OR-SEN: The Best 90 Seconds of the Race

As many folks know because of the Presidential primary, Oregon's day is May 20--and along with the choice between Obama and Clinton are a number of statewide and federal races. The Secretary of State race is between three Democrats with one token Republican, and the Attorney General's race has NO GOP contender, so the primary is for all the electoral marbles.

But by far the most interesting race to me is to replace Gordon Smith, primarily (pun intended) between Steve Novick and Jeff Merkley. I'll say up front I'm fully backing Novick; I think he's the more progressive candidate, the more honest candidate, the better-informed candidate, and he's exactly the right kind of change we need in Washington to get BETTER Democrats, not just more Democrats to fill the seats.

Recently the top 3 candidates participated in the biggest debate of the primary season, televised live statewide and sponsored by KGW and The Oregonian.
{more below}

You can watch the hourlong debate yourself, broken into three parts. This is Part One, here is Part Two, and then Part Three.

There's certainly no shortage of information from a variety of sources on Steve, if you are interested. His issues pages are VERY extensive, and even include a set of videos discussing major points. For instance, here's what he has to say about battling poverty, and this is a good one on the war. There are also a host of current-affairs policy statements and press news, on topics as varied as his applause for the House standing firm on FISA and stopping a liquefied natural gas plant on Oregon's coast.

But the best way to understand why Steve has a double digit lead over his closest competition is to watch his closing statement at the KGW debate. In 90 seconds, you get that he gets it. Watch the video...

A lot of us here in Oregon are getting pretty excited--ballots for the all-mail primary go out around the first of May, under two weeks from now. With his fundraising up 57% from last quarter, leading in the polls and about to release new ads to run across the state, Steve is primed to seal the deal and take on the real prize--beating Gordon Smith. Considering he wrote the template on how to do it, we're pretty confident Gordo won't know what hit him--he's never faced a Democrat who fought back before.

•  Steve Novick will take down Gordon Smith

  Norvick has my support.

  by Lefty Coaster on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:39:22 PM PDT

•  Steve Novick really DOES get it

  Can't wait to see the new ads. I hear they are great.

  The old ads were pretty good too.

  Steve is a great candidate and will utterly confound Gordon Smith. Smith knows how to run against conventional Democrats. He's never had to run against anyone like Steve.

  by vard on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:52:55 PM PDT

  •  David and Goliath

    I think that Novick is definitely the one we need to go with to beat Gordon Smith.

    Either candidate, Novick or Jeff Merkley, will be massively outspent by the Republican incumbent, but only Steve has shown that he has what it takes to run against a better funded opponent.  If the primary is any indication as to how either will run against Smith, the edge clearly belongs to Novick.

    Merkley has had help from Chuck Shumer's DSCC, and they've brought John Kerry, John Tester, and Max Cleland along to try and beat Steve.  Still, Novick has done better than Merkley in every poll I've seen.

    If Merkley is having trouble despite the institutional support advantage, he's going to have a hell of a time running against Smith.  Novick is the one who can topple the wealthy giant.

    by maloney on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:10:15 PM PDT

•  Sorry, torridjoe, but Novick

  turned my vote away with that petulant little foot stomp over the "Who would you vote for" question.  I don't want that kind of politically out-of-tune attitude representing me in Washington.  Speaking truth to power is one thing.  Coming across as an ass is another.  

  To be clear, I was leaning heavily in Novick's favor.  That performance was eye-opening.

  by CJB on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:07:12 PM PDT

  •  eh?

    What's politically out of tune? Rejecting the same old politics of smearing your opponent when you're behind? Rejecting the same old politics of a Democrat attacking ANOTHER DEMOCRAT for being pro-tax? Supporting progressive views like impeachment of Bush and Cheney?

    That's what Novick was doing there--he was deciding whether to be a robot and give the answer he was supposed to give, or whether to be honest and reject the old politics. And he said he would support the Democratic nominee no matter what, so I don't see the issue.

    by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:13:48 PM PDT

    •  I've just seen/heard/read him be impolitic

      many more times than once. And perhaps one too many times with the interchange I mentioned.

      My mistake was to insert the previous comment (and perhaps this one) in this diary.  I have sworn to stay out of "pro" diaries with "anti" comments in other races.  Supporters of a candidate should be allowed their space.  That should apply here, as well.

      Best of luck to Novick and to you.

      by CJB on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:21:35 PM PDT

      •  no, it's OK

        Steve isn't afraid to face honest questioning, so I don't see it as unfair here, either. I think there is a strong difference between written comments (made at least in Obama's case in the context of a mock letter in which Novick goes on to ask if he (Novick) should be deported) done as a non-candidate, and spoken comments during the course of a campaign. I think his statements from the WWeek video are fair game, as long as they are taken at face value. Steve recognizes all too well the role of a spoiler (having backed Nader in 96 when he wasn't one, and urging voters in 2000 to vote for Gore when he was), and he has said he believes Frohnmayer is a strong candidate, but can really only be a spoiler. And he's never said anything other than that he would back the Dem nominee in the general.

