Daily Kos

OR-Sen: Rasmussen--Smith held under 50 by either Dem

Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:00:31 PM PDT

A new Rasmussen poll of the Oregon Senate race shows Republican incumbent Gordon Smith still under 50%, for the third month in a row.

Any incumbent who polls below 50% is considered potentially vulnerable and this month’s polling contains even more bad news for Smith—support for his potential Democratic challengers is increasing.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Oregon voters finds Smith leading Jeff Merkley by just three percentage points, 45% to 42%. In late March, he enjoyed a thirteen point lead. In February, he was ahead of Merkley by eighteen points.

When matched against Steve Novick, Smith leads by six percentage points, 47% to 41%. In the March poll, Novick trailed by eleven. In February, the gap was thirteen points.....

In Oregon, Smith is viewed favorably by 55% of the state’s voters, Novick by 46%, and Merkley by 42%. The numbers for both Democrats are trending up.

Those figures include just 18% with a Very Favorable opinion of their incumbent Senator. Thirteen percent (13%) have a Very Favorable view of Novick while 9% say the same about Merkley.

Oregon's primary is May 20, and Smith, though unopposed, has hit the airways with an attack ad aimed at both Democrats, all the while trying to present himself as the "change" candidate ("See? I'm just like Obama! Really! Change!")

The latest SUSA poll (May 1) has Merkley and Novick virtually tied, with Novick at 30% and Merkley at 28%, making up the double digit deficit he had in the April poll.  Given the decent performance of each of them in holding Smith under 50, the NRSC has another race to worry about.

On the Web:
Jeff Merkley for US Senate
Steve Novick for US Senate

Update: The DSCC has responded to Smith's "change" ad:

Race tracker wiki: OR-Sen

  • ::

Tags: OR-Sen, Oregon, Senate, 2008, Gordon Smith, Jeff Merkley, Steve Novick (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 243 comments

  •  Which Dem is the better one? nt (4+ / 0-)

    "The only thing I would trust Dick Cheney on is if I had a dead hooker in my hotel room." --Jon Stewart

    by DemBrock on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:04:10 PM PDT

    •  I second this question (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Hardhat Democrat, lams712

      Can any Oregon Kossacks give us the rundown?

      •  Oregonian here... (6+ / 0-)

        I put up a diary on this earlier today making the case for Jeff Merkley.

        If you have a chance, check it out.

        •  Merkley clearly the one with the momentum (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          verasoie, Hardhat Democrat

          Both Primary Election polls and now General Election match-up polls show that Merkley is surging strongly.

          Throw in the exceptionally long list of great progressive organizations which have endorsed Merkley - which you partially list in your diary - and it's clear that Jeff Merkley is the stronger candidate.

          •  What momentum (0+ / 0-)

            I've seen Novick volunteers out doing visibility countless times now...in many different areas.  I have yet to see a group of Merkley volunteers around Portland with signs.  Some momentum.

            •  Twice the momentum (3+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Carla, verasoie, Hardhat Democrat

              This newest Rassmussen poll also included tracking stats from their February and March polls which are very revealing.

              Merkley went from 18 points down to 13 points down to 3 points down - a statistical tie. That's a 15 point swing since Feb. and a 10 point swing since March.

              Novick went from 13 points down to 11 points down to 6 points down. that's a 7 point swing from Feb. and a 5 point swing since March, half the momentum which Merkley has demonstrated.

              Clearly Merkley has the stronger momentum.

              The other interesting corrolary is that this is a GE match-up, yet it strongly corrolates with the SurveyUSA PE (i.e., Dems only) polls. Both are showing a strongly surging Jeff Merkley who clearly has Gordon Smith running scared.

      •  All four Portland papers back Novick (5+ / 0-)

        they almost never agree on anything!

        Oregonian
        Willamette Week
        Portland Mercury
        Portland Tribune

        7 of 10 general papers are for Steve, statewide.

        •  shout out for DPO (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          cjallen, mamabigdog

          Democratic Party of Oregon has been all over this race, and they have a great website - StopGordonSmith.Com.

          "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

          by JLFinch on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:44:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Smith's ad almost made me throw-up in my mouth (2+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            Carla, Wes Opinion

            The gall of the man trying to compare himself to Obama.  But, I have to say, I didn't much like the ad they are running against Smith.  The music in the background was very distracting and the visuals didn't add much to the ad.  Hopefully they will do better next time.

            What I would like to see is an ad with Smith saying he thinks we should get out of Iraq...you all remember that don't you.  He was all choked up thinking about it and said we need to get out now.  Then the ad can show all his votes on Iraq since then.  Also, add in his votes against the vets for good measure.  I think Smith has something like a 90% or better average of voting with Bush.

