both candidates, at this point.  Either would provide a strong voice for positive change in the Senate.  In some ways, I actually prefer Novick's direct (and provocative) style, to Merkley's more soft spoken and nuanced one.  And I think the difference between them is far more one of style than substance, for the most part.  Their positions are almost identical, and neither backs away from difficult stands on contentious issues.

The one substantive difference is Jeff's experience successfully leading the Democratic caucus in arguably the most progressive and most productive session in recent history.  It is precisely that kind of leadership which is so sorely needed in Washington right now, as so many diaries here on "spineless capitulation" bear witness.

And the matter of style is not entirely unimportant.  As a party worker in rural Oregon, I have a vested interest in our choosing candidates who not only have the right stand on the issues, but can persuasively deliver their message in hostile territory.  I'd love to see another Wayne "Fighting Silver Fox" Morse sent to Washington from our state, but I think we stand a better chance of winning Smith's seat, and building for our party's future, with honey rather than vinegar right now.