive primary - any more than the Jim Hill/Pete Sorenson challenge was competitive 2 years ago against Ted Kulongoski.

    I'm not sure who is intended for what role here, Novick for Hill, or Merkley?

    At any rate Hill pulled more votes than Sorenson, and seriously shook up the governor. His re-election didn't look as certain, so changes were made.

    Plus I'm not sure how one gets including Steve in the lineup above is meant to compliment him - he's already running for an office, one he's the best candidate running, and sure to go on to become our "Lion in the Senate" someday in the proud tradition of Wayne Morse. He's picked his job.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Grant, of course the folks here in Marion/Polk voted for Catherine Webber, at that time a sitting state senator with accomplishments they knew about, rather than Ed who had no presence in the Marion/Polk area. That should be a lesson to those who mention Steve (not even a 5th Dist. resident) or Lynn Peterson, whose name is not known down here.

    And it is worth remembering that when Darlene was first elected, some people said she was a 3-fer: first woman first 5th Dist. member of Congress from Clackamas County first 5th Dist. member of Congress not affiliated with the NRA.

    That last one was interesting because there were those back then who were saying that if each and every Democrat didn't become an NRA member, we'd never win another election outside of large cities.

    Kari, I would LOVE to see someone from Marion, Polk, Clackamas counties, the Albany/Corvallis area, or the coast in Congress from the 5th District, not someone from Portland no matter what is in their resume.

  • (Show?)

    TJ, Miles, and Stephanie--you guys have gotten WAY too sensitive. You're seeing bogeymen in the shadows where there aren't any. Seriously, anyone here mentions the name Novick, and you assume there's a covert message or a slight. Except, of course, when you see a covert message or slight when he's not mentioned.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Miles, Kevin's point of view is hugely important to the reclaiming of the progressive vision for the country and your response is (perhaps purposely) dense. Of course your 50,000 will either vote for the Democrat, whover that might be, just like Kevin and I will. Your other alternative is to throw your weight behind a Nader, Frohnmayer, or some other perceived Purist Spoiler of the Week.

    Pat, you've seriously misinterpreted my comment above. You're also making faulty assumptions about me. I'm probably one of the most conservative Democrats hanging arond this watercooler (which is not so much a reflection of my conservatism as it is the liberalism of my friends here -- in the real world, I'm what's known as a "moderate Democrat").

    My point is not purist. It's that my Republican friends are more likely to vote for a Novick than a Merkley. I recognize that goes against conventional wisdom, but my Republican friends (like many of my Dem friends) are apolitical. They don't prefer McCain over Romney and Romney over Huckabee, they go back and forth between McCain and Obama. You and I know that McCain and Obama occupy very different places on the political spectrum, but they don't. They don't look at policy so much as character, gut feeling, and likability.

    My argument for Novick's electability isn't about ideology (although I also argue the ideological point that among Dems we need more Novick's and fewer Merkley's in the US Senate, but that's a different argument), it's about winning over the apolitical types. When assessing candidates, they're going to see Merkley and Smith as exactly the same, and thus they'll vote for the incumbent. They will see Novick as something different, unique, and those qualities that might make them switch.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Hey folks, about comments like this: "My argument for Novick's electability isn't about ideology (although I also argue the ideological point that among Dems we need more Novick's and fewer Merkley's in the US Senate, but that's a different argument), it's about winning over the apolitical types. "

    I have friends here in the Marion - Polk area who are Republicans who voted Bush/Hooley in 2004. If they are even paying attention, they'd likely vote for the Speaker of the House over the political consultant. But this is supposed to be about the 5th District Congressional seat, not about US Senate!

  • (Show?)
    When assessing candidates, they're going to see Merkley and Smith as exactly the same, and thus they'll vote for the incumbent. They will see Novick as something different, unique, and those qualities that might make them switch.

    You're describing an apples to oranges situation compared to my friend. He's not apolitical but neither is he Kool-Aid swilling partisan. He votes regularly, which is how he came to vote for Smith twice. If he'd been living in Oregon when Smith first ran I'm sure his tally would be longer than just the two votes.

    There were about a dozen of us at the Pizza joint. Of those who knew who we were talking about, not a single one indicated that they see Merkley and Smith as the same. If you'd been there and suggested that Merkley and Smith are essentially the same they'd have laughed at you and probably given you the evil eye for trying to snooker them.

    None saw Novick as unique, at least not in a good way. These folk don't typically vote for political activists of any stripe, conservative or progressive. Not because they necessarily have anything against activists like Steve, they just don't see them as viable candidates. They've been alive long enough to have figured out that there's a difference between talking the talk and walking the walk. And they want to see a track record before betting on a horse - particularly for such a major political office. If it were for Dog Catcher or something like that then they'd be much more open to giving a newbie a chance to prove her/himself.

    I'm certain that most of these guys have voted for Smith in the past. And some of these guys will probably vote for Smith again. Although the old guy who said he's gonna vote for Merkley is influential among the group and the others may follow his lead and do the same.

    BTW, having been a conservative Republican once upon a time, and a self-described centrist for most of the last decade, I've voted for Smith too. In fact this will be my first time voting against him, including his initial loss to Wyden. So I have some idea of where these folk are coming from.

  • John Forbes (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why does every Blue OR post turn into a Novick-Merkely contest? ALthough in fed races, unlike state, out of district residents can run, Steve is a PDX liberal through and through whose public ambition has been for years to run for the 3rd, not 5th, CD. Novick's name shouldn't even be part of this discussion.

  • Robert G. Gourley (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why does every Blue OR post turn into a Novick-Merkely contest?