            I truly think if the Democratic party pumps a lot of money into Oregon, I think that either Merkley or Novack can beat him, especially riding Obama's coat tails.  Not being able to poll over 50 when you have no actual opponent doesn't bode well for either Smith or McCain.

            •  I thought at least one of Smith's ads (4+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Carla, JLFinch, la2tempe, Hardhat Democrat

              was incredibly laughable. HE attacks Novick and Merkley as being more of the same and then tries to say he's the agent of change. Yeah that's it Smith is gonna shake up Washington just like he has for the last 12 years. My God it's so completely absurd I can't help laughing every time I see it.

              "Fools rush where angels fear to tread. Oddly enough, fools have accomplished a great deal more than angels." -- Newtkeeper?

              by Wes Opinion on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:21:18 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Too bad Novick hates Obama (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              verasoie, Preemptive Karma

              Okay, maybe not hates. But he did call Obama a fraud and a captive of the military-industrial complex.

              Made me like him a little less, I gotta say.

              A pain in the ass wrapped in a headache surrounded by a nightmare

              by Blank Frank on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:08:02 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Mandate Media (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            petrichor

            The same guy the DPO pays for this anti-Smith site is also on Merkley's payroll. Most recently he, copied Novick's actual campaign site, filled it with attack ads and claimed credit for the entire content, causing Novick's online director to write an open letter.

            On the recent attack website you launched for Jeff Merkley, novickinsultsdemocrats.com, you used a substantial amount of work that I, and others, created for the Novick campaign and claimed credit for it as your own. This work includes graphics, logo design, photography, and layout design.

            Merkley probably was a decent enough man, but once he got in bed with Chuck Schumer and Kari Chisholm, he chose the path of politics of personal destruction.

            The out of context snippets which are the stuff of Mandate-Merkley's latest attacks are akin to the "Dean scream." (And it appears the media agree.)

        •  Not to mention Gov. Kitzhauber (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          JLFinch, PdxRegina

          His endorsement of Novick means alot to me.

          A ship adrift in a sea of rhetoric & recycled clichés.

          by Terre on Sat May 10, 2008 at 04:47:54 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Dead Tree papers are meaningless (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          verasoie

          Kos has said it a number of times and its true here.

          Check out my Oregon politics blog Forward Oregon

          by bdunn on Sat May 10, 2008 at 06:52:54 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Merkley is polling within three points of Smith (3+ / 0-)

        I wish that had been the lead off line in Mcjoan's piece rather than Novick's numbers, considering Merkley is the one surging here. He's jumped the most in the recent poll among Democrats and among all registered voters in Oregon with the new Rasmussen poll. The real story here folks is that Gordon Smith is scared of facing Merkley! He's airing a nasty smear against only Jeff right now and I now see why. Merkley is statistically tied with Smith this early on in the race.

        Merkley is a strong progressive candidate. As House Speaker he led the greenest and most labor friendly session in 30 years. He brought Repubs on board with domestic partnerships legislation, anti-discrimination legislation, paday lending legislation, ethics reform and a ton of environmental bills. The OLCV said that much of the credit for our green session was because of Jeff's leadership. I support Merkley because I think he can beat Smith and he's a very skilled progressive legislator.

        Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley

        by sarahlane on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:27:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  So sorry...must correct myself.... (5+ / 0-)

          I read Mcjoan's piece too fast! She did point out Merkley's big surge first, my apologies!!!

          Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley

          by sarahlane on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:28:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Sarah, THEY ARE BOTH TIED (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          JLFinch

          "The real story here folks is that Gordon Smith is scared of facing Merkley! He's airing a nasty smear against only Jeff right now and I now see why. Merkley is statistically tied with Smith this early on in the race."

          I don't know why it is you keep repeating that; they are both statistically tied. Novick could be 45-43 up on Smith in this poll, and still be within the 95% confidence.

          Smith has also aired ads against Novick last week

          •  They're both very close to Smith which is great (2+ / 0-)

            but I don't know how you can continue to spin that they're both tied, when only Merkley is within the moe.

            Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley

            by sarahlane on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:45:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Moe is calculated on both figures (0+ / 0-)

              The margin of error is applied to each response. So a 4% MoE means that Novick is at 41%, +-4. Gordon Smith is at 47%, ALSO +-4.

              So you apply the range. Smith's best outcome within the 95% confidence range is him beating Novick 51-37. That's Smith +4, and Novick 4. Unlikely-as every answer is the farther you get from center--but possible.

              On the other hand, Novick +4 and Smith 4, Novick actually leads 4543. (If Novick is +3 and Smith is -3, it's tied).

