Kitzhaber endorses Novick
The Associated Press is reporting that former governor John Kitzhaber has endorsed Steve Novick for the U.S. Senate.
Kitzhaber says Novick "fully understands that in order to secure the future of this nation we must first be willing to face the facts. And the facts are not always politically popular." ...Novick says Oregonians have counted on Kitzhaber to tell the truth about challenges to the state and nation and said he was "honored" by the former governor's support.
Extended quotes from the Novick for Senate website:
"I am endorsing Steve Novick because he fully understands that in order to secure the future of this nation we must first be willing to face the facts," Kitzhaber said. "And the facts are not always politically popular. Steve is a committed fighter for progressive causes – and his primary weapon is the truth. More than any other candidate in this race, Steve has not only identified the great challenges facing America, but has also candidly described the difficulties involved with overcoming them. He has offered substantive solutions to the pressing problems we face." ...
"When John Kitzhaber first ran for Governor, his slogan was: 'Face the facts. Seize the future.' That slogan is as timely today as it was then," said Novick. "Oregonians have always counted on John Kitzhaber to tell the truth about the challenges we face as a state and as a nation. I am honored by his confidence and am grateful for his wise counsel. What we are going to prove in this campaign is that Oregonians are as ready as ever to elect a principled, progressive candidate. We'll tell the truth, and tell the truth loudly, about what needs to be done — to reform health care, to prevent global warming, to rebuild a fair economy and a fair tax system. And we'll win. And then we'll get to work."
Discuss.
|
March 3, 2008 |
in the news | Comments (73 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Sponsored Advertising
Comments
Posted by: trishka | Mar 3, 2008 1:34:38 PM
what's there to say, really?
that john kitzhaber is a smart man?
seriously. this is big, great news for novick.
Posted by: Carl Fisher | Mar 3, 2008 1:39:09 PM
So far Kitz has endorsed: Kroger for AG, Avakian for SOS, and now Steve Novick for US Senate.
While I was an early supporter of Steve, I think I gotta take a second look at Avakian and Kroger now. Two races, I have yet to make up my mind on.
This is another good day for the Novick campaign.
Posted by: Harry Wilson | Mar 3, 2008 1:46:56 PM
Harry posting above is not Harry Wilson.
Posted by: torridjoe | Mar 3, 2008 1:50:23 PM
not many individual endorsements stand to have a material effect on a race, but I think this one will. It gives Novick instant credibility in the mainstream. Short of Tom Mccall endorsing from the grave, Kitz's nod was always the prize in this primary.
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 3, 2008 1:51:06 PM
This is a great endorsement for Steve. No doubt about it. Whether or how much it will help him in the primary is an open question. Kitz endorsed Bill Bradley in 2000 - the only Dem Governor to not endorse Al Gore. Despite Kitzhaber's popularity that endorsement didn't seem to help Bradley much.
That said... Kitzhaber's popularity extended outside of the Democratic faithful when he was Governor. I've mentioned before that I'd never voted against Gordon Smith. I also never voted against John Kitzhaber.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Mar 3, 2008 1:57:54 PM
Can't wait for the Kari spinning to start.
Yup, it's a big endorsement. He and Governor Roberts are the two most popular former elected officials in the state.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Mar 3, 2008 1:59:15 PM
Of course, for the Novick fans, if I say that it's a big endorsement - does that automatically mean that it's a small one? :)
Posted by: trishka | Mar 3, 2008 2:00:39 PM
i have to say my main concern about novick's chances in the primary has been around the endorsements. i'm thinking of all the loyal democrats who always vote, but aren't the political junkies we are searching out info on the candidates months in advance. i'm thinking of the democratic voters who make their decisions based entirely on the voters' pamphlet, and who would be swayed, not knowing anything about either candidate, by the list of endorsements from the party establishment on merkley's side of the page.
i have to say: getting john kitzhaber's name on his list is going to go a long long way towards tipping that particular scale back over to steve novick's side.
and all other election factors being what they are - running the more savvy campaign, doing a better job of getting favorable media coverage, getting his name out in front of the voters as the cool guy who can open bottles with his hook, the excellent job of netroots fundraising he's been doing - this puts him in a terrific position for may.
it really does.