    It probably has to do with Novick's name being listed in the original post:

    Which leads to one more tantalizing possibility:

    Steve Novick.

  • (Show?)

    And since it was brought up, no the Hill and Sorenson people didn't flood the Mult Dems CC meeting in order to endorse them over Kulongoski. It had absolutely nothing to do with that. The people who were voting on the endorsement were pretty much entirely long-time Dem volunteers, PCPs, and activists. They were people who are always there at a CC meeting, there to the end even when our meetings run over, etc.

    I was a supporter of Sorenson over Kulongoski, and it had nothing to do with being a "purity troll." I was extremely unhappy with Kulongoski's performance, which had nothing to do with Minnis & Co. It had to do with him not fighting harder, not participating in the budget process, etc.

    But I can say that had Kulongoski acted the way he has over the past 14 months or so during that first term, I would have been a Kulongoski supporter from the beginning. He participates more, fights more for Oregon, etc. Obviously he understood why so many of us were unhappy with him and has worked hard to change that.

    And I think it's funny that you say all that junk when the people you're accusing of not being for fighting against Minnis and such were just about the people out working HD 49 in 2004 when just about everyone else declined to participate. Or that these people were out in HD 49 and other similar districts around the area in 2006 (and state, for those of us canvassing with the Bus Project) to make sure we won the House and kept the Senate. Or that they turned out in droves to re-elect Kulongoski once the primary was over.

    Calling people like me a "purity troll" is completely insulting and does nothing but drive them away. It's this kind of stuff that people are doing more and more that is keeping people from getting involved with the greater cause once their candidate loses a primary or pulls out of the race.

  • (Show?)

    There was absolutely no reason to float Novick's name for the 5th CD race, nor any basis for it.

    Novick is leading in the polls in the Senate primary race. Not only is his campaign is not tripping over itself every other week, his beer commercial is one of the best earned media efforts we've ever seen in this state.

    If things keep going the way they have been for the last few months, I'd be surprised if Merkley stays competitive through May, particularly if Novick can keep it close in terms of fundraising.

  • Roxanne Bruns (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This post ignores the single most competitive potential candidate for the 5th district: Brigadier General Mike Caldwell. Caldwell is the Deputy Director of the Oregon National Guard, a former Union County (Eastern Oregon) Commissioner (an impressive post for a Democrat to win), a former small business owner, has a firm anti Iraq war stance (and the credibility to push it) and has a hell of a lot of charisma. He is a lifetime democrat with a ton of cross-over appeal. General Caldwell would not only represent the fifth better than anybody else, but be more competitive than any name listed above.

  • (Show?)

    Roxanne:

    Name sounds familiar, but I can't quite place where I'd heard it. Could you tell us a little more about him? What you've listed such far is quite interesting.

  • (Show?)

    Mike Caldwell also has the advantage (?) of being the brother of Oregonian editorial page editor Bob Caldwell.

    Mike is a great guy but probably not running for Congress.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Sal, you are right on most things, but with regard to "I'd be surprised if Merkley stays competitive through May, particularly if Novick can keep it close in terms of fundraising.", Steve has yet to earn my vote. So many questions I have, some of them relating to what Kevin said above.

    The beer commercial was amusing once, but not enough for me to believe that my friends who voted Bush/Hooley in 2004 are more likely to vote for Steve than Jeff.

    When I saw Steve speak some months ago, he did better on the Q & A than the speech, and he did not impress my young guest. I do not find Steve inspiring, and never having been in elective office we have only his word that everyone who voted for him would like his voting record in office. There were people who voted 3rd party in 1996 saying at least Smith had a voting record and Bruggere who didn't often discuss issues)expected us to take him on faith. What did Steve learn from working on that losing campaign? Or doesn't that matter because he does clever commercials?

    Roxanne, why would Caldwell be better than Paul Evans who has been Mayor of Monmouth and ran an aggressive, inspiring campaign for state senate?

  • Barney Gorter (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Punditry! Punditry! Punditry!

    Tom Civiletti is the only resident of the Fifth Congressional District I recognize. He and I both live in an unincorporated area of Clackamas County. Tom has the experience of having run for elective office. I do not. I do not recognize the name amongst the bloggers above of any former or current officeholder.

    We Democrats face a difficult race for this congressional seat. A very short nominating process ending nine weeks after the filing deadline will be combined with the Herculean task of raising 1.5 to $2 million between making the announcement to run and the election in November. Whomever we nominate will need our help both fiscally and physically to win the election.

    Of the three candidates mentioned thus far, who live within the 5th CD, I would be proud to support any one of them. Let us give time for those who are seriously considering pursuing the seat time to reflect on all it takes to run and win. We all have favorites in the other statewide races, but it is ludicrous for us to think any of these candidates would willingly give up their quest for the office they are currently seeking.

    I propose that we work our tails off for the candidate of our choice to win the primary. Then remember that regardless of who wins the primary, we must win in November.

    In case I forgot to mention it, I am the current chair of the Fifth Congressional District Democrats.

  • Rose Wilde (unverified)
    (Show?)

    So why so few women still?

    Can we have a a whole thread on this topic? I attended a panel of female leaders at the Rebooting Democracy conference last month, and met some amazing women, like Tina Kotek, who discussed how they made it into office and how they survived.

    Not a single one mentioned how they juggled children and a family life, but I didn't notice at the time. But, as younger person with the possibility of having children before me, every time I consider greater political involvement, running for office, serving on a local county committee and such, I wonder "so when exactly will I be growing a baby and birthing it, and then there's the loving it and such"?

    I imagine the modern men of Oregon also have these concerns. Chris Edwards has a young son, and a very busy partner who surely can't pick up all the slack. (Probably why I see the three of them out together so much, compared to other pols who seem to go solo to most political events).