              So Novick is also within the margin of error. He could be 14 down, or 2 up. Within the margin of error, he has tying or winning scenarios. He's tied.

              Note how Rasmussen makes no claim about Merkley they don't make about Novick. There's no mathematical difference between them, especially if you compare Merkley's vote to Novick's vote, (42 to 41).  

              It's also MAY, for heaven's sake.

              •  don't know what happened there (0+ / 0-)

                If Novick is +4 and Smith is  negative 4 as the MoE tolerates, Novick wins 45-43. That's a statistical tie.

                And the other part that got strikeout, meant to say that the probability is less at the ends of the ranges.

                It's a good math bet that Smith leads both by a little, and the two Dems perform equally well (because Smith's number is not dependent on theirs).

                (ah, I see it's the hyphens pairing up to be strikeout code)

            •  All polls show Merkley with the momentum (4+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Carla, verasoie, Hardhat Democrat, bdunn

              Both the Primary Election polls and the General Election match-ups show that Merkley is the one with the momentum. Which is why Smith is now running false attack ads against just Merkley.

    •  Very tough question (4+ / 0-)

      Novick is more of an outsider, with innovative advertising.

      http://www.youtube.com/...

      But he said that he wouldn't necessarily support a Democrat if it wasn't him

      Merkley's more of an insider, but pledged to support a Democrat no matter what.  Also, his most recent advertising has gone after Smith for Smith's absurd "Vote for Change!  Vote for me, the two-term Republican incumbent!" ads.  

      http://www.youtube.com/...

      So I dunno.

      John McCain: Healthcare for kids? Not in the Bush-McCain America.

      by bosdcla14 on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:07:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Any differences on the issues? (0+ / 0-)

        •  Been some dust up that Merkley once (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          lams712

          voted in favor of a resolution "supporting the war" - I don't know all the details, but there is a concern it would make it harder for him to use the war as an issue against Smith.

          "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

          by JLFinch on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:11:10 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It was a support the troops resolution (11+ / 0-)

            like lots of states were passing. I wouldn't hold it against Merkley.

            Novick has a sort of Deanish tendency to speak his mind that's gotten him in trouble more than once this primary. I don't necessarily hold that against him, either.

            I'm kind of glad I don't have to vote in Oregon this cycle. This would be a hard one for me to make the choice in.

            "There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty." - John Adams.

            by mcjoan on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:14:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It's not the crime... It's the cover-up (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              petrichor

              Most of our "leaders" in DC voted to allow Bush to invade Iraq. Two days after the invasion Merkley was voting to "acknowledge the courage of George W. Bush." Hillary won't apologize for her vote, and neither will Speaker Merkley.

              The added problem with Merkley is that he went on to lie about his early anti-war cred. After he caved into the GOP, Merkley addressed our legislature saying:

              "I have not been and am not today persuaded that Iraq was a significant threat to the United States or that the war we fight today is the best strategy to fight terrorism or the wisest application of our superpower resources. But that is a conversation or a debate for another day."

              he and his surrogates would later claim this was an "anti-war" speech which "attacked Bush."

              When Oregonians were marching off to war, Merkley was too busy shopping for yellow ribbon magnets to "discuss" whether attacking Iraq might be the "best strategy." For me, that demonstrates a stunning lack of reason and fortitude. Five years later, has Merkley finally found the time for a conversation on Iraq?

            •  it wasn't just a "support the troops issue" (3+ / 0-)

              it literally praised george bush for his courageous leadership, and the support the troops bit was an afterthought at the end.

              Whereas the dictatorship of Iraq has continued to develop weapons of mass destruction in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441;

              and

              Whereas the dictator Saddam Hussein has demonstrated a willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against neighboring nations and the citizens of Iraq;

              and

              Whereas Saddam Hussein threatens the Middle East and the global economy with the threat to use weapons of mass destruction; now, therefore,

              Be It Resolved by the House of Representatives of the State of Oregon:

              That we, the members of the House of Representatives of the Seventy-second Legislative Assembly:

              (1) Acknowledge the courage of President George W. Bush, the President?s cabinet and the men and women of the Armed Forces of the United States, and express our support for the victorious removal of Saddam Hussein from power;

              and

              (2) Praise the courage, dedication, professionalism and sacrifices of the men and women of the Armed Forces of the United States and their families in the defense of freedom.

              though you're right novick has deanish tendencies...

            •  sorry, i left out (3+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              JLFinch, la2tempe, East Bank Thom

              the issue isn't so much the content of the resolution, but the blurring--gordon smith is going to be able to say

              "jeff merkley voted to express his 'support for the victorious removal of Saddam Hussein from power' just like i did in 2003, and we both have had a change of heart."

              issue blurred.

