It's time for another in the great Brewhaha series, sponsored by the Bus Project (in combo with the Merc) and featuring former Senate and possibly future goobernatorial candidate, definite budget wonk Steve Novick as emcee. That's enough to perk your ear right there--wonkiness, beer and comedy? With sports? You know Novick's all OVER that.
While fun policy debates are cool too, this takes participatory public affairs to a new level, where the office pool bracket meets the very serious decisions about what to cut and where in the face of a projected $3 billion deficit for the next biennium.
Of course, for the most part we'll try to make black humor out of it, lest we cry in the beverages we shall surely hold in earnest at Backspace on March 4th at 7pm. Oh, and sidebetting*! Stimulate the economy with beer and gambling!
All of a sudden after months of being totally zen about this election, i am feeling a deep anxiety. Perhaps it is because for the first time in years, due to having a new baby followed by a huge work deadline (that conveniently ends tomorrow), I have done absolutely no volunteering. Just sitting on the sidelines feeling helpless is unnatural. Since I poll watching in this situation only makes things worse, I've mostly paying attention to what Obama might to upon being elected.
Anyway, enough about me. Today a nice distraction was provided by the Politico, who is reporting that Obama insiders are getting chatty about his possible cabinet picks. And who might be on that list?
Secretary of Transportation: Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.)
I know we've heard a lot of speculation on this subject before, but this is the first time I have heard it from sources within the Obama campaign itself, and that is exciting. What makes it even more exciting, to me, is a memorable quote from Steve Novick during his concession speech last May calling for Blumenauer as ... Secretary of Transportation! And that's not the first time he's mentioned it, he actually started a tongue in cheek campaign in 2004. If Earl gets appointed, whether or not Novick runs for his seatseat, it's likely going to be a total bunfight that could be made even more interesting if M65 passes. (Actually, I'm not certain how this stuff technically works , so feel free to pipe in if I am way off base).
Not one but two brief items on our good friend Steve Novick today, both from PolitickerOR. First, Steve was captured offering his former primary rival Jeff Merkley some advice: just be yourself, buddy:
"I've told Jeff that everyone should take advantage of their natural strength," Novick said. "And Jeff is a hard-working, honest, geek."
Novick said that geekiness was actually a strength for Merkley, and after eight years of the Bush administration he estimated that Oregon's voters were looking for someone with a little more policy background and a little less polished.
"With the start of school, it's a great time to do a commercial showing Gordon Smith finally coming around on global warming, or the Iraq war," Novick said. "Then you show Jeff on the screen looking really geeky, and say something like, ‘But Jeff Merkley is a guy that's done his homework.'"
The article goes on to note that Novick is looking for a new job this summer--based on the above idea, and Merkley's ads so far, how about media consultant to the nominee?
Former Democratic Senate candidate Steve Novick, who has been mentioned on Oregon political insiders’ short list as a possible gubernatorial candidate in 2010, did not rule out a run Thursday when he was asked about the possibility.
“It has occurred to me that if I am going to spend the rest of my life fighting Bill Sizemore, I might as well do it from a position of power,” Novick said as he left the Oregon Democratic delegation breakfast [at DNC Denver].
I would certainly be thrilled with Governor Novick, although truthfully I think he's the least well suited for that job compared to House or Senate. Mahonia Hall seems like a waste of his prodigious talents, IMO. He could amply articulate a broad vision from the Executive's office, but his passion and his proficiency are most clearly on display when Novick is embracing HIS inner geek, constructing policy at the nut/bolt level. That's legislative stuff. Being a governor is too many dinners, too many task forces, too many junkets. To paraphrase the naive news photographer in Full Metal Jacket, Steve needs to be "in the shit."
I'm still holding out hope for Earl Blumenauer as Transportation Secretary in Obama's cabinet, which would make Steve a Stone Cold Lock for OR-3. But gov is nice, too. Stay (loosely) tuned...
Update, 8/14--from CNN via Kos, the Obama and Clinton camps have "agreed" to allow her name to be placed into nomination at the convention...although truthfully the normal procedure would have required it, so what this really means is that Obama has backed off any idea of trying to prevent it.