    And then there's the money -- even as a lowly state bureaucrat I still make almost twice what my state representatives make, not to mention those sweet bennies (thanks to SEIU). I know compared to most I'm freaking rich.

    So, I can't imagine how people like Vicki Walker and more locally Bonnie Bettman manage to eeek out a living on $17k (in Bonnie's case, less) a year while raising children without a partner.

    So, yeah, let's talk about why it is so darn hard to get anyone who isn't wealthy, white, retired, and usually male to run for anything.

    Now, for some fun: if we could take Baessler in a bunny suit, and give him some hormone therapy and some falsies, I'd take 'em in the fifth.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Rose, are you serious? Which women living in Marion, Polk, Clackamas, the Albany/Corvallis area, or over on the coast?

    And that joke about Joe--does he live in the 5th District or are you not being serious?

  • Rep. Sara Gelser (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Rose,

    As a young mother serving in the Legislature while raising four kids (ranging in age from 6-13) I can tell you it is a great experience. I first started serving on the Corvallis School Board when my youngest was 3 months old (and still nursing, as she did for nearly three years). At the time, the others were 11 months old, 3 years old and my oldest was in kindergarten.

    I love my children, and I love my job just as do working professional women everywhere. If you are ready to serve, do it! It is possible to be an involved and loving mother, and a dedicated elected official at the same time. You'll make your kids proud, expose them to all sorts of new experiences (mine loved the chance to do a mock debate in the House chamber after hours, and my son is one of the few kids in the state whose resume includes interrupting the Governor during a news interview to ask him if he likes pirates!), and at the same time bring a much needed perspective to policy making.

    We need you! Don't wait! If you know of any young mothers considering public office at any level, I am happy to talk to any of them about the experience of juggling motherhood and public service. It is well worth it.

    Rep. Sara Gelser Assistant Majority Leader HD 16 (Corvallis and Philomath)

  • (Show?)

    Being a mom and an elected official can definitely be hard. It's something I had to really think hard about before I decided to run for the Gresham City Council (an unpaid position). We're talking about finally having another, but I definitely won't even consider it this year - I can't imagine campaigning and being pregnant at the same time.

    It would definitely be great to hear from more elected officials who are moms as well. I was glad to see Rep. Gelser above mention it. We need more women involved as elected officials for sure!

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    You're describing an apples to oranges situation compared to my friend.

    Well, Kevin, people seem to be annoyed that we're discussing this, so I won't belabor the point except to say that I believe you are right about your friends. And I believe I am right about my friends. The relevant question is: which of our groups of independent/republican friends most represents independents/republicans statewide? It's on that question that we disagree.

    On another topic, I'd like to second Rose's suggestion that there be a thread on why we lack female candidates in the top tier for Hooley's seat -- and more generally, what can be done to encourage women to run throughout Oregon. It's an important issue.

  • Roxanne Bruns (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why would Caldwell be more competitive than Evans? Paul is a fantastic guy with good experience and nobody would say that his run for the Leg was not inspiring. However, Caldwell has a few immediate strengths. He is probably one of the most smart, charismatic, plain-spoken people in Oregon politics, he has the instant shelf-appeal of being a Brigadier General, and is more likely than any democrat (other than Hooley herself) to appeal to the ag and natural resource interests in the district, which are extensive. Put Caldwell across the table from the fishing, logging, or ag lobbies with a beer in his hand and he'll at least talk them out of endorsing Mannix or Erickson.

    Here's a link to the press release when Caldwell was appointed to command the State Defense Force and was promoted to General.

    Here's a photo of Caldwell.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Roxanne, how many campaigns have you worked on?

    I ask because of this statement, "He is probably one of the most smart, charismatic, plain-spoken people in Oregon politics, he has the instant shelf-appeal of being a Brigadier General,".

    My experience in 30 years as a volunteer is that terms like "shelf-appeal" sound more like people on the consultant/theoretical end of the spectrum than the grass roots volunteer end of the spectrum.

    The first thing I knew about Paul Evans was when a young co-worker told me about a ballot measure debate she attended at WOU in 2000. This was someone I had never heard discuss politics before, but she just raved at how well the Mayor of Monmouth had handled himself in a debate with Don McIntire.

    The Paul Evans events I attended in 2006 were very well attended, and there were people who had known him for years (in some cases watched him grow up) at his campaign kickoff who were Republicans.

    Gen. Caldwell is by all reports a fine man, but unless we know a) if he is interested b) how he would do in the nuts and bolts of campaigning, debates, in fundraising, in being able to inspire a crowd c) how successful he would be in recruiting the needed army of volunteers from young people to those who have been around politics a long time then I don't see why he would be the best candidate.

    Darlene Hooley, Mike Kopetski, Jim Bunn were all legislators first. Denny Smith first won the year Reagan was first elected, but only because there was a 3rd party candidate.

    Against that history, someone with "instant shelf-appeal" will win the primary and the general because....?

  • (Show?)

    "TJ, Miles, and Stephanie--you guys have gotten WAY too sensitive."

    Sensitive? I'm delighted! Some folks with a vested interest are trying to get the fly out of the primary ointment, and Josh Kardon is telling people Steve can win statewide--since obviously if Novick is a good shot to win the 5th, statewide is a cakewalk. If a Democrat can win over an electorate without Portland, you can win it with.

    I mean really, is that the best they have? "Hey Steve, what about THIS race over HERE??" LOL

  • (Show?)

    LT - It's not policy that differentiates these guys -- though there are clear and important differences between them -- but rather the different areas of expertise.