            •  Merkley took a page from Hatfield's playbook (4+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Carla, verasoie, JLFinch, Hardhat Democrat

              Not surprising since Merkley interned for the staunchly anti-war Mark Hatfield.

              In 1966 when Hatfield was Governor of Oregon he very famously voted against a resolution at the 1966 Governor's Conference which expressed explicit support for President Johnson's policy on the Vietnam War.

              That much is pretty widely known. What's less well known and 100% relevant here is that Hatfield first tried to amend the resolution to express support for the troops. The net effect would have been a resolution expressing support for both the troops and for the war. Hatfield didn't support the war but clearly was prepared to vote for a resolution which expressed support for the troops.

              It was only after Hatfield's amendment was rejected that he cast the famous vote against the whole thing.

          •  It was a non-binding resolution (7+ / 0-)

            the day after the war began supporting the troops, as well as praising Bush and wanting Hussein removed. The GOP controlled the legislature, and it was the only point where legislators would be able to go on record as supporting the troops, which was a big deal for Democrats back then, if you remember, we were wanting to make sure Republicans couldn't turn us into the anti-troop parody they tried to pull on us after Vietnam. But Merkley delivered a floor speech to say he wasn't convinced the war was worth it, and even Novick's most prominent supporters have said it's ridiculous to say Merkley supported to war.

            Prof. McCain
            By Iraq, is Pakistan near,
            While Czechoslovakia's here.
            Sunnis are Shi'a,
            Sudan is Somalia,
            and Putin's the German premier.

            by Michael D on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:15:51 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  As far as I know.... (3+ / 0-)

            Merkley is the only one on record against the Iraq War before the invasion. Please correct me if I'm wrong if Novick did make a public statement prior to the invasion. Even though Merkley voted for a resolution supporting the troops he made the argument on the House floor that he did not think the invasion was a wise decision.

            Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley

            by sarahlane on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:18:26 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  where's Merkley's record? (0+ / 0-)

              I don't know of any actual opposition to the war before the invasion from Merkley. His floor speech only goes as far to say he wasn't convinced, and a column he is touting doesn't say anything except dropping George Mitchell before dropping bombs.

              Novick marched in March 2003 against the invasion.

              I don't need formal speeches to be assured Merkley was against it, but I think it's uncool to claim you were the only one, when your statements are weak at best, and your opponent has shown his bonafides pretty clearly.

            •  merkley is not on record against the war (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              East Bank Thom

              before the invasion, or even immediately after the invasion during the HR2 vote. what he said was:

              Colleagues, I have not been and am not today persuaded that Iraq was a significant threat to the United States or that the war we fight today is the best strategy to fight terrorism or the wisest application of our superpower resources. But that is a conversation or a debate for another day.

              Today I rise to praise our young men and women serving our nation at great personal risk. Today we are not Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal; we are Americans concerned about the safety and support of our troops.

              nothing at all against it.

              novick has been confirmed as having attended anti-war rallies in march/april 2003.

            •  Consider yourself corrected, Sarah (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              petrichor

              Merkley did indeed repeatedly claim he was against the war from the start, the only candidate to publish an anti-war column and that he stood up on the house floor to "disagree completely" with Bush's decision.

              The problem is Sarah, the Speaker lied to you (all of us, really).

              "And that's exactly what i did. I stood up 2 days into this war and gave an anti war speech on the floor of the House. So the record is absolutely clear. I wrote an article before the war. I spoke 2 days into the war. I've been consistent 100% of the time, and so it only reinforces by complete 100% clarity and consistency on this war." - October 28, 2008, Outlook Portland

              Read his (short) floor speech. Merkley lied.

              "So i stood up on the House floor and said what i had said in an article previously that the Iraq war is uh...uh...uh...using military force is uh...is uh... uh... uh... uh... uh... terrible way to approach this. And it is uh... I have grave doubts about this strategy." - August, 31, 2008, KPOJ

              Again read the floor speech. He wanted to have a "conversation" on the war "another day." It's been five years now...

              Sarah, of all the Merkley surrogates, you've been the nicest. But you've also been duped. To be absolutely blunt, Jeff Merkley lied to me personally. That's a big issue for me.

              Posted by Thom at November 17, 2007 1:45 PM
              Dear Representative Merkley,
              you and some associated with your campaign have described your 2003 HRes 2 floor speech as an "anti war speech" which "attacked President Bush." What specifically supports these characterizations, and did you really stand up and say in your floor speech that you "disagree completely with the decision to go to this war"?

