I agree. I'm not too excited by Kulo and I don't know anyone who is, but unless Kits runs, I think he's a shoo in.

The point is, who will gain the most votes?

If there is a candidate for Governor who has a vision for the next 10 years and the detailed proposals to carry out that vision, who runs a positive campaign saying something like "As a state we can do better. Here is who I am, here is why I am running, here is why you should vote for me and I hope you will join my campaign for a better Oregon" then we would have a contest.

But I certainly don't see that from any candidate challenging the incumbent. No matter what one's personal views of the incumbent or any challenger, unless there is someone who can generate that level of substance and enthusiasm (Westlund is the only one I can think of, and currently he is not a candidate as far as I know) I don't see a very exciting campaign for Governor next year.

Pat, that is freakin' hysterical. Thanks for the tip. As for Teddy K (I'll cut him a break), I don't think I'd call him my boy. His low-temperature, low-activity governing style appears to my libertarian streak, but that's about as far as it goes. As much as I think he'll win and basically serve competently, it wouldn't break my heart to see him go either....which kind of reinforces the point about running against him...I mean, what do you say beyond "We could do better"? That's an argument that forces one to explain how.

LT,

I'd argue the problem with Ted is that it isn't, as you put it, who gets the most votes. It's about who actually does shit for the state. Ted's been more than mediocre. His MIA. I think it's funny that this got characterized as 'low-key' leadership.

Ted's in trouble because the people who knock on the doors, raise the money and generally move the campaigns feel like they gotten forgotten the day after the election, in direct contradiction to what he said during the campaign.

When you can't mobilize your base, those poll numbers won't hold up.

Ted's in deep shit with his base and it's his own damn fault.

Oh, and why are his most trusted advisors child molesters?

I don't find Teddy K all that inspiring either. Has he done much as Governor? Hard to say. In any case, the argument that he has been doing things for the State, just not making them into public accomplishments, isn't really a good reason to keep him. Why do we want a Governor who isn't going to tell us what he's doing for us? When I hear that argument I don't feel more inclined to vote for him. I want a fiery politician right now, I'm tired of dull "low-key" ones.

I think the Gov. will get a second term - in spite of himself.

He gave a speech at the Oregon Summit. He had my full support for the first half hour - he recounted his youth and how he got into politics. My support waned during the next 30 minutes of tedious talk about what he accomplished this last year or so. For the last 15 to 20 minutes of his speech, I was stupefied by the continuing drone of his speech - and don't have a clue what he said. I just recall being so glad it was over.

If a good Democrat ran a solid campaign against the Gov., he could lose. The Republicans have nothing.

So, I think the Gov. will get re-elected. Hopefully he won't have many more speeches. If you get invited to one - run (the other way).

IMHO, Kulongoski has been channeling (former) California Governor Grey Davis. 1)First run by telling your base you're going to fight for them. 2)Then when you're elected, reach out to interest groups who didn't vote for you in the hope of growing your lead for the next race. 3)If policy issues erupt where the base and the "maybes" conflict, go for the "maybes" because your base will only have one candidate they can stomach and it won't be the Republican. The tragic thing is, it might work. As a party, we're so afraid of losing we don't know what to do with ourselves when we win. Then again, it might not. Did I mention that it's former Governor Davis? Metsger would be worse than TK. He's opportunistic and will do what's necessary to get in, but when the chips are down in Salem, he'll follow the corporate line. Walker's a little more consistent, especially in her visceral dislike of anything or anyone who's been within 3 feet of former Governor Goldschmidt. It's not really a governing philosophy and didn't do much to endear her to her colleagues in the Senate. That being said, she knows how to fight-I'm just not sure over what. Westlund seems like an amiable guy, but his voting record on taxes and natural resource issues won't win him many D votes and his opinions on choice and schools will turn off the hard Rs.

Being somewhat ignorant as to what constitutes a fishfetish, I still think Kitzhaber is the only potential candidate with the smarts, style and appeal to put it together. His speeches at DPO and City Club show that he's not afraid to call 'em as he sees 'em. Lots of folks respect that even if they don't always agree with the call. If he enters the race, he'll have legions of disaffected grassroots supporter to walk and knock. What the big donors do is another question, but I don't remember Kitz trying to take out PERS during his earlier tenure.

Kulongoski is lame with a capital Loser. He makes the classic mistake of trying to live in the middle over and over.

Newsflash: there is no middle. There is only well reasoned action.

I can't tell the difference between Kulongoski and a lot of Republicans. Plus, he's boring.

Bring back Kitzhaber. Or someone decent. Teddy go bye bye.

You all really ought to give Mannix another look. I'm not kidding. He has grown, and is reaching out to moderates by repositioning himself as pro-education and pro-union.

I think if it comes down to Mannnix and Teddy, Mannix will run to theleft of Kulongoski. Sure you'll have to put up with his annoying pro-life position, but whaddya think he's gunna do, outlaw abortion in Oregon?

The fact is Mannix is going back to his liberal roots as a D. He probably doesn't really believe in anything at all, conservative or liberal; he just wants to do whatever it takes to get elected. We should welcome him with open arms. Who cares if he is just being craven?

If he'll get more money to schools and the health plan, protect the environment, and keep OIA at bay, why not go with him?

"Fishfetish Kitzahaber focused on the unsustainable Oregon Health plan."

OHP is only "unsustainable" because Oregonians are not willing to support it. Poor people were betrayed in the last session by both the governor and the Senate Democratic leaders. This has left us with a lot of anger and no reason to support the Democrats.

There are other options besides raising the personal income tax or creating a sales tax. One is that we could cut out all the business tax breaks. Someone wrote a while back that state legislators "have been passing them out like candy," shifting the tax burden from businesses to individuals.

Democratic candidate for governor Pete Sorenson wrote on his website: "According to the Oregon Center for Policy Priorities, big corporations paid 18 per cent of the income taxes in 1973. They now pay FIVE PER CENT. I think Oregon should have a more fair tax system. Having the working people and the small businesses pay 95 per cent of the income taxes and having the big corporations pay only five per cent is not fair. I will work to make the system fair. I am working on a specific proposal to raise approximately $1 BILLION in revenue for public education, health care and social services." Sorenson FAQ

Another option to support health care in this state, and take some of the pressure off of OHP, would be AFL-CIO leader Tim Nesbit's proposal to add medical insurance to the state minimum wage, forcing all employers to provide it. This wouldn't cost the taxpayers anything. (No, I don't buy the conservative argument that all businesses are able to transfer tax expenditures to their customers. Prove it.) We could couple this with insurance buying pools for small businesses to bring the premiums down. I don't know why we aren't already doing this.

Or we could stick with the present dysfunctional medical insurance system and wait for it to blow up in our faces. As a poor person, the riots or revolution (your choice) in France are looking mighty inviting. I don't see why we can't do that here, if the political system refuses to respond to our needs. See you at the barricades.

<h2>Any change in Mannix's positions are likely to be calculated political maneuvers. That's his approach to politics. A statesman, he ain't.</h2>