    If you believe that we need, first and foremost, a proven manager with some experience in building coalitions to make incremental progress toward moderate policy goals in the Senate, then probably Merkley is your guy.

    If, on the other hand, you believe that we need someone with a detailed grasp of the law, who can come in and provide a high level of oversight over a bureaucracy that has been riddled with Bush appointees who have rolled back basic protections for workers, the environment, etc. then probably Novick is for you.

    Given the choice, I think we need a change agent, not someone to come in and make the trains run on time.

  • (Show?)

    Regarding the reasons why Steve Novick was listed above.

    <h1>1. Because I got something like 12 phone calls in the two hours after Darlene announced her retirement from people (who were not on the Merkley team) who wondered if he would/could/should consider running. This post was an attempt at a comprehensive list of who was being discussed in the immediate minutes after her announcement. Novick was being talked about as a candidate. Merkley was not.</h1> <h1>2. Would I like Steve Novick to get out of the Senate primary race? Sure. That would make life easier for the candidate I support. I don't have be part of some grand conspiracy to think that way. (I'm guessing that the pro-Novick people would like Merkley out of the race... doesn't make you an unethical asshole either, does it?)</h1> <h1>3. Would I like to see Steve Novick in Congress? Absolutely. Hell, I'm the guy that registered NovickForCongress.com last year - at Steve's request. I think Steve Novick is whip-smart, funny as hell, and has great progressive values. To me, the appeal of the idea of running Steve in the 5th District isn't about clearing a path for Merkley - it's about clearing a path for Steve!!!</h1>

    Steve Maurer hits it on the head. You don't have to think ill of Steve to think his better move would be to find another race to run in. I like Steve. I wish him well. I believe he's going to lose the Senate primary. Badly. That's why I've hoped that he would run for the State Senate (Kate Brown's seat), the City Council (either seat), or Congress.

    Now, I can understand why these comments make the pro-Novick people angry. I get it. Y'all think he's going to defeat Merkley - and y'all think he can beat Smith. If that's your view, I can understand why you'd oppose seeing him jump to any other seat.

    But, for those who believe this primary isn't even competitive but who think Steve is a great guy, it's perfectly reasonable to hope he jumps to another option.

    One last thought: For those of you complaining that I've got some kind of bias in this post... I simply say: You're right! Bravo! You're the masters of the obvious!

    When I post over my own name, I have no legal, ethical, or other obligation to say anything other than my own opinions. They're my words. I stand by them. I have opinions. I intend to share them. There's no grand conspiracy here. Just a blogger saying what he thinks.

    Would someone please explain why I'm supposed to be the only blogger in Oregon without an opinion of my own? Y'all seem to be applying some higher standard for me than for anyone else. Seriously, I don't get it.

  • Roxanne Bruns (unverified)
    (Show?)

    LT, I think I should probably resent your vague accusation of not being involved in campaigns from the "grassroots" level. I lived in the 5th CD for 22 years, how many years did you live there? As for how many campaigns I have worked on, plenty.

    "Shelf appeal", as I intended the phrase, means likely to show support from voters in the types of questions that are asked in polls. "Would you vote for a candidate with 30+ years in public service who has risen to the rank of Brigadier General?" "Would you vote for a candidate who was elected County Commissioner of an agriculture-intensive county in his 20's?" "Would you vote for a Democratic candidate with a consistent stance against the war in Iraq, but with 30 years of military service and the rank of General Officer to back it up?"

    I dont think I need to go on at much greater length. Besides, I have not said that Paul is a bad candidate. Paul is a really great guy and a great public servant. To think that Caldwell is good, one need not think that Paul is bad. However, given the choice, I think that Caldwell would be more competitive in the district.

  • Robert G. Gourley (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Would I like Steve Novick to get out of the Senate primary race? Sure. That would make life easier for the candidate I support. I don't have be part of some grand conspiracy to think that way. (I'm guessing that the pro-Novick people would like Merkley out of the race... doesn't make you an unethical asshole either, does it?)

    Actually I was happy to see Jeff get into the race, except for the way he got in it. His name recognition was needed to bring more attention to the race. I like Jeff a lot, but I sincerely believe Steve would serve us better. Unless something really dramatic happens, I bet Steve would be in there for the long haul.

    As to anyone being an "unethical asshole?" Come on, we're talkin' politics here.

  • John English (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I would not support Paul Evans because he is married to Darlene's chief of staff, Joan Mooney. Joan, by many accounts, is disorganzied, hell to work for, and has run off good staff. Why Darlene seems to have faith in her is a mystery. Twelve years of Joan Mooney as chief of staff has been 12 years too many.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Sorry to hear that, John. I have known Joan since Darlene's first year in office and she has struck me as having many good qualities. It is quite possible for 2 people to know the same public figure and have 2 different opinions (I've known Steve Novick since long before I knew Jeff Merkley existed, and knowing him that long factors into my decision on the US Senate primary--as anyone else who knows a candidate is free to do.)

    Paul is the most inspiring politician I have seen in quite some time: speaking ability, volunteer recruitment, excitement level from young people, among other things.

    Roxanne, I am one of the people who campaigned for Tom McCall's re-election in 1972 and then got fed up with the Oregon Republican party. I worked on the first 5th District primary in 1982, and had smaller involvement in the 1984 congressional election and the Kopetski campaigns of 1988 and 1992 (not to mention some involvement in the Webber campaign of 1994).

    My problem with your use of the phrase "shelf appeal" is that there are polls and there is grass roots politics, but polls don't tell activists to go out there and contribute their spare time. Candidates or issues inspire such grass roots volunteer work. None of the congressional campaigns I worked on were won due to poll results, although one may have been lost in a recount because of a poll (in 1988, DCCC trusted their pollster over one done by an Oregon pollster and after the election ended in a recount the head of DCCC sent an apology letter).