              I am so glad you asked this question, Thom.

              I am the only candidate in this race who published a column against using force in Iraq before Bush launched the invasion.

              I am the only candidate in this race who rose to speak against the use of force two days into the invasion." - Jeff Merkley, live blogging, November 17, 2008

              It turns out that Merkley never "published" an anti-war article. The Oregonian finally got the campaign to turn over what he had been referring to all along. Two days later, most of the states papers started endorsing Novick.

              It's not just that I can't support politicians like Merkley. It's that I really do support Steve Novick. He is passionate and accomplished and independent. Precisely what the Democratic caucus in DC needs. Not another spineless suit.

              I am so disappointed in the Democratic class of 2006. Vote Hook (and give Steve Novick your support!)

        •  Very similar, Novick very slightly more left (5+ / 0-)

          For example, argues against a simplistic solution to immigration concerns.

          http://www.novickforsenate.org/...

          http://www.jeffmerkley.com/...

          John McCain: Healthcare for kids? Not in the Bush-McCain America.

          by bosdcla14 on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:13:14 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well Merkley's website loaded faster (0+ / 0-)

            So that's one point in his favor :)

            They both look like good candidates. Merkley looks like he has a little more momentum vs. Smith right now, though. (13 down in last month's poll vs. 3 down now, compared to 11 down for Novick last month vs. 6 down now).

            But I'm not sure that GE polls this far out are anything to base a decision off of.

            Anyway, good luck picking the best candidate.

            •  Might just be that more people are on Novick's (4+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              gogol, Terre, Wes Opinion, PdxRegina

              site.  Merkley's latest negative ad on local TV has completely turned me off to him.  Plus, if Schumer's trying to buy him into the current Dem leadership POS, I'm just flat not interested in helping him.  If anyone here thinks that "More and BETTER Democrats is on Schumer/Pelosi/Emanuel's minds, they're nuts.

              I do appreciate the new DSCC ad, though.  It's how they should have been helping us here from the very start, not trying to make sure that their dog in the race wins.

              You really have to experience Novick in person to realize how intelligent and honest he is.  That he speaks out instead of playing it safe with his Dem Leader buddies should not be perceived here as a fault.  That 'play safe' attitude is exactly how we've gotten in the mess we're in with our current crop of Congressional cowards.

              Conservatism is a function of age - Rousseau
              I've been 19 longer'n you've been alive - me

              by watercarrier4diogenes on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:11:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  But... (2+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                sarahlane, Preemptive Karma

                have you met Jeff?

                You really have to experience Novick in person to realize how intelligent and honest he is.

                I've met Jeff Merkley before, and I can say the same thing about him.

                Honestly, what's Jeff supposed to do?  Give the Dem leadership the finger?

                Steve sought their support, too; but Jeff was the one who got it.

                For many reasons...

                Chuck Schumer's going to pick a candidate to support, that's his job.  But I don't think that we here in Oregon should base our decision of whom to support upon the preferences of Chuck Schumer. "Pro", or "anti"...

                "Even a broken clock", and all of that...

                •  it's not his job, no (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  Terre

                  there's no reason for Chuck Schumer to be involved in a competitive primary--especially one that wasn't competitive before he recruited someone--unless the state is New York.

                  The DSCC does a wonderful job representing the party, and their resources are a must in most Senate races Democrats run. But putting your finger on the scale in a primary does the voters in that state a disservice. Especially in the situation we have now, where a candidate who is clearly viable against Smith, shows similar fundraising capacity (especially at the grassroots) and appears to have stronger support in Oregon based on how different their money profiles are this year (Novick 3/4 from Oregon, Merkley 1/3).

                  I don't think Chuck Schumer needs to be involved in Oregon's decision until May 21st.

                  •  You're entitled to your opinion... (2+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    Carla, Preemptive Karma

                    But do you honestly believe that Steve would have turned down their support if they chose to back him instead?

                    And please, let's stop the "out of state people have no place in our primaries!" thing.

                    United States Senators affect everyone, they're federal legislators.  Of course, we here in Oregon are the ones who should ultimately decide upon who gets the nomination...but shouldn't we welcome any help we can get in ridding us of Bush Republican Gordon Smith?

                    Would you argue that only New Yorkers, Illinoisians (sp?) and Arizonans should decide our presidential race this year?

                    •  DSCC should do no harm to Democrats (0+ / 0-)

                      yes, that's my opinion. They can't support a Democrat when they're sending 100 grand to one running against him.

                      I don't care that Merkley took it, I care that Schumer offered it.

                    •  My first ever donation was out of state (2+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      Carla, Hardhat Democrat

                      I gave money to the Dem trying to unseat Tom DeLay in Texas in 2004. That was my first ever political donation in my life.