[posted on Steve's behalf--great to have the Candidate keep up his rep as the Commentator as well...]
Let Them Vote!
I wasn't Hillarious in the primaries. I was with Edwards (I know, I know), then Obama. But I can't for the life of me figure out why the Obama forces would think for a second that they shouldn't let Hillary's name be placed in nomination, and let her delegates vote for her.
Pride may or may not be inherently a sin, but messing with someone's pride for no particular reason is definitely a sin. Some historians blame the rise of Hitler on the harsh terms of the Treaty of Versailles, at the end of WWI, which Germans found humiliating. Among other things, the treaty required Germany to take full responsibility for starting the war. My recollection from history classes is that that might not have been completely off base, but even if it was true, what was the point of requiring the Germans to sign on the dotted line? The lesson of history is clear: If we don't let the Hillaryites have their day in the sun, are we prepared to take responsibility when, twenty years from now, their tanks go marching into Prague?
Hillary's people worked hard. They won a mess of states. They won a lot of delegates. They'd like the country to see how well they did, at the Convention. They want to proudly cast their votes, raise the roof, hoot and holler. They do that, they feel good, then they get on board for Obama.
What's the problem? Do we think that, by avoiding a vote, we're going to make the American people think that Obama won all the primaries? I kinda think they know he didn't. Keeping the Hillary delegates from voting strikes me as a lot like asking the losing team in a 4-3 National League Championship Series to forfeit its three victories to show 'solidarity' going into the World Series.
One of my fondest political memories is of Mo Udall's speech at the 1976 convention. Udall had been the leading progressive alternative to Carter. (Udall was blind in one eye, prompting The Village Voice to write an article with the cute headline, "In The Country of the Blind, the One-Eyed Man Is Not So Bad.")
At the Convention, his name was placed in nomination, by Archibald Cox, no less. His 300 delegates voted for him. The demonstration as he began to speak was so loud and long that Udall began by saying: "If this goes on much longer, I might have to accept the nomination." But later he said: "yes, Jimmy, I'll be wearing one of your little green buttons." There was no harm done to Democratic unity. Carter left the Convention with a 30-point lead.
So c'mon, Barack, let them vote. It'll be fine. Let them vote, and then remember not to give any interviews to Playboy about lust in your heart.
Over at Steve Novick's real job--Pyramid Communications--he's put up a piece that dives into the concept of the "Steve Novick brand," and how it impacted his race for Senate. As you might expect, he's brutally honest about what worked and what fell short--but the bottom line is that even with a great campaign, being outspent 2 to 1 is a bitch. Hearing it from the candidate's mouth--perhaps contrasted with the smug Jon Isaacs post-mortem validating old politics--makes for some interesting reading. To wit:
Now, again, we lost, so apparently branding isn’t everything. But I think it’s fair to say that we did better than expected. As a first-time candidate running against the speaker of the State House, I was outspent by roughly 2-to-1, and lost 45 percent to 42 percent. Compared to other recent “progressive underdog vs. moneyed establishment candidate” Northwest races, that’s not bad. In 2000, Maria Cantwell outspent progressive underdog Deborah Senn in Washington’s Senate primary by about 2-to-1—and won the race by an even larger margin.
What kind of brand did we create, and how did it relate to my substantive positions? Well, like thousands of other candidates before me, I ran as a “different kind of politician” who wasn’t going to play “politics as usual.” My version of being “different” and “unusual” consisted of being a plainspoken, truth-telling progressive sort who wasn’t going to pretend we can have everything for nothing.
I didn't know this was going to be published, I have no idea who the author was, and I first heard about it when it showed up in the Lefty Blogs wire. I don't think there's any new knowledge being dropped since we covered the big exdpenditures from the June report (still waiting on Q2 numbers for the Senate race that I know of; should know after the 15th), and so it's a little apropos of nothing, beyond the diarist's discovery that Chuck Schumer's DSCC laid out a lot of money to beat Jim Neal and Steve Novick with Kay Hagan and Jeff Merkley, respectively. They're not the same kind of candidate, and many consider Neal to have been far less competitive--but their discovery makes the same point we did at the time, and continue to make: why is the DSCC spending so much of our money to defeat other Democrats? For instance, wouldn't that $800,000 dropped on behalf of Merkley be really helpful right now?