Posted by: torridjoe | Mar 3, 2008 2:02:50 PM
I'd add Norma Paulus, Kari. One of thelast remaining "good Republican" leaders left from the glory days.
Posted by: Oregon Bill | Mar 3, 2008 2:03:23 PM
>While I was an early supporter of Steve, I think I gotta take a second look at Avakian and Kroger now.
Both Steve Novick and John Kroger back equality for all Oregon families - gay and lesbian families included. None of this delicate dancing about the two-tiered system we have now, with substandard "domestic partnership" for "lesser" Oregon families, and the full rights of "marriage" for everyone else.
And watch - the Merkely and Macpherson crowd will claim that they DO support "equality" for all - because they support "domestic partnership." Only... a domestic partnership isn't marriage. And if it's not equal - it's not equality.
Go Steve! And Kroger, too...
Posted by: paulie | Mar 3, 2008 2:26:29 PM
Every contested primary candidate Kitzhaber endorsed in 2006 lost.
Posted by: LT | Mar 3, 2008 2:33:46 PM
Yes, Dr. John's endorsement is big.
Now Steve should take a page from the Kitzhaber playbook. Stop the clever commercials (he has been "introduced" to the general public) and show he has the qualities of former Gov. Kitzhaber. Talk directly to the camera saying "this is what I would do in the US Senate".
The candidate who will talk in detail about his vision and proposals, and rarely mention his opponent, is an attractive candidate following the Kitzhaber model. (Denny Smith ran some vile commercials, worse than anything which has happened in this campaign, but with all that rich material to mine, Kitzaber was a serious candidate who never derided his opponent and the message to supporters was that the Kitzhaber campaign was to be a positive campaign, not sinking to Denny's level of attack. He impressed general election voters as "the one with more substance".)
Novick has now been endorsed by 2 famous Oregon politicians who started as legislators: AuCoin and Kitzhaber. Very different campaign styles. My vote could well be decided on whether either Novick or Merkley adopts the Kitzhaber campaign style.
Which means, of course, TJ, Stephanie, et al. saying WHY STEVE SHOULD BE the nominee. We know why you dislike Merkley, but that alone is not sufficient reason for those of us undecided to vote for Steve.
Not only that, "vote for me because of what is wrong with my opponent" is the Denny Smith campaign style. Both Mike Kopetski (for Congress) and Dr. John Kitzhaber (for Gov.) defeated Denny Smith by running positive campaigns. Steve talking positively about his beliefs and proposals is very appealing. But will that be the face of Novick for Senate for March, April, and May? Only time will tell.
Posted by: Jonathan | Mar 3, 2008 2:38:55 PM
Congratulations Steve! Kitzhaber endorsement means a lot to me and I look forwarding to casting my vote for you in the Primary. I also look forward to casting my vote either for Merkley or Novick in the general. Both are great candidates and will be fantastic U.S. Senators from Oregon.
Posted by: paulie | Mar 3, 2008 2:51:17 PM
And every competitive primary candidate endorsed by Barbara Roberts won.
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Mar 3, 2008 3:07:37 PM
Paulie -- I think that's true, but only in races where Kitzhaber and Roberts both took a position and were on opposite sides.
Jesse Cornett, for example, was endorsed by Roberts and lost. I don't believe Kitzhaber endorsed at all.
But your suggestion is an interesting one.
Posted by: trishka | Mar 3, 2008 3:18:59 PM
so like with bdunn's assertion that all of novick's national coverage is ill-timed, i would ask the question:
if kitzhaber offered to endorse jeff merkley, would merkley respond with a "no thank you, dr. kiss-of-death, i've seen what your endorsement did to candidates in 2006"?