                      My next donation was to Howard Dean - another out-of-state politician.

                      The DSCC has a major political stake in state races. Having Gordon Smith return to the Senate because he destroyed a weak candidate directly harms the interests of Democrats in the entire nation.

                      •  Steve isn't a weak candidate (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        East Bank Thom

                        I'd say he's doing pretty well even, considering he hasn't gotten DSCC money...or taen out extra loans

                      •  Great points! (2+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        Carla, Preemptive Karma

                        My first foray into politics was actually for a candidate in my home state (at that time) - former US Senator from NJ Bill Bradley's 2000 presidential primary run; and since then I've volunteered for well over a dozen campaigns, from city council and mayor up to governor (Jim McGreevey and Jon Corzine), Congress (Steve Brozak, Rush Holt, Bill Pascrell and Linda Stender) and US Senate (Frank Lautenburg, Bob Menendez, and now Jeff Merkley...).

                        I was a Howard Dean guy in 2004 as well; and last year I was one of the founding members of a "Draft Russ Feingold" movement back in my old state, after which I switched over to John Edwards.

                        Joe Biden's a great guy, too...

                        Of course the DSCC is going to get involved in these races, and we should be grateful for that.  As much good as my door-knocking and an occasional $20 contribution to local candidates can do in certain circumstances; they're not much compared to what substantial support from a national organization can do towards ridding us all of Bush Republican Gordon Smith.

                        That is the ultimate goal here, after all...

                        •  You want DSCC to be the decider on who our Senate (1+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          East Bank Thom

                          candidate is?  There's a HUGE difference between what you and I do with our contributions and effort and what the DSCC does in helping one Democrat over another.  You say "Of course the DSCC is going to get involved in these races" and give nothing but Dem vs Rethug examples.  This isn't a Dem vs Rethug race and Schumer is trying to make sure he gets someone in the OR-Sen seat that is beholden to him.

                          Conservatism is a function of age - Rousseau
                          I've been 19 longer'n you've been alive - me

                          by watercarrier4diogenes on Sat May 10, 2008 at 08:27:42 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Thank you for telling me what I "want". (1+ / 0-)

                            Recommended by:
                            Preemptive Karma

                            Where did I say that?

                            If you can point that out to me, I'd appreciate it.

                            Otherwise, I'd appreciate if you'd stop lying about me.

                            You say "Of course the DSCC is going to get involved in these races" and give nothing but Dem vs Rethug examples.

                            Oh really?  Where did I do that?

                            •  you're really that unable to read your own text? (0+ / 0-)

                              In each of your examples, did the DSCC jump in at the primary level at the expense of another good Dem candidate?  No, they stepped in at exactly the point they should have, when the Dem candidate had been decided (or was the only one to file on the Dem ticket) and helped that Dem fight the Rethug opponent.  That's NOT what they've done here in Oregon.

                              Conservatism is a function of age - Rousseau
                              I've been 19 longer'n you've been alive - me

                              by watercarrier4diogenes on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:51:37 AM PDT

                              [ Parent ]

                        •  Premature Contribution (0+ / 0-)

                          Of course the DSCC is going to get involved in these races, and we should be grateful for that.

                          When you've got more than one credible candidate, it would be good for the DC insiders to STFU (shove their funds up...)

                          When it was first rumored that Chuck Schumer was hunting for a candidate in Oregon, I had this to say:

                          Posted by: East Bank Thom | Jun 30, 2007 9:00:30 AM

                          Maybe i'm just waking up on the wrong side of the bed, but my first reaction to the DSCC is "stay the hell out" until We blue Oregonians nominate OUR own candidate. Then come in with your truckloads of cash to battle Smith's loads of cash.

                          A true grass roots candidate needs to be organic and locally grown, without any Washington DC Miracle-Gro.

                          Eventually, the establishment settled for Merkley, even dumping 100K on his kickoff. Team Merkley denied at first that they were in the pocket of the DSCC. Then the truth came out.

                      •  when did you become part of the DSCC? (0+ / 0-)

                        Individual donations generally don't have much impact on a race. When Chuck Schumer drops 100 large on one candidate, that intimidates people from supporting the other candidate.

                      •  You're not the organization that's supposed to be (0+ / 0-)

                        spending my effing donations in the fight AGAINST REPUBLICANS, the DSCC most definitely IS.

                        I'd be a lot more friendly toward Merkley if he were getting small donations from a broad cross-section of Democrats nationwide, but he isn't.  The truth of the matter is, he's going to have to pay back that DSCC support some day, and you and I aren't likely to be too happy about what Schumer calls that debt in over.