In the North Carolina and Oregon Democratic US Senate primaries this year, two great progressive candidates ran for the nomination: Jim Neal (NC) and Steve Novick (OR). The DSCC, who is not supposed to pick sides in a primary, appears to have secretly funded their preferred candidates anyway (Kay Hagan (NC) and Jeff Merkley (OR)).
If the DSCC leaders personally had a preference, that’s fine. BUT IT IS NOT OK TO FUNNEL MONEY TO ONE CANDIDATE OVER ANOTHER IN A DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY!!!! That's unfairly taking sides and deliberately influencing an election, and that is not what the Democratic Party is about.
The diarist, who goes by the poetic handle of spnj889, shows exceptional acumen by quoting my story on the financials from the June reports at length, specifically the part where Chuck Schumer pays Jeff Merkley's light bill so Merkley has the money to buy expensive air time for his commercials attacking Novick.
Again, I don't think they had quite the same race in NC--but the point is that it doesn't matter. It would have been just as wrong for Schumer to funnel a bunch of money to Novick, because they suddenly felt with exposure he could really win. (Oh, to wish). It isn't any more right to spend money to defeat the less progressive Democrat, than it is to spend it defeating a less progressive one. It's using Democratic donor money to beat Democrats. Not good for the party, not good for the movements in each state. Leave them alone.
The anger at Schumer putting his thumb on various scales before primaries is not limited to Oregon, it would appear. I just happened across this diary. Just sayin', is all.
While we're certain to elicit cries that this reportage represents mere Surreptitious Succor for Smith, something else seems to be motivating Congressional Quarterly and Oregonian political reporter Jeff Mapes--twice--besides lingering bitterness over Oregon's Senate primary.
No, the noteworthy reaction is based on the release of May's expenditures in the federal races, which you can peruse here (click on the "June Monthly" link; watch out for the file size--it's 1000+ pages). Folks who want the details can read on beyond the quotes below, and there's a good lively diary at LO already on the subject (which I'm now poaching attention from; sorry Larry). But here's the professional analysis, dry from CQ and with a little more local color from Mapes. From CQ's Greg Giroux, a pretty good reporter himself:
The DSCC reported $409,000 in “independent expenditures” to produce and air a television advertisement opposing Republican Sen. Gordon Smith, whose November opponent is state House Speaker Jeff Merkley. Party committees can make unlimited independent expenditures, so long as the spending is done independently of candidates’ campaigns.
The DSCC also reported $279,000 in “coordinated expenditures,” which are limited by law but can be made in concert with candidates’ campaigns. The largest share of these funds went to assist Merkley, whom the DSCC preferred in the May 20 primary election over Steve Novick, a lawyer and liberal activist who lost by 3 percentage points. The DSCC also used coordinated funds in May to boost the campaigns of North Carolina Democrat Kay Hagan, a state senator who is her party’s nominee against Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole ; Kentucky Democrat Bruce Lunsford, a businessman who is challenging Minority Leader Mitch McConnell ; and Landrieu, whose Republican opponent is state Treasurer John Kennedy.
Note who else got the money; we'll compare Merkley's situation to theirs, and what was done for each. But last above the fold is Mapes, including a flattered Steve Novick:
[T]he level of direct support was remarkable. All told, the committee spent $386,000 in coordinated expenditures with Merkley, which doesn't count the advertising the DSCC produced and paid for on its own. It helped give him resources Novick couldn't match.
I called up Novick, wondering if he thought he could have won if the DSCC had stayed out of the state. He said he was now backing Merkley, but he couldn't resist saying:
"I'm very proud, and I think my supporters will be extremely proud, that it took that kind of humongous effort to beat us. They clearly gambled that Jeff Merkley had a better chance to beat Gordon Smith and they had better be right...If they're not, a lot of Oregon Democrats will justly be mad at them."