Posted by: LT | Mar 3, 2008 3:20:06 PM
Folks, let's not forget what this campaign is all about. It should not be Team Jeff and Team Steve fighting to the death, it should be about who can best defeat Gordon Smith and all he stands for.
Just now on the Oregonian website:
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/120451470487460.xml&coll=7
Judge angrily scolds court, and it responds
9th Circuit case - Sen. Gordon Smith's brother sparks a rare review of a timber sale ruling that he said went much too far
Monday, March 03, 2008
MICHAEL MILSTEIN
The Oregonian Staff
It was unusual enough when a high-level federal judge -- who is the brother of Sen. Gordon Smith -- blasted his own court for decimating the Northwest logging industry with "blunderbuss" rulings that went way too far.
But the extraordinary scolding by Milan D. Smith Jr. last year apparently got the attention of his fellow judges on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the top federal court in the West.
They recently took the unusual step of voting to have a full panel of judges reconsider the case that set Smith off. That could rein in the federal courts that Smith -- along with timber industry leaders -- blame for needlessly idling sawmills while they meddle in logging decisions beyond their expertise. ...............
He said he would like to let the Forest Service go ahead with the Idaho logging.
But he said his hands are tied because his own 9th Circuit ruled earlier that courts should examine the science behind Forest Service claims that the logging wouldn't harm wildlife, down to how many owl hoots scientists heard in a timber stand.
Posted by: Sarah Lane | Mar 3, 2008 3:35:50 PM
Trishka: Merkley may have received some less than desirable news coverage while Novick has not, but the truth is Merkley has to legislate. He has to be in the midst of local battles, while Novick can stay above the fray. It's both an advantage and disadvantage IMO for Novick. He gets the positive press coverage, but it ends up being less focused on the issues, and as you put it, Steve ends up being portrayed as, "the cool guy who can open bottles with his hook." I don't think it's good for the media to be focusing on Steve's left hook more than his career as a lawyer.
Kitzhaber is a great endorsement for Novick, and even though I'm a Merkley supporter, it's nice to see both former Govs way in on the race. No matter who gets the nod, we're all uniting against Smith. Every last one of us!
Posted by: verasoie | Mar 3, 2008 3:46:04 PM
Any thoughts on what substantive issues might have pushed Kitzhaber to Novick over Merkley?
And by this, I mean, not why YOU necessarily are a Novick supporter instead of Merkley, but actual policy (or other) differences?
Or is it just an augenblick on Kitz' part?
Posted by: Robert G. Gourley | Mar 3, 2008 3:46:10 PM
This means two of the smartest politicians in Oregon have endorsed Steve - first Aucoin, now Kitzhaber.
Posted by: Jeff Alworth | Mar 3, 2008 4:19:26 PM
This is big news for the Novick campaign--maybe the biggest news to date. Congrats, folks.
Posted by: Jeff Alworth | Mar 3, 2008 4:22:51 PM
Now that I think about it for a moment, there is more than a passing comparison one might make of these two politicians: liberal, smart, direct. Kitz didn't suffer fools easily, and my guess is that Novick doesn't, either. I don't know if personal style has anything to do with an endorsement, but I see something alike in each of these men.
(Of course, the reason I back Obama is because we're so alike: smart, eloquent, urbane, stylish. Err, wait...)
Posted by: bdunn | Mar 3, 2008 4:37:40 PM
Huh, thats funny I thought all the Novick folks thought that endorsements don't matter. Glad to know that they matter again. Ill try to keep up better in the future.
This is a good endorsement for Novick, hard to see it any other way.
Triska: My point wasn't that it is/was ill timed but that if Novick supporters are counting on getting a free ride like this from the press they are sorely mistaken. If Novick becomes the nominee all of his dirty laundry becomes fair game. There will be a lot more stories about how he wants to raise taxes, is scared of real estate, etc. and a lot fewer about how isn't it neat that a guy without a left arm can run for US Senate.