                        Conservatism is a function of age - Rousseau
                        I've been 19 longer'n you've been alive - me

                        by watercarrier4diogenes on Sat May 10, 2008 at 08:22:59 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Your first contribution was in '04?! (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        petrichor

                        And your first peace rally was the month before last?

                        Kevin, do you also post on BlueOregon as "18yearoldwithanopinion"? Because you look a bit older in the Merkley TV ads.

                        Honestly, you're perfect as a Merkley surrogate.

            •  If I had the supreme joy and blessing (6+ / 0-)

              of living in Oregon and choosing between the two, I'd probably choose Merkley.  I've heard positive reviews of his tenure in the State House and his ability to "get things done." I like Novick on the issues a little better, but his bombthrowing style might be less effective in the Senate. Plus, Merkley does have some sort of experience as a legislator. Of course, there are very good arguments for choosing Novick.

              Unfotunately, I live in PA and had to vote for Bob Casey... and possibly Chris Matthews.

        •  issues differences (4+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          Terre, lams712, maloney, PdxRegina

          Here's how the Novick campaign sees the difference...

        •  Yes (4+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          JLFinch, la2tempe, lams712, MacJimi

          In addition to supporting raising the Social Security tax cap on the grounds of tax fairness, Novick also has advocated for changing the rates of taxes on capital gains to mirror those paid on wages.  Merkley opposes both.

          There are also the stylistic differences where Steve is willing to criticize other Democrats when they stray from progressive principles.  He's brash sometimes, but he's generally right on the mark.

          "The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." -Anatole French

          by maloney on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:17:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm ready for some brash (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            la2tempe

            from our Dems in DC.  About damn time!

            "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

            by JLFinch on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:46:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah... (5+ / 0-)

            while I agree a lot with what Novick has said about different Democrats, he could do a better job at making his points without the insults. Insulting Democratic leaders is not a good way to build a strong progressive coalition in the Senate.

            Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley

            by sarahlane on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:35:30 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Look at the context (2+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              la2tempe, petrichor

              Steve's comments that are being featured in Jeff's negative ad were made in blog posts (most a couple of years ago). The intent of those posts, it seems to me as I review them, is to stir up discussion, engagement and creative thinking. They are also entertaining posts. None of those posts show that Steve thinks that "insulting" other Dems is the way to build a coalition since coalition building wasn't his intent in them. Steve has an impressive history that shows a great deal of productivity and proves, I believe, a great ability to bring people together to get the job done.  I have no doubt that he will bring those same skills to bear when he  joins the Senate.

              I agree with everyone who has stated that it's great that we have two strong progressives running for this nomination - time to get rid of Smith!

        •  A few differences.... (4+ / 0-)

          Merkley is against capital punishment while Novick is not opposed to it. Novick is for raising the s.s. cap while Merkley is not. I think those are basically the biggest differences between them.

          For me, Merkley is the most electable and will be the most effective progressive legislator. I believe we can depend on both Novick and Merkley to cast progressive votes. However, Merkley has shown serious legislative skills here in Oregon. He was able to unite the Dem caucus and get Repubs on board with countless progressive bills. I like and respect Novick, I just think Merkley will be a dynamite progressive legislator in the Senate.

          Netroots Director for Oregon Senate Candidate Jeff Merkley

          by sarahlane on Sat May 10, 2008 at 03:21:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Being against raising the S.S. cap is a Positive? (0+ / 0-)

            Plus, consider that neither of them is going to sweep into the Senate and begin leading it on day 1, so that aspect, which I question to begin with, is a non-factor in getting Smith replaced.  Where I can see Novick speaking directly to issues in much the way Feingold, Whitehouse, etc are now doing, I can't see Merkley being anything more than a comfortable back-bencher, voting where Schumer wants him to.  Schumer and Emanuel in charge of the DSCC and DCCC have done a great deal of damage to the Democratic party in their pursuit of the improvement of their personal cliques/power bases.

            And how about Merkley's (not his campaign's) statement on civil marriage for gays? Vard responded to your comment here last month.  Have you gotten clarification from him on what he meant when he spoke to her?  You may not want that to be an issue in this campaign, but that choice isn't up to you.  Compare it to what Merkley's new ad is claiming are 'important issues' about Novick and see how far you get with it in the Portland LGBT community.

            Conservatism is a function of age - Rousseau
            I've been 19 longer'n you've been alive - me

            by watercarrier4diogenes on Sat May 10, 2008 at 08:51:48 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You have clearly not met Merkley, watched the leg (0+ / 0-)

              In 2005 he almost got arrested after being repeatedly gaveled down on the floor when the Republican speaker changed House rules to block the passage of a civil unions bill.  Then after leading Democrats back to power he passed it in the next session.