It being 2008 and a Presidential election year, of course one of the leading topics of discussion was who would be running for Governor in 2010. Never mind that a few of the people on the buzz list are running for brand new offices in 2008 and would have to launch gubernatorial campaigns almost immediately, and never mind that one of them can say been there, done that. Let the speculation begin!
Apparently Steve Novick has recharged his batteries, and is back on the horse taking folks like old nemesis Bill Sizemore to task. After a tumultuous spring the clouds have parted, the sun is shining like it's supposed to, and The Hook is giving our lesser, aggrieving citizens the what-for. All is right with the world:
On Tuesday, Bill Sizemore's measure to allow an unlimited deduction of federal taxes on Oregon income tax returns -- a repeat of a measure Oregon voters defeated in 2000 -- qualified for the November ballot. Sizemore's measure will join, among other things, Kevin Mannix's measure to impose mandatory minimum prison sentences for certain property crimes. What the two ballot titles won't tell voters is what impact either measure would have on education, health care, senior services and child protective services in Oregon. But, in fact, the measures will divert money that would otherwise be spent on those services.
...it's not possible to slash taxes for wealthy people or to spend lots of new money on prisons without affecting education, health care, senior services and child welfare. Repeat: It's not possible to slash taxes for wealthy people or to divert money to prisons, without affecting education, health care, senior services and child welfare.
That's not spin; it's arithmetic. There simply isn't enough "other" spending to cut. The entire "other" budget for 2007-09 is less than the amount of the Sizemore tax cut, once it's fully implemented.
Now, why won't the ballot tell people that these measures affect education and health care? By tradition, the "ballot titles" address the things a measure says it will do, but devote little if any attention to the trade-offs a measure will force. That's a disservice to voters. When measures, as these do, have clear, unavoidable and significant effects on vital services, the ballot itself should provide that information -- a surgeon general's warning, if you will.
The next Legislature should change the ballot title law to ensure that next time, Oregon's voters get that critical information upfront.
Such the man crush, have I! And why the hell not? The silver lining in not sending Steve to Washington is that as a result he stays here and Oregonians get to hog all the benefits of his advocacy. Send Merkley to DC, but let's keep the real ace down on the farm. :)
(I was writing up a column on this very subject last night--and then Firefox crashed and it was too late to start again.
I had planned to take some copyright liberties and reproduce an extended chunk of Duin's column; pat has gone me one better and printed the whole thing. Naughty naughty! Plus he's included some extra visual aids to enhance the experience.
- promoted by torridjoe)
The Oregonian's Steve Duin hit the nail on the head with this take on Steve Novick's concession speech, which closed out his unsuccessful primary campaign that could have put an honest-to-God (and much needed) iconoclast in the U.S. Senate.
An Eloquent, Graceful Exit
At the bittersweet end of an audacious campaign, Steve Novick gave the most entertaining and uplifting concession speech I've ever heard.
I've been in a lot of hotel ballrooms when pathetic candidates heard the death rattle they so richly deserved, and campaign staff and the obligatory lobbyists, embarrassed to be seen with one another, melted into the nearest bars. That was not the mood at the Benson Tuesday night when Gov. John Kitzhaber introduced Novick, even as the jukebox cranked out, "I Fought the Law and the Law Won."
With 30 of his most fervent supporters, including his parents and girlfriend, on the stage behind him, Novick received an electric ovation, prompting him to quote an ol' Mo Udall line: "If this goes on much longer, I might have to accept the nomination.
"Well, my friends," Novick continued, "we thought we were going to stick it to the man. But in the end, as usual, the man stuck it to us. But for a while there ..."
He was the Democrats' best hope to unseat Sen. Gordon Smith in the general election, and in the end, it took hundreds of thousands of national Democratic Party dollars to turn the tide of the primary toward his opponent, the lifeless Jeff Merkley. "The last days of the campaign reminded me of nothing so much as the last scene of 'Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid,'" Novick said. "A couple of outlaws against the entire Bolivian army. But now we're hearing the endless rattle of gunfire ... and the movie is over." (emphasis mine)
Novick expressed the hope that his supporters would be proud of being part of a campaign that would "go down in history with the great losers of all time ... like the 1975 Boston Red Sox." Underdog campaigns like his, Novick reminded a room still filled with several hundred supporters, are "a self-selective community. You didn't join this campaign out of resignation, because it was what you had to do."