    My concern is not whether someone named Roxanne has worked on an election in every election cycle for the last 22 years. Mine is a "proof is in the pudding" concern. Caldwell may be the best public speaker Oregon has ever known, have an army of volunteers all ready to campaign for him if he runs, have friends across the political spectrum to support him, and have great fundraising ability.

    But no one is required to take that on faith because of a blog post.

    If Caldwell is interested in running and gave a speech locally, I would try to attend. But I am not willing to say that a person I have never met is the one and only answer to this congressional vacancy just because someone else believes in him.

    Roxanne, please understand this: in the last quarter century I have seen several high quality people run for Congress, many of them friends. It may be that Caldwell is a better candidate than all of those put together. But that remains to be seen, and no poll will convince me that he is a better candidate than anyone who ran for Congress before Darlene was elected. It is the obligation of candidates to win over voters, not the obligation of voters to say "gee, that person looks good on paper and would probably do well in polls, therefore I will support that person". (On the contrary, the argument could be made the opposite way--Bruggere sure proved that a "looks good on paper" candidate can be an utter failure.)

  • (Show?)

    When I post over my own name, I have no legal, ethical, or other obligation to say anything other than my own opinions. They're my words. I stand by them. I have opinions. I intend to share them. There's no grand conspiracy here. Just a blogger saying what he thinks.

    Would someone please explain why I'm supposed to be the only blogger in Oregon without an opinion of my own? Y'all seem to be applying some higher standard for me than for anyone else. Seriously, I don't get it.

    Kari, as long as you are doing paid advocacy work for clients, and using your commentary to the benefit of those clients in the context of a political campaign, you are going to be judged by a different standard than bloggers who are not receiving compensation to work on these races.

    I can understand not wanting to be criticized, but do you really believe that there is no legitimate difference between a blogger commenting or posting on a race for which he is taking consulting fees and one who isn't?

  • (Show?)

    Sal... Sure, I understand THAT concern. Of course people should take my consulting work into consideration when evaluating what I have to say. That's why I disclose it at every turn. People may absolutely feel free to apply however many grains of salt they need to consume my writings -- or better yet, if they don't think I'm credible, don't read what I write.

    But that's much different than the bizarre implication (or outright argument) that I am somehow required to be neutral when I write over my own name.

    I'm not neutral. Never pretended to be. Get over it.

  • (Show?)

    I would not support Paul Evans because he is married to Darlene's chief of staff, Joan Mooney. Joan, by many accounts, is disorganzied, hell to work for, and has run off good staff. Why Darlene seems to have faith in her is a mystery. Twelve years of Joan Mooney as chief of staff has been 12 years too many.

    John... I happen to think Joan and Paul are both fine people.

    But I'll pipe up here to note that Joan won't be Paul's chief of staff if he's elected. Congressional rules are very clear: You can't hire family members.

    Incidentally, you can marry a staffer, but once you do, no more pay raises beyond cost-of-living adjustments. (That's why Jim Bunn gave his mistress/fiance/chief-of-staff three pay raises of $10,000 annually in three consecutive months. And partly why he lost to Darlene Hooley in 1996.)

    If Paul is elected, Joan Mooney Evans will be eligible to be a chief of staff to 434 members of Congress - but not eligible to be his chief of staff.

  • (Show?)

    Kari, they don't really have a problem with you not being neutral in your own posts. If you look at the way torridjoe has reduced loadedorygun into a single page ad for Steve's quixotic run, you can see they have no problem with editorial partisanship.

    The real problem they have is that: 1) They disagree with you, 2) You're influential, and 3) "Corruption" is the excuse purity trolls use explain to themselves why they lose, so it comes an easy accusation for them to throw around.

    I wouldn't worry about it. Although I've found myself disagreeing with 2/3rds of your candidate choices (I'm Merkley/Kroger/Obama not Merkley/Macphearson/Edwards), I appreciate the effort you've put in to create this neutral news forum. I think the silent majority of non-contributing readers do too.

  • (Show?)

    Kari:

    You don't have to think ill of Steve to think his better move would be to find another race to run in. I like Steve. I wish him well. I believe he's going to lose the Senate primary. Badly. That's why I've hoped that he would run for the State Senate (Kate Brown's seat), the City Council (either seat), or Congress.

    How many of those dozen calls were from Dem House members or their staffs, I wonder? Step out of the bubble, man!

    It's perfectly fine to believe he's going to lose the primary badly, but since the facts on the ground make that a preposterous and unsupportable proposition, you can't fault folks for wondering what your ulterior motive might be. Jeff's running even at best, behind more likely--and I'll bet you a dollar we'll continue to see more of that phenomenon objectively expressed in the near future.

    But, for those who believe this primary isn't even competitive but who think Steve is a great guy, it's perfectly reasonable to hope he jumps to another option.

    You can't really think he's going to get beaten badly in a statewide primary, and ALSO think he's a good choice in a congressional district where he doesn't live, and where winning would certainly be tougher than without 1 million or so liberal Democrats added into the mix. I think the word here is disingenuous.

    It's a silly suggestion, albeit a flattering one for him. You're not hearing shouts of anger (at least from me); more like derisive snorting. And I'd add that for those who think Steve is a great guy--and is coming dangerously close to pushing Merkley's candidacy aside--hoping Novick jumps to another race is ALSO a reasonable option for those folks.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    TJ, thanks for saying Steve doesn't live in the 5th District. There may well be people who are spending every spare minute they have campaigning for Novick for Senate who would not support him for Congress because he doesn't live in the district. Nothing makes downstate people angrier than Portland types telling them who should run in their district in a downstate area(yea, there is a small amount of Portland in the 5th District, but the core is downstate.)