Paulie: Thats because everybody wishes that Barbra Roberts was their grandmother. I know I do!
Posted by: anon | Mar 3, 2008 4:43:11 PM
Can't help but wonder if it's Novick's politics that led to the endorsement or the fact that the Legislature passed SB 329 to move toward universal healthcare instead of Kitzhaber's proposed universal health care bill. It is widely known in Salem that the former Gov was NOT happy about that. Just wondering how much payback is involved in this endorsement.
Too bad if it is.
Posted by: Pat Ryan | Mar 3, 2008 4:51:24 PM
Kitz didn't suffer fools easily, and my guess is that Novick doesn't, either.
Well, I've always thought that Kitzhaber was an elitist arrogant punk who was dismissive--not just of fools--but of anyone who failed to see things his way.
I think the endorsement's a good fit indeed. I've been personally snubbed by Novick, as has my wife, long before Merkley ever got into the race, and I still went to his campaign kickoff at his invitation, where he again couldn't even be bothered to offer eye contact or a handshake.
My history with Kitzhaber includes being the target (as part of a group of biker rights activists) of his ridicule as well as witnessing his hypocrisy re mandatory helmet laws while he chooses to run rapids bareheaded.
years later, at bus project functions, I've had him brag directly to me about "sticking it to 'em" with that little gloat thing going.
He, of course, not bothering to know or care who I was or who he was informing of little victories.
***********
Yep. a good fit.
Posted by: J | Mar 3, 2008 4:53:38 PM
The Barbara vs. Kitzhaber thing is interesting. To the extent it suggests anything beyond luck, best guess is that it has something to do with Kitz's willingness to cut against the Democratic mainstream, whereas Barbara has worked hard to be a loyal party person.
I don't think that's a knock on either leader, by the way, nor a knock on their endorsees. Just a potentially explanatory thought.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Mar 3, 2008 5:23:24 PM
I adore Barbara Roberts.
While I was disappointed in her decision to endorse Merkley, I am mindful of the many personal and party connections between them, and it is typical of her as the good Democrat and loyal friend she is. Governor Roberts is not exactly a maverick. That's part of her charm.
Posted by: Daniel Spiro | Mar 3, 2008 5:26:09 PM
Who cares about endorsements? Let the people decide!
(Oh, wait a minute. This is endorsement for my friend Steve.) Ah ... never mind.
Seriously, I'm very happy for Steve as this is a well respected endorser. He also happens to know what I know: Steve would do an amazing job if y'all sent him to my city. He'd make you proud as a fighter for progressive causes that is very difficult to dislike (which is apparent from the way he handled that buffoon on Fox News).
Posted by: Jack Murray | Mar 3, 2008 5:35:46 PM
One good example of the Kitzhaber/Roberts divide is the Sam Chase v/ Brad Avakian primary for state Senate back in 2006.
Kitzhaber backed Chase, joined by Portland and Multnomah elected officials.
Roberts backed Avakian, joined by labor, state electeds and the choice & GLBT groups.
Sound familiar?
Kitzhaber is now backing Avakian for Secretary of State.
(Nonetheless, I still consider this endorsement to be a pretty big feather in the Guevara-esque Novick cap).
Posted by: Bill Bodden | Mar 3, 2008 5:42:21 PM
Kitzhaber says Novick "fully understands that in order to secure the future of this nation we must first be willing to face the facts. And the facts are not always politically popular." ...
That is one of the reasons I support Novick and will make a temporary change from NAV to Democrat. He is more likely to be a straight shooter and much less a "politician" saying or doing what is more likely to be popular.
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 3, 2008 5:44:28 PM
Posted by: anon | Mar 3, 2008 4:43:11 PM
Somebody has been paying attention...