No, as Kitzhaber said, people supported Novick because he "had a message, a heart and a brand," or everything that Merkley lacks. And they remained with him to the end.
Novick likened his supporters to "a group of guerrillas who came down from the mountains and almost took out the establishment. This group made me feel like Castro. The young Castro."
And he expressed the hope that in years to come, those guerrillas -- whose efforts helped Novick carry Multnomah County and the city of Portland -- would still feel a bond with one another "when you realize you were both for Novick in 2008."
I don't know a single Novick supporter who isn't extremely proud of having been a small part of Novick's campaign. He made us proud of our support right through to the end.
Novick and his competent, creative crew almost pulled it off, despite the stacked deck.
Hey, we're overachievers -- although I would have preferred that "the movie" end at this scene (below), with Novick's "couple of outlaws" overcoming the seemingly insurmountable and coming out on top...
...But we all know the movie didn't end that way. And so it was with this campaign. We got this (below) at the end instead ...
...A great old tune, for sure, but as Duin wrote, bittersweet. So all that's left is to slice up a lime, crack open some of the remaining Left Hook Lager and, of course, a salute: Here's to ya, Steve. Thanks for a great ride. You can bet we'll be there for the next one!
It's Election Day in Oregon, and whether you're a regular reader or a newcomer linking in to follow the state's primary, this is Christmas--real voting! The Presidential race is certainly exciting, but Gordon Smith and the Senate race to replace him have been a primary editorial focus since our founding in 2006, and now here we are ready to pick the person to take him on.
This is definitely the year to do it, so it's been a hugely important decision who that person should be, and in spring of 2007 we formally endorsed Steve Novick for Senate. We haven't diverged from that one bit since, despite the entry of House Speaker Jeff Merkley and subsequent staffing changes. The "Election Pregame" series today is designed to give you a few of the most recent things related to the Senate election--the four most recent polls, the newest videos, turnout statistics and what they imply...so: thanks for coming by! Take a free account if you think you might be round again.
For so long in this race, we had to suffer without decent polling, or use way-too-early general election heats as a stand in for comparing the two major Dem candidates for Senate, Steve Novick and Jeff Merkley. Then when polling finally got going earnestly in January, we discovered why no one was wasting their money all that time before--huge numbers of undecideds, starting at about 70%.. Not only had almost no one heard of the activist with the hook, they didn't know who the Speaker of the House was, either.
Of course, now that we're finally at Election Day there has been more interest and thus more polling--although to a large degree true polling results are STILL hampered by undecided figures approaching 20%.. However, in the last eight days four polls have been done by three different outfits, with two final looks coming yesterday. Let's dive in and see what they tell us, shall we?
{ah, but not before I make you jump below the fold!}
(Chuck Todd's lips to God's ear! - promoted by torridjoe)
From the excellent Chuck Todd's excellent First Read
*** Down the ballot: There are some interesting House and Senate primaries in Kentucky and Oregon today. The DSCC has a little something on the line, as both of its preferred candidates in Kentucky (Lunsford) and Oregon (Merkley) are struggling to win their nominations. Lunsford should hang on, but Merkley's another story. His foe, Steve Novick, seems to be benefiting from the increased turnout of new voters created by Obama's candidacy. Does anything north of 12 points for Obama mean a Novick victory? Astoundingly, the DSCC has spent some $300,000 on Merkley's behalf, so losing would be a real embarrassment to Chuck Schumer. It's going to be a nail-biter.
The bold text is mine. I admit I'm gonna be sorta crushed if Novick loses. I'm so looking forward to a summer of Barrack and Steve whacking on McBush and Smitty.
It's Election Day in Oregon, and whether you're a regular reader or a newcomer linking in to follow the state's primary, this is Christmas--real voting! The Presidential race is certainly exciting, but Gordon Smith and the Senate race to replace him have been a primary editorial focus since our founding in 2006, and now here we are ready to pick the person to take him on.