        Steve has a strong history of working as part of a team (at DoJ), leading a team (at the state Senate), and building a team (creating coalitions to defeat Bill Sizemore and Don McIntire). When it counts, when there's work to be done, Steve simply gets it done. There's no doubt that Steve speaks his mind, but in these times I'll take the honesty and fearlessness over false comity and being intimidated to protect your career with mushmouthedness, any day.

        Thanks for the comment, no worries.

        by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:10:25 PM PDT

    •  That was a poll.

      Not an attack. And given Merkley's record, I wouldn't be surprised if he was using Novick as a stand-in for himself. How bad would it have been in the general if he had called himself a tax-and-spender in his own poll?

      by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:27:29 PM PDT

      •  nope

        there are several other character attacks Merkley made. And it IS an attack in a poll, given that he is placing that message into the minds of the electorate without full disclosure of the facts or a fair response.

        by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:03:52 PM PDT

        •  It's a few hundred people.

          Given how few people would actually change their minds based on a poll question like that, I doubt this is what you're making it out to be. You seem to have a long habit of trying to foment outrage at Merkley whenever and wherever possible.

          by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:07:46 PM PDT

          •  nobody has to foment anything

            Merkley can disappoint people perfectly well on his own.

            by vard on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:08:51 PM PDT

            •  Every politician disappoints on things

              Trying to blow up every little thing into an outrage is tiring.

              by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:11:51 PM PDT

              •  not just me

                one of The Oregonian's prominent columnists addressed the issue last week and called Merkley out for being a hypocrite. So let's not make it about me, please.

                by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:16:52 PM PDT

                •  Ok, it's not you.

                  You're wonderful. It's the outrage over the little things that wears me out (which the media ... ahem ... isn't that great about, either).

                  by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:27:09 PM PDT

                  •  attacking Dems for Dem principles

                    just doesn't seem that minor to me, sorry. And as a generality I don't really care what you say about me, which was rather the point--it's not about me, it's about Steve.

                    by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:30:32 PM PDT

                    •  I'll be disappointed when I see the ad.

                      Or press release, whatever.

                      by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:35:18 PM PDT

                      •  he's running neg ads already

                        The last three videos Merkley has produced have all been hit pieces on Steve. Steve hasn't done a single negative video on Jeff, even on the issues where he believes he's more progressive.

                        by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:37:47 PM PDT

                        •  'Negative ads'

                          I'm fine with publishing a web video of Novick in the WW interview. I didn't think that was out of bounds. I haven't seen the other videos, but this is a change of subject from taxes.

                          by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:11:22 PM PDT

                        •  What?

                          These are the only two ads that Merkley has put up.  Neither even mentions Steve Novick.

                          by bdunn on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:56:44 AM PDT

                          •  forgetting some?

                            are you forgetting "Jeopardy," and the two videos he released using footage from City Club?

                            Or have you just not seen them?

                            by torridjoe on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 12:19:37 PM PDT

                        •  Link? (n/t)

                          by jgilhousen on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:05:04 AM PDT

                          •  same as the others

                            they're in the same place as the rest of his ads on youtube...I believe the account is MerkleyForOregon.

                            by torridjoe on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 12:21:11 PM PDT

          •  Another excellent observation n/t

            n/t

            by Preemptive Karma on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:11:50 AM PDT

          •  Whats even more ridiculous...,

            Is that Novick's campaign acknowledged doing the exact same negative message testing that Merkley did a month earlier, the only difference was they didn't randomly call a house with an AP reporter.

            by bdunn on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:54:55 AM PDT

            •  not quite "the exact same," bradley

              As Steve said, they tested issues.

              They didn't test namecalling like "divider" or "tax and spend liberal."

              by vard on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 10:02:36 AM PDT

      •  Cont...

        I mean, think about it: Why would he even consider using "tax and spend" in a Democratic primary? It wouldn't work. There's no reason to waste a poll question on that. But it would be quite useful to know how much to worry about Republicans hitting hard against Merkley on taxes.

        by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:05:00 PM PDT

        •  it's their #1 attack

          I think it's kind of a useless test in that vein; of COURSE they're going to attack him as pro-tax, same as Novick. The GOP's website against Novick actually says "just as tax happy...only funnier."

          They're using other attacks from that poll; you don't pay to test them and not use them. As for using the question on taxes as a proxy for Merkley's own position, I would be very surprised if they didn't do a set of negatives for Merkley separate from those for Novick. It's pretty standard. The whole idea of negative testing is standard--but character attacks and attacks for hewing to Democratic principles are unusual for one Dem against another.

          by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:13:54 PM PDT

          •  If they tested Merkley's negatives directly...