    That said, all this concentration on Steve in a 5th District (or other non-US Senate) blog topic is not going to change my mind from uncommitted to supporting Steve.

    It is what STEVE says on issues, not what bloggers say, which will make up the minds of most people. Comments like "coming dangerously close to pushing Merkley's candidacy aside" don't help Steve.

    Suppose Steve did get the nomination and people who are already tired of hearing about him on every blog topic decided that another race (5th District, legislative, statewide, president, etc.) were more important. Would "yeah, he's better than Gordon but don't expect my help on his campaign" really be the outcome you wanted?

  • (Show?)

    Steve,

    I'd be careful about so cavalierly dismissing Novick's campaign as quixotic.

    From my view in the cheap seats, Novick appears to be running a better campaign than Merkley by any reasonable measure with the exception of money, and even that would fairly be comparable if the DSCC weren't putting their thumbs on the scale on Merkley's behalf.

    ActBlue is as good a barometer of grassroots support as any, and Novick has raised something like $325,000 on ActBlue -- 4th highest of any candidate for Senate and nearly triple what Merkley has raised.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Sal, from an objective standpoint, you may be right.

    However, lots of people can't name anyone running for US Senate beyond "is this the year Gordon Smith runs for re-election?".

    There are people who hear Steve speak for the first time, and not 100% of those people come away as impressed as some of the people here.

    And then there are those who think his concentration for too many weeks (and the blogging of some of his supporters) on an obscure 2003 resolution was a blunder. Steve decided to mention it at Sunriver (and on Nick Fish also?) and no amount of blogging will change that.

    Don't call me names, and if here are people out there who regard the 2003 resolution and the blogging on the subject are the most important parts of the campaign, knock yourself out. Spend your time volunteering, not blogging.

    I am still undecided and may remain that way until May.

    If money raised were the one and only yardstick, Huckabee would have dropped out long ago, and no candidate who was outspent would ever come anywhere near winning.

    So far, I think the 5th Dist. race (what this topic is supposed to be about) and the legislative, statewide, and perhaps presidential races might be more interesting this fall. 2 cute ads will not change my mind and make me someone who would suggest Steve to my friends. And there are grass roots volunteers who donate time, something Act Blue cannot measure.

  • (Show?)

    TJ wrote... It's perfectly fine to believe he's going to lose the primary badly, but since the facts on the ground make that a preposterous and unsupportable proposition, you can't fault folks for wondering what your ulterior motive might be.

    Sounds like a wager in the offing, TJ. A pitcher of beer on the outcome of the primary.

    Sal wrote... ActBlue is as good a barometer of grassroots support as any, and Novick has raised something like $325,000 on ActBlue -- 4th highest of any candidate for Senate and nearly triple what Merkley has raised.

    Sorry, Sal, it's only a good barometer if both campaigns are using it exclusively. Quite a few months ago, the Merkley campaign switched its online fundraising to another merchant account provider. I love ActBlue as much as anyone, but their 4% cut is a bit steep for a campaign bringing in as much money as the Merkley campaign is. We're now down to just over 2% or so. For every million bucks raised, that's $20,000. Every dollar that isn't spent on credit card fees is a dollar spent to defeat Gordon Smith.

  • (Show?)

    Lt, you can't claim blogging doesn't mean anything--and then make an issue about what bloggers did assume any importance. You're arguing against yourself.

    Kari, any child drunk on Kool-Aid can make a wager. You're dodging the point, which was that your fantasy view notwithstanding, the actual status of the race completely contradicts you. It's not that you're unable to claim some 20 point victory for Mr. 30% job approval as leader of the House--but that doesn't mean you have any basis for doing so. Making a bet doesn't change that at all.

  • (Show?)

    oh--and are you bragging to the DC boys that the campaign is making too much money to use ActBlue? Cause they're not impressed. It sure slowed down in January; Merkley was only taking in half as much per day as last quarter. Was that too rich for ActBlue's blood too?

    So what's Merkley's online total?

  • (Show?)

    It's just crazy-stupid to suggest that Steve Novick or any other Portland Democrat who doesn't live in the 5th CD should run for that seat. Just because it is technically legal, that does not make it politically realistic or feasible.

    Kari, if you were getting actual phone calls suggesting such a scenario, and I'm taking your word for that, then I would have expected a sharp political mind like yours -- in reporting those calls -- to say, yes, people are talking about this, but as he does not live in the district it is a non-starter.

    And I loved this:

    I love ActBlue as much as anyone, but their 4% cut is a bit steep for a campaign bringing in as much money as the Merkley campaign is. We're now down to just over 2% or so. For every million bucks raised, that's $20,000.

    So, yeah, that's $20,000.

    Plus the added benefit that you have rid yourselves of the inconvenient transparency that comes from raising your money at ActBlue.

  • (Show?)

    Kari, fair point. Of course, there is also the matter of the "quixotic" Novick leading Merkley in the polls, and the polling that suggests that after 4 months and $400,000 spent, Merkley has been following Rudy Giuliani's unfortunate trajectory of moving down in the polls the more he campaigns.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    For once I agree wholeheartedly with Stephanie, "It's just crazy-stupid to suggest that Steve Novick or any other Portland Democrat who doesn't live in the 5th CD should run for that seat. Just because it is technically legal, that does not make it politically realistic or feasible."

    And how a thread started as who will run for Hooley's seat got sidetracked to Novick and the merits of Act Blue and who is better at fundraising for US Senate is one reason some people ignore blogs.

