Why is this stuf a suprise to anyone still. When are we goin to learn how to support our own and stop hoping that the otherside is not as bad as we thought, wake up - they are that bad or worse so get to work trying to get a democrat elected. Saxton is no more a moderate than george bush was when he ran as one in 2000 oops.

Assuming K. Mannix does not win the Republican primary, and I hope to God he doesn't, I may very well vote for Ron Saxton this fall. I have always voted Democratic since 1976, but I think it is time for Salem to get a wakeup and stop slamming taxpayers with higher taxes and more "fees". I want a governor who can run this state within the budget.

The Oregonian is completely bent on getting Saxton elected governor. They are going after Mannix and they are trying to pump Kulongoski up just long enough to get him through the primary knowing that his record on the issues and 33% approval rating make him a liability for Democrats in November.

Did you notice how today’s editorial pontificated against the Grand Ronde's independent media campaign in support of Jim Hill (who on principle opposes a casino in the gorge) and yet intentionally leaves out that Saxton has benefited from the tribes opposition to Mannix.

No "Ad Watch" from the Oregonian about Kulongoski's misleading ads implying that somehow Jim Hill wants more gambling in the state which could not be farther from the truth.

So, Ron Saxton will sign "almost" any abortion limit that Oregon Right to Life can push through the Legislature. Mannix, I'm sure, would sign any (not "almost any") abortion limiting bill. So why does David R. think Saxton is better on that issue? Maybe it's because he thinks Saxton can win in November and Mannix can't. This is a sign (already seen in previous years) that more RR types are thinking more about winning by accepting less than losing by trying to get the so-called perfect candidate.

By the way, where's the quote from Saxton saying that "He's made that clear this time" ?

Bob Tiernan (Libertarian).

Howdy Bob!

I've known other people who had the same name as controversial politicians. I'll bet you are better looking than the guy Devlin defeated--esp. if you don't have the scowl and can be polite to people.

Interesting comment I heard today. A man in our church is a very gentle soul of the same branch of midwestern GOP that Gerald Ford comes from. The sort of person who still has the Jackie Winters for Congress bumpersticker and was still angry in the fall of 2004 about the way Zupancic treated Jackie (Zupancic lost Marion County in both the primary and general of 2004--whatever our disagreements with Jackie, many locals believe no young sarcastic outsider had the right to treat our state senator that way).

So, I asked how he voted for Gov. in the primary. Interesting reasoning process which I doubt shows up in polls or focus groups:

Tough decision. Nothing wrong with being an outsider. But this friend of ours had heard somewhere that Saxton said something about only serving one term (news to me). Saxton would spend half of his term figuring out how things work.

Kevin Mannix (a local to those of us in Marion County), love him or hate him, has a reputation for getting things done. So the final decision was to vote for Kevin.

Personally I hope Atkinson comes in first or second because he is a new breed (not fighting the old fights from 4 years ago), in his best moments sounds quite serious, and has not run negative ads. Wouldn't it be great if that behavior were rewarded?!

As much as everyone likes to shuffle their feet when it comes to Teddy K, the state will give him a passing grade in November because they can't point to anything concrete... Teddy just kept his head down and didn't have any big f-up moments that stick in people's minds.

Given that this state's GOP party is a long-standing joke (seriously guys, Saxton and Mannix are the best you could do??), this election will actually give Teddy a boost in popularity. It gives him a chance to tout his achievements for once and seem light-years better when contrasted with the crazy Republican candidates.

I predict a 59%-to-41% win for Ted over Ron this Nov....

That is quite an endorsement. "Can't point to anything concrete" and "didn't have any big f-up moments". Can't wait to see those ads. They are sure to inspire Oregon voters to help Kulongoski get above the 49% he got in '02.

November’s election is being decided tomorrow. If Kulongoski is our nominee the Democrats are in for a long painful general election. Sink with Ted or jump ship to Westlund? Lose or Lose.

59%-41% is ridiculous on so many fronts. If you are going to propagandize at least try to make it somewhat believable.

[Comment falsely impersonating Lars Larson deleted. -editor.]

Yes, Saxton & Mannix are both awful on the issue of a woman's right to choose an abortion. So is Westlund. So if that's your issue, vote for Kulongoski. He's GREAT on that issue.

Hey GW,

Actually, I wasn't endorsing or propagandizing for Ted K at all (disclosure: I voted for Pete Sorenson in this primary). Merely stating the obvious.

My point is, voters reward incumbant pols who keep their nose clean and don't do/say anything too stupid. Sometimes sad, sometimes true. You could make the same argument that Wyden, Smith, DeFazio, Hooley, etc are all in power because of the power of vanilla incumbancy. This is course flies in the face of some poll numbers, but I think they don't tell the story. Why? Dem voters have complained he's not quite liberal enough, but in the end, he's got a pretty good track record and they'll vote for him. Republican voters who dislike his job are saying so because, well, because he's a DEM. The problem for conservatives is that they're hard-pressed to find anything TOO liberal about Ted. He gets a passing, middle of the road grade from moderate Republicans, so... there ya go. Victory for Ted in November.

OK, maybe 59%-41% is a little hopeful, but I don't think by much.

BFD about Reinhard. The man is clueless on his best day, more commonly just a raving bigot and generally mean-spirited.

I'd like to see the Oregonian have editorial writers who actually examine the complexities of public affairs. But alas, whether it's columnists or letter writers, the O only wants to publish set-piece "conflict" stuff.

<h2>AS for Westlund, one, why has he got an ad on this website, and two, can anyone explain why I should vote for him? It's not as though finally realizing that the GOP platform consists of greed, paranoia and bigotry is exactly a stunning, unanticipated piece of analysis on Westlund's part. In 2002 I voted for my cat rather than Kulongoski, who struck me then (and no less now) as combining two main characteristics--opportunism and dullness--that don't exactly make for an effective governor. My intention right now is to vote for my cat AGAIN.</h2>