Posted by: Kevin | Mar 3, 2008 5:51:24 PM
Posted by: Stephanie V | Mar 3, 2008 5:23:24 PM
I always liked Roberts too. But I gotta say that my estimation of her went up several orders of magnitude when I met her and listened to her speechify at the Tester/Merkley event. Not because she was there, although I liked that too, but because it was the first time I got to interact with her and personally observe her doing what she does best without having it filtered through camera shots and a TV screen.
Few people can be summed up in one word. Barbara can: Firecracker! Seriously, she could have lit up Portland that night with just her personality alone.
Simply an amazing woman...
So yeah... like Stephanie, I'm a fan of ex-Governors on both sides of this race. C'est la vie. But it does make me proud to be an Oregonian because I don't think that all that many states can boast of such stellar leaders. Both of them fit in with Katz, McCall, Bud Clark and other, dare I say, unique characters.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Mar 3, 2008 5:58:34 PM
Kevin's right about Governor Roberts.
When my husband was a delegate to the Democratic National Convention in 2000, I went along for the week. Barbara was there (presumably as a superdelegate) and I had the opportunity to spend a little time with her. I found her utterly charming and very smart and funny, and I have never had any reason to change my mind.
Posted by: Sarah Lane | Mar 3, 2008 7:01:18 PM
Trishka: Time will tell? Do you really think that the Dems and progressives won't unite against Smith? I would be astounded if either the Novick or Merkley camp didn't support the eventual nominee no matter who it is.
BTW...I meant "weigh in on the race", not "way"...wowzers.
Posted by: Peter Bray | Mar 3, 2008 7:44:05 PM
Can someone tell me why many environmentalists in Portland and elsewhere are supporting Merkley? I just don't get it. Novick is clearly better on the environment.
Posted by: Sarah Lane | Mar 3, 2008 8:28:32 PM
Peter: Merkley has delivered on environmental issues in the House and that's why environmentalists back him. The OLCV even said that more pro-environment bills passed in 2007 than in 1991-2005 combined. Merkley helped push through the bottle bill and countless other pieces of environmental legislation. Plus, Merkley has a detailed energy/climate agenda and seems like he is ready to work on energy as soon as he's elected if he wins the primary/general.
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Mar 3, 2008 8:31:31 PM
Stephanie:
She typically goes as Oregon's one unpledged delegate.
I've had the chance to talk with her a few times, including at a women in politics event that is hosted by a few of our female state reps and senators here in Portland. I have a lot of respect for her - she reminds me a lot of my favorite governor, Ann Richards.
Posted by: LT | Mar 3, 2008 8:47:16 PM
Jenni,
In 1984, Sec. of State candidate Barbara Roberts read the Oregon vote total at the convention (as a Mondale delegate, if memory serves). She said, "Oregon, the state of clean air, clean water, clean politics, casts....".
Don't rely on that word "typically". In 1984 there were 2 unpledged delegates, and those were chosen at the state delegate selection convention---NOT a foregone conclusion who would be elected.
This year district delegate selection conventions will elect state convention delegates, and they will choose state level delegates, unpledged, permanent members of committees (Platform, Rules, etc.). Without knowing who is elected state delegates, there is no way of knowing in the most contested presidential nomination for many years who will be elected by the state convention (regardless of what has been done in the past).
Posted by: Jenni Simonis | Mar 4, 2008 2:20:52 AM
LT:
Stephanie had mentioned her and thought she went as a super delegate. I pointed out she typically goes as an unpledged delegate.
I'm sure if you go back some years, you'll find her as a pledged delegate and potentially even a super delegate. I'm talking about in recent years.
This year we'll once again have one unpledged add-on delegate. The DPO chair nominates the people to fill that position. If my memory serves, Barbara Roberts has been elected unanimously at the previous few votes. It was even mentioned at the last DPO SCC meeting that the add-on delegate is usually Barbara Roberts.
She is well loved, and I think the position is given to her as a way of honoring her. It also means that she is a delegate without party members having to vie against her for a position - I know I certainly wouldn't want to be competing with her for s delegate position.