    TJ, you miss my point. If someone is doing regular on the ground activism (working in the office, fundraising, helping with events, going door to door, that sort of offline volunteering) on a campaign AND blogs besides, that is fine.

    But as an old volunteer coordinator and someone who has supported candidates of the "doesn't have a chance" variety, I think previous columns here of the "turn off your computer, go out and volunteer" persuasion are right on!

    OK, let's suppose that in the next month both Merkley and Novick have record fundraising to report. Does that mean conversations among ordinary folks in April will include discussions of whether Merkley or Novick should be the nominee? I mean conversations of the "my friend told me Merkley and Novick are running for the nomination to take on Gordon Smith for US Senate and....." variety.

    Word of mouth still is a very powerful (and cost effective) means of advertising. But the people who engage in conversations with their friends about particular candidates may never have heard of blogs or Act Blue or have any idea what polls are saying. But those are the voters who will probably decide the primary.

  • (Show?)

    TJ wrote... It sure slowed down in January; Merkley was only taking in half as much per day as last quarter. Was that too rich for ActBlue's blood too?

    Huh? Exactly how do you know how much Merkley was raising in January? Q1 reports aren't due until April 15.

    Stephanie V wrote... Plus the added benefit that you have rid yourselves of the inconvenient transparency that comes from raising your money at ActBlue.

    Actually, I love the added transparency. If Merkley was moving all his money through ActBlue, he'd easily look like he was out-raising Novick. As it is, we gotta explain. Which is never good.

    But no campaign is going to get 100% transparency by using ActBlue... unless they're going to reject checks.

    Sal Peralta wrote... Of course, there is also the matter of the "quixotic" Novick leading Merkley in the polls

    Really? Got a legitimate and credible poll that says that? (And no, right-wing hack Mike Riley doesn't count.)

    For the record, I didn't say "quixotic". That was someone else.

  • (Show?)

    kari, the merkley campaign is where I got their numbers. They ended 2007 with 913k. They announced a drive for a million, and as of jan 18, reported 970k. Do the math; that's roughly 60k in 20 days, or $3k per day. That's half of what you reported her for them in q4. I don't believe they actually passed a million until Feb, but I can't tell because I don't see a date attached to it. Say they got to 1.13mil by jan 31; again, that's half the pace of 4q 07.

    As for polling--describe why Riley's poll is not accurate in its results. And in any case there's also the roll cal poll putting the two even against Smith. And the campaigns do intervals; hasn't Jon shown you theirs?

  • (Show?)

    among the many typos in that last comment, it should read internals, not intervals.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    OK, folks, if you are going to discuss US Senate race in this topic, at least admit that money alone will not buy a primary victory. It can buy staff salaries, transportation, clever ads, etc. But if 2 people are talking and one of those people is impressed with a particular candidate and says so to the other person, that does not show up on the FEC report.

    Knowing Darlene and telling people "she's someone I have known for years", and telling positive character stories ("when he did that, it really impressed me") about Mike Kopetski and then challenging Denny Smith supporters to do the same (they had a tough time doing that) is part of what got Darlene, and Mike before her, elected as Democratic 5th District members of Congress. If one candidate leads in fundraising every month from now until the primary and people are telling friends, "you know, I like the other guy better", all the bragging rights about fundraising and polls won't make much difference.

  • (Show?)

    There are lots of reasons why the latest Riley poll is bunk - and why Riley in general is not a credible pollster. Those objections have been detailed elsewhere before (here and here and here, for starters).

    As for internal polling... I'm not at liberty to disclose anything about whether the Merkely campaign has done polling, and if they have, what those polls say.

    I do know this: Campaigns don't do polls just to measure the status of the horse race. Campaigns do polls to uncover actionable data - to help them figure out what messages work and which ones do not.

    I just know that there are zero independent, public polls that actually put Merkley and Novick head-to-head, other than the Riley junk.

  • (Show?)

    Kari,

    Sorry bro, citing a couple of blog posts written by yourself and Merkley's campaign manager to justify your opinion about Riley isn't exactly the kind of unbiased critique that might provide a legitimate justification for your opinion on this.

    I guess I'd do the same thing if I were in your shoes -- shoot the messenger when he says stuff we don't like.

    Most people following this race understand that if Merkley had a poll showing him running well, he'd release it to bolster the campaign's laughable narrative that the Democratic Primary is really just a coronation.

    Even Hillary Clinton abandoned that tactic when the facts started getting in the way.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Sal, I am not part of any campaign, and am undecided on any of the major candidates. But I see no reason why Riley should be trusted any more than Bob Moore. Or some other pollsters.

    Now, if you can show me a pollster who said no later than Oct. 2006 that you and Gilbertson would come very come very close to winning, THAT would be a pollster worthy of respect.

  • (Show?)

    LT, please show me where I've said that Mike Riley is more credible than any other pollster, including Moore. All I'm saying is that the fact that Kari doesn't like Republicans, or the fact that Riley is saying something he doesn't particularly want to hear is a lousy basis for claiming that Riley is wrong.

  • Tom Civiletti (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I guess I'll run.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Did Riley poll in the 1988 5th Cong. District general election? If so, as accurate as the Mark Nelson poll or as inaccurate as the DCCC poll?

    The reason I am asking is that otherwise this is the wrong thread for a discussion of whether Merkley supporter Kari should be talking against Riley polls.

    Kari's remark "I just know that there are zero independent, public polls that actually put Merkley and Novick head-to-head, other than the Riley junk." would be worthwhile on a US Senate thread, but this is supposed to be about the 5th Cong. District.

    Speaking of that, Tom C--where in the district do you live?

  • (Show?)