This is definitely the year to do it, so it's been a hugely important decision who that person should be, and in spring of 2007 we formally endorsed Steve Novick for Senate. We haven't diverged from that one bit since, despite the entry of House Speaker Jeff Merkley and subsequent staffing changes. The "Election Pregame" series today is designed to give you a few of the most recent things related to the Senate election--the four most recent polls, the newest videos, turnout statistics and what they imply...so: thanks for coming by! Take a free account if you think you might be round again.
Two pretty great little videos came over yesterday, for different reasons. The best quick take on yesterday's SUSA/KATU poll that showed Novick with a strong surge of +10 in a week is the news report for it done by the station. Forthwith!
As presumed, Survey USA has just released their final Senate polling for the Oregon primary. Results in parentheses are from the 5/12 survey, followed by the 5/1 result)
Novick 37 (27, 30)
Merkley 34 (31, 28)
Neville 7 (8, 11)
Undecided 17
Well, because the gap is just 3 points, we still have a...mathematical tie (how many times have we said that in this race the last two months??). However, while the previous two surveys showed no definitive movement by either candidate, in this poll Novick surges 10 points from his previous position, vaulting past Merkley, who was +3 from last time.
In other Oregon races done in this poll, Kurt Schrader looks comfortably ahead of Steve Marks in a OR-5 Dem primary race I wish had gone on a lot longer; on the Republican side, has Kevin Mannix's BabyGate ploy worked? Erickson has gone from eight points ahead to four points behind. Both Mannix's +5 and Erickson's -7 appear real.
More as I get it/get to it....
...if anyone has the SUSA link, please post in comments; I'm typing by phone...
Updating the previous "breaking post," showing Survey USA's Presidential primary numbers in Oregon that have Barack Obama leading Hillary Clinton 55-42, there is another result out just now from Public Policy Polling. That poll shows Obama leading 58-39, It, like SUSA, is a robopoll, meaning the interviews were conducted by computer interviewers rather than people. PPP does far more calling, however, yielding a Democratic sample of over 1,200 likely voters with just a 2.7% margin for error. Here's the company's blurb:
Barack Obama is likely to win a dominant victory tomorrow in Oregon. PPP has repeatedly found similarities between Wisconsin and Oregon in its polling of the two states. Both times polling more than two weeks out tended to show Obama with a lead in the single digits. A week out his lead moved into the lower double digits. And now it's in the upper double digits. Oregon is also the only state besides Wisconsin where we've found the war as an issue on par with the economy, and that works to Obama's advantage as well.
Given how many people have already voted and how strongly they're going for Obama, there's a decent chance he's already won the primary based on the ballots already filled out. 74% of respondents said they had already voted, and among them Obama has a 60-39 advantage.
Obama leads 50-43 with women, pretty much cutting off any hope for Clinton, while leading 63-32 with men. Clinton leads senior citizens, while Obama has the advantage across the rest of the age groups.
As with SUSA, that "turned in ballot" figure causes me concern; the record for Democratic turnout was 71.9% in 1968 (McGovern over Kennedy if I recall right), and it doesn't look like they screened first for likely voters, then whether they'd turned in their ballot or not--so a 74% can't really be treated as valid in my mind. Treat them all as you would without early voting, not counting ANY votes in the bag yet.
OK, I've done the Presidential poll first like a good boy, since it's, you know, a little more high profile. But you know I am DYING to tell you about the Senate result in PPP. Also, because there's a SUSA Pres poll out today, I'm pretty sure there will be a Senate result too--but KATU pays for them and keeps an embargo until they do their evening newscast, so I expect we'll see something from them then.
OK, that first picture is not mine, but I understand now what dazzled people about Camelot--and cripes, JFK was cheating on his wife! I keep staring at them thinking, that's what the world will see of the next American First Family. It gives me a happy shudder to see such a thing.
With the exception of I think two others (one of which is clearly a getty photo), the rest are all from my iPhone and either cropped up or cleaned up a little. They're not high quality, but a couple decent shots.