Posted by: maria | Mar 4, 2008 7:23:08 AM
My favorite part of this endorsement is the last line as reported by OPB "Kitzhaber says despite his endorsement, he would support whichever candidate wins the nomination on May 20th."
And in a statistics heavy field, Merkley has endoresements from 2/3 of the last 3 Democratic Governors to Novick's 1/3. That math looks pretty good to me.
Posted by: Disappointed Demo | Mar 4, 2008 7:31:33 AM
I watched Steve Novick at a past Candidates Gone Wild forum (2004). It was there that I witnessed his vicious sense of humor.
That evening left me with an impression that he will never be able to overcome. His public humiliation of a candidate was inappropriate for the venue and unforgivable. I cannot support such a mean-spirited person who is willing to attempt to destroy another, all in the name of good fun.
The fact that Kitzhaber would endorse Steve and that he would make an appearance in that hokey film for the Adams campaign, only makes me question who I thought Kitzhaber was and what he stood for.
Posted by: John Calhoun | Mar 4, 2008 8:16:21 AM
Disappointed,
Steve is not a mean person. I remember going to the the Candidates Gone Wild in 2006? and feeling that it was out of control in terms of abusing less popular candidates. I can not remember Steve's performance in 2004, but my sense was that the whole program went off track and my sense is that Steve probably got caught up in the mood that was set by the organizers. I think that the organizers have tried to set a better tone going forward.
Like every other candidate, people can get a distorted impression based upon one contact. I suggest that you consider both Steve and Jeff based upon a wider set of data.
Posted by: trishka | Mar 4, 2008 8:59:07 AM
sarah, my time will tell comment was directed at the first part of your post, where you talked about whether or not the national media coverage for steve novick will end up being more positive or negative for him in terms of consequences. sorry i didn't make that more clear.
as to endorsements, i've never said that they don't matter, but rather that they aren't enough all by themselves. a campaign needs to do more than just rack up a list of endorsements, and the fact that i didn't see much in the way of that from merkley's campaign, compared to steve novick's, is largely why i decided to support steve.
his adding a solid important endorsement like this on to *everything else he is doing with his campaign* is a positive thing, and will go a long way towards counterbalancing the long string of endorsements that merkley has gained.
it's not just about the endorsements. but i don't deny they play a part, like everything else.
Posted by: Disappointed Demo | Mar 4, 2008 9:07:50 AM
"Steve probably got caught up in the mood that was set by the organizers."
Frankly, it was more than one incident that gives me the impression that Steve is unkind. The example I cited was the one that wasn't personal. And, getting "caught up in the mood" sounds like an excuse for adolescent behavior--not one of the personality traits I look for in a senator. We have enough of that going on already. We need grownups who are ready and willing to lead and set an example worthy of following.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Mar 4, 2008 9:25:28 AM
So now we have a few new (?) anonymous posters whispering that Steve is mean. Clearly this is the new talking point since "Steve is unethical" didn't get any traction.
Steve is clever, no two ways about it, and he has a sharp sense of humor. If you pay attention, though, you will notice that Steve's sense of humor is directed at himself and his own eccentricities and foibles at least as often, and with at least as much edge, as it is at anyone else.
There is no malice of any kind in Steve that I have ever observed. Just as he is lacking fibulas, there is not a mean bone in his body either.
Hey, this is a free country. It's OK to prefer Jeff Merkley for whatever reason floats your boat, but I hate to see the next smear campaign firing up here.
Note: The presence of any individual above does not imply an endorsement by BlueOregon. The selection of faces shown is done by Facebook. Visit BlueOregon on Facebook.
Post a comment
Posted by: Stephanie V | Mar 3, 2008 1:29:43 PM
Novick's been getting a lot of traction lately, and this is very big.
It's great for those who care about big name endorsements, and (unlike many big name endorsements) it's also great for those who care about substantive progressive public policy advocacy.
It'll be interesting to see how this changes the dynamic.