    OK, Sal, I'll play... Just ONE of the many reasons why Mike Riley can't be trusted to play fair on this stuff: He picks and chooses which candidates to include based on the conclusions he wants to draw - and he draws those conclusions independent of the data and broader context.

    • On poll, he left out Steve Novick and included John Frohnmayer, despite the fact that Novick had been running for months and Frohnie was still just a rumor. (Never mind that he told said, on-air, that Dave Frohnmayer had been the Governor.)

    • On another poll, he told the media that Smith's approval of 57% among Republicans was good... when any objective pollster would have and share the context that 57% from your own party is dismal.

    • And on the most recent poll, he jumped up and got it in the field the week after Novick's first ad went on the air. Which is fine, if you're doing a regular monthly schedule -- but since his polls aren't regularly scheduled, it smells funny.

    And one last thing: He's now a paid pollster for the Frohnmayer campaign. That's all well and good for the Frohnies, but his numbers should be regarded with that information in mind. He's no longer an objective and neutral source for data.

    I guess I can actually amend my earlier statement, and don't need to call Riley's polls "junk" in order to make this clear: There are zero independent, public pollsters that have actually measured Merkley's and Novick's support head-to-head.

    Sorry, LT. We're way off topic now.

  • backbeat12 (unverified)
    (Show?)

    YOU ARE ALL OFF TOPIC

    DELETE DELETE DELETE

    Did anyone ever answer my question as to who the most progressive option is? Because now that Obama is rolling the table and Donna Edwards won big, ridding us of another corp "Democrat", why not go for it? Who is the most progressive?

  • (Show?)

    Riley ran a general election poll including the presumptive Democratic nominee -- a guy you claim is going to win in a landslide, and repeats the same poll with the same candidates and questions 3 months later.

    I have no idea why anyone other than Steve Novick or Jake Weigler would have a problem with that.

    Then he runs a poll asking questions about the Democratic Primary, and includes all Democratic candidates. Now you appear to be implying that he is colluding on some level with Steve Novick's campaign.

    So tell me, Kari, is he screwing Novick or collaborating with him?

    It's reasonable to disagree with the guy's analysis about the results of his polls. It's something else entirely to infer that he is somehow a corrupt asshole because you happen to disagree with his analysis.

    As to the rest...

    Unless something has changed since the December poll, Mike Riley has never been a paid anything for John Frohnmayer.

    The strongest criticism I've seen from you, one of the few accurate comments you've just made, is that Riley made a factually inaccurate statement on an unscripted, unrehearsed television show about 6 months ago about Dave Frohnmayer. Whoop-dee-frigging-doo.

    Seriously strange stuff to get your knickers in a twist about, Kari. And now I come back to the same place I started. This is about trying to kill a messenger who is telling an inconvenient truth about the candidate you work for.

  • (Show?)

    Unless something has changed since the December poll, Mike Riley has never been a paid anything for John Frohnmayer.

    Wait. Didn't he get paid to do a poll by the Independent Party? Did I get that wrong? Happy to correct the record if that's not the case.

    Or are you just splitting hairs between the party and its candidate?

  • (Show?)

    Did anyone ever answer my question as to who the most progressive option is?

    Great question, backbeat. I think the first question is - who are the candidates even thinking about it? Later, we'll get into the questions of what their views are on various issues. I'll let others summarize those positions into a catch-all description like "progressive" - since "progressive" is definitely in the eye of the beholder.

  • (Show?)

    Kari, don't try to BS someone whom you know understands polling science at least as well as you do.

    You cited three articles. The first attacks Riley's lack of transparency on methodology. That's not the case with the January 08 poll, in which the likely screen, question text and question order are public.

    The second attacks him for not including Novick in a poll, which might be a mistake if you want to know about all the candidates in the race--but it doesn't impugn a primary trial heat like the January 08 poll, where all Dem candidates were tested.

    The third--written by Merkley's campaign manager--attacks Riley's analysis of his poll, not its construction or execution.

    The problem here for you is that he would have to be COMPLETELY off--like, a margin of error approaching 20%--for it to jibe the least bit with your assertion that Merkley would beat Novick "badly." And you'd also have to find something wrong with the SUSA/Roll Call poll that put them in the same position as the Riley poll, with respect to Gordon Smith--unknown, Novick slightly more favorable.

    I'm fully aware you won't acknowledge internal polling--but I know you know that it exists, and I think you know that I know, generally speaking, what it tells. And of course there may or may not be OTHER unreleased polling out there. That was my point--for you to suggest what you did, knowing that the facts on the ground totally contradict you, is just blowing smoke. The race is totally up for grabs and you know it--you have pretty much nothing to hang your hat on to back up your position, and much to discredit it. So to cite the concept that Novick is going to lose badly, as a pretext for floating with Kardon a completely nonsensical idea, exposes more of your motivations than you'd probably like, I think.

    As for all the phone calls--we know you have trouble properly interpreting phone conversations; maybe that's the hang-up here? :)

  • (Show?)

    I don't believe that the Independent Party paid for the poll, but even if they did, are you saying that a political party is the same thing as a candidate running for public office?

    I don't think that anyone who understands election law, business registration, or how political party organizations work would argue that such a statement is reasonable and true.

    You stated that Riley is John Frohnmayer's pollster. To the best of my knowledge, that statement is demonstrably false.

  • LT (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The eye of this beholder asks "who would be worthy of the 5th District given the quality level of other Democrats who have run in the district since it was created?".

    So far, Dan Gardner and Paul Evans are at the top of my list based on all the quality 5th District candidates I have known and supported.

    Thank you Kari for bringing this back to the topic in the headline, and saying "progressive" is in the eye of the beholder.

connect with blueoregon