            ...that was not included in the descriptions that were reported.

            by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:29:39 PM PDT

            •  neither were a lot of things

              the primary heat test questions, the Merkley positive tests, the general heat--none of that was included either. But they were done, unless something is really wrong over there.

              by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:31:46 PM PDT

      •  Excellent point

        Message testing is as much about discovering your own strengths and weaknesses as it is about discovering your opponent's strengths and weaknesses.

        by Preemptive Karma on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:10:56 AM PDT

  •  those are very judgmental words

    "petulant little foot stomp" is a very harsh characterization of what Steve did and said.

    Hey, I was annoyed with him too, because I know that a Democratic nominee is the only person who has any hope of beating Smith. But when I thought about it, I had to acknowledge that Merkley was testing my own resolve to "support the nominee" if it were to be him, just because of the nasty primary campaign he's running. But Steve did say that he would support the nominee and work hard to elect that person (although he expects to be the nominee).

    They say that a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth at a time when a lie would be conventional and expected. So... I prefer to vote for the guy who tells the truth AND does the right thing.

    The other thing no one is talking about is the enhanced prospect of John Frohnmayer dropping out if Steve is nominated. I have no inside information but I do know that Novick and Frohnmayer think highly of one another. If his nomination would result in the 3rd party candidate dropping out, leaving him a clear shot at Smith that Merkley wouldn't have, isn't that a good reason to support Novick?

    by vard on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:19:58 PM PDT

    •  I tried to answer this a number of times

      last night, and my comment post kept failing.

      The one thing that keeps Novick in my sights is that he's being dissed by the local politicos.  I've seen it happen on a county level.  Pisses me off.  

      AND, although I think Merkley's fine, he is all shades of beige.  

      To end, there's a lot I like about Novick.  Right now, his lip just isn't one of them.  Flies with honey, and all that.

      I wish him well.  You, too.

      (And, frankly, Frohnmeyer's not a bad guy.  He'd be a better senator than Smith, fer sher.)

      by CJB on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 11:42:44 AM PDT

•  "I would vote for John Frohnmayer"

  I know he later said he didn't understand the question and would vote for a Democrat, and then later said that Frohnmayer should get out of the race, but answering with a non-Democrat when asked who he'd vote for strengthened my initial concerns that he isn't ready yet. He seems like a very remarkable person, and strongly progressive, too. But I would feel a lot better voting for him if he could demonstrate even one election and half a term of legislative experience before putting him in a competitive US Senate race. I know a lot of good people have won Senate seats without legislative experience, but I don't think they've really needed it as much as Novick could use it. Just to smooth out some of his rough edges, and I don't mean that as a euphemism for "conventional politician." I don't think Novick could possibly be that.

  by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:18:57 PM PDT

  •  can you explain this?

    "but answering with a non-Democrat when asked who he'd vote for strengthened my initial concerns that he isn't ready yet."

    I think it shows he's MORE than ready; he's not into saying just what he's supposed to say, no matter what. But can you explain what element he's missing that you see from that statement?

    by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:01:06 PM PDT

    •  "I support Democrats"

      That's not just "what you're supposed to say" for the sake of being what you're supposed to say. It's a fundamental position that I expect good Democrats to believe in. If he doesn't believe in that, why is he saying it now?

      by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:10:15 PM PDT

      •  he DOES believe it

        He's never said any different than that he would support the Democrat in the general. Where are you going with that?

        by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:18:03 PM PDT

        •  "I would vote for John Frohnmayer"

          Even if there were such a thing as voting for Frohnmayer in a primary, I would still say this is "supporting a non-Democrat." But Frohnmayer's only on the general election ballot anyway, if I'm hearing right.

          by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:32:35 PM PDT

          •  it wasn't a question about his vote

            that's what Steve was saying--he thought he was being asked who he'd prefer to see in the Senate if it couldn't be him. He picked the most progressive guy after him, he believed. The issue of who you'd vote for is a different question; you don't always vote for the candidate you prefer the best, lest the most likely non-bad candidate to lose to the worst candidate.

            by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:35:47 PM PDT

            •  "vote for"

              It was in both the question and Novick's answer. Am I being unfair here?

              by Michael D on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:08:01 PM PDT

              •  from the answer, yes

                He made clear who he preferred--and who he would vote for, in his answer.

                by torridjoe on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:11:28 PM PDT

              •  No, of course not

                Merkley immediately, clearly and unambiguously stated that he'd vote for Novick.

                Novick's answer was not immediate but it was clear and unambiguous - he'd vote for Frohnmayer.

                Let the Kool-Aid brigade do whatever they're going to do here. The facts remain despite the fevered attempts to get you to disbelieve your own eyes and ears.

                by Preemptive Karma on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:18:55 AM PDT

•  A good debate

  Last week's debate was a very good chance to see all of the top 3 candidates for the Democratic nomination - it's great that you linked to the whole debate. I think Novick showed his strength as a candidate for the whole hour and that closing statement was fantastic. His intelligence, knowledge, history and courage are great assets to him and will continue to be as he takes down Gordon Smith.

  by PdxRegina on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:22:59 PM PDT