              Thats the kind of fighter I want.  Merkley isn't what you portray him as.  You should really get to know him better.

              Check out my Oregon politics blog Forward Oregon

              by bdunn on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:55:00 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Novick was one time asked a question (5+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        Terre, lams712, MacJimi, maloney, tash5809

        who he would support - and I think he said he would support the (little known) independent in the race.  That's because Novick thinks he is a better candidate than Merkley - that's why Novick is challenging Merkley.

        I would not make too much of that at all. Novick is a true, strong progressive and I support him.

        "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

        by JLFinch on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:10:14 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's an issue for me (5+ / 0-)

          Just in that it demonstrates he's still not reliable to avoid stupid comments. Merkley was asked, if he couldn't vote for yourself, who would he vote for? He said Novick. Novick was asked the same question, and he said the independent's name, the guy who's running as an alternative to the Democratic party, and could play the role as spoiler. It was a stupid statement, and after over 50 seconds of awkward silences, and some hemming and hawing, he changed his answer to say he would support the Democratic nominee, and I'm sure he would. It just shouldn't be so hard to say the answer that every Democrat should have down pat.

          Prof. McCain
          By Iraq, is Pakistan near,
          While Czechoslovakia's here.
          Sunnis are Shi'a,
          Sudan is Somalia,
          and Putin's the German premier.

          by Michael D on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:19:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  didn't change the answer (2+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            JLFinch, maloney

            he was clear that he was not answering a question about the general election. And I suspect he paused because he didn't want to be dishonest, and went with his gut.

            The chance that Frohnmayer will drop out (and Novick said on live statewide TV he hoped he would drop out) is probably better with a Novick nominee; he's spoken well of Steve.

            •  You can only vote for an independent (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Preemptive Karma

              in the general.

              Prof. McCain
              By Iraq, is Pakistan near,
              While Czechoslovakia's here.
              Sunnis are Shi'a,
              Sudan is Somalia,
              and Putin's the German premier.

              by Michael D on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:32:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Thats crap TJ (1+ / 0-)

              Recommended by:
              Preemptive Karma

              in order to vote for Frohnmayer either Novick would have to vote for Frohnmayer in the general or quit the Democratic party and register as an independent to vote for Frohnmayer in the primary, which considering his lack of party loyalty wouldn't be surprising.

              Check out my Oregon politics blog Forward Oregon

              by bdunn on Sat May 10, 2008 at 06:58:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  wow, harsh (0+ / 0-)

                I don't think you really have any call to question Steve's loyalty. He's worked his ass off for the party in Oregon in his career.

                I like that when Steve criticizes a Democrat, it's about straying from Democratic principles.

                I feel like when Merkley attacks, it's never on policy but on side non-policy stuff like Obama and even Bono (he brought up Bono in a debate one time!! Silly). This seems like more of that.

                By the way Bradley, one of the kids at Willamette in your group said you work for Merkley. Is that true?

                •  Nope. Not true. (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  Preemptive Karma

                  Bradley volunteers for the Merkley campaign when he can. But he is not on staff and is not paid.

                  Unless the Willamette student who told you this said "work" in the sense that Bradley is a super volunteer and works very, very hard. He's a passionate young man--who happens to believe strongly in Jeff Merkley.  

                  I very much admire Bradley's intensity and passion. He just graduated from Willamette this week (congrats Bradley!!)  and I hope he'll be able to spend a lot more time with the campaign. He's got a real affinity for field work, as I understand it. That's definitely NOT something I'm good at. :)

                  Carla--Netroots Outreach, Jeff Merkley for Oregon

                •  How many times do I have to say NO? (0+ / 0-)

                  you have been branding about this false accusation for months and I have told you time and time again that I volunteer my time and nothing more.

                  This is bordering on libel.

                  Check out my Oregon politics blog Forward Oregon

                  by bdunn on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:38:11 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Also (7+ / 0-)

          Novick entered the race early, before Merkley. He's not in it because he thinks Merkley sucks.

          Prof. McCain
          By Iraq, is Pakistan near,
          While Czechoslovakia's here.
          Sunnis are Shi'a,
          Sudan is Somalia,
          and Putin's the German premier.

          by Michael D on Sat May 10, 2008 at 02:20:05 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Novick definitely supports nominee (4+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        JLFinch, la2tempe, lams712, maloney

        "But he said that he wouldn't necessarily support a Democrat if it wasn't him"

        That's not accurate at all. Novick has always said he will support the Democratic nominee in the general.