{more below the jump, just to save some front page data load...}
I suspect some may not laugh at the morbid connotations of 'stumping' for a man with a hook for an arm, but I bet Steve would, and 'canvassing' always makes me think of wrapping people in tent material, like at Boy Scouts summer camp, when you spent the week inside those heavy canvas platform tents.
And then I dismissed the notion, figuring the only person who'd dare write such a headline was me.
Some folks in the MSM are noticing that Senator Chuck isn't the political Midas they gave him credit for being, citing Oregon's senate race as the case in point.
Taegan Goddard's Political Wire news aggregator carries a link to an AP story making that point but you have to read a web posting from the Janesville Gazette Extra to get the full text.
Writer Matthew Daly points out that while Schumer actively recruited Merkley (even after Novick had declared) and has thrown a bunch of money into the campaign, "Polls show the race is too close to call."
Daly also offers a great quote from Novick on the subject: "Why they think Merkley can beat Gordon Smith if they have to prop him up to beat me is beyond me."
You can read the rest of the story for yourself, but there's one more point I just have to make. The standing joke in political circles around in NY and DC is that the most dangerous place you can find yourself is between Chuck Schumer and a microphone. I'll let Daly say it, "Schumer, who typically makes himself available to reporters, declined to comment for this story."
8. Oregon: State House Speaker Jeff Merkley has been one of the most disappointing candidates so far this cycle. Recruited into the race by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, Merkley has struggled to transition from state legislative politics to a U.S. Senate campaign. Those struggles have been exacerbated by the surprising strength -- fundraising and otherwise -- of party activist Steve Novick. Polling, public and private, suggests Novick could well pull the upset in Tuesday's primary. Democrats insist either candidate will be competitive against Sen. Gordon Smith (R), but that runs counter to the national party's decision to recruit Merkley when Novick was already running. (Previous ranking: 8) [emphs mine]
Ow ow ow! The word has gotten out, and the meme is solidifying--Merkley's blown his opportunity. Maybe he'll survive on Tuesday, having pulled out whatever guns he's got left--but even if he wins, how will his effort be perceived in the centers of power? How far down the ladder will Oregon slide if he's the nominee? You can argue that Schumer and the DC boys don't like Novick, but they're not idiots, and politics is often a bandwagon game--once the critical mass is reached, it becomes counterproductive politically NOT to support him. And if they think Novick's a bum, what does it say that Merkley has struggled so hard to dispatch him?
The WaPo column isn't really aimed at an Oregon audience, but they should be paying attention--the perception of the candidates in DC very much will make a difference in the amount of support the institution provides the nominee against Smith. Think twice before voting for someone who is rapidly earning a reputation in Washington for being an underachiever...
We're headed into the final weekend, and Jeff Merkley is doing everything humanly possible with every kitchen appliance he has to beat Steve Novick for the nomination. The three prongs of his support base--the DSCC network, the legislature and the beholden unions--have all come into play on his behalf over the last couple days, most urgently just now.
First, the grotesque display of wanton disregard for state autonomy shown by DSCC Chair Senator Chuck Schumer, whose response to a campaign labeled locally as "tone deaf," "disappointingly negative," and generally lacking in charisma or promise, was to double and triple down his money.
Having dropped 100K into the campaign as seed money to get it started, as much as $300,000 more has poured in since, musch of it late in the form of ads that swipe at Gordon Smith but then only mention Jeff Merkley. Here's one:
RSS Feed: http://www.loadedorygun.net/rss/rss2.xml
It's time for another in the great Brewhaha series, sponsored by the Bus Project (in combo with the Merc) and featuring former Senate and possibly future goobernatorial candidate, definite budget wonk Steve Novick as emcee. That's enough to perk your ear right there--wonkiness, beer and comedy? With sports? You know Novick's all OVER that.
With 30 of his most fervent supporters, including his parents and girlfriend, on the stage behind him, Novick received an electric ovation, prompting him to quote an ol' Mo Udall line: "If this goes on much longer, I might have to accept the nomination.
