So Blueoregon is making a pretty big deal about this little giveaway--and I'm sure the four house candidates who get the money will appreciate it. But is $1,000 in four races enough to make a difference? And why just four races?

According to Blumenauer's last campaign finance report, he has over $280,000 in the bank--and no opponent to spend it against. What's he going to do with the rest of that money?

If he is tithing, it should be 10%.

Beyond the potential for volunteers and a campaign contribution, this contest highlights possible movement in the Oregon House and the significance of November 7th, 2006. To the extent that Oregonians become aware of and involved in these House races, the contest will have proven useful.

Moreover, the number of contested races exhibits the top-notch candidate recruitment efforts by Representative Merkley and the House Leadership; they should be applauded for their efforts.

Besides, it's kinda' fun.

I'm pretty sure larry thinks its kinda of fun because he made the top 10. I voted for him in both rounds, we need to win that district. When I worked for a state senate race as an intern earlier this year it was a big deal even when we got $25 donation. THis is a really cool thing I hope that the other congressmen do it. Also I read yesterday that Wyden has 1.2 million in the bank, he could really help a lot with a program like this.

Fair is fair. Last cycle, Ron Wyden gave something like several hundred thousand dollars to Oregon candidates. Not sure what the total is or will be this cycle, but I'm sure it'll be plenty.

I didnt know that but its good to here. Thanks for the info Kari.

I hope the coastal demos will help out Deborah Boone. A hard worker and moderate that works passionately for her constituents. Never pushy, and down-to-earth attitude describes her well. Sometimes we disagree but she does listen and decides without prejudice.

Publicity stunt. Nothing more. Let's call an apple an apple here and not try turning it into an orange. Earl Blumenauer is gaining a lot of free publicity from this stunt, and it is the real reason for such a gimmick. This isn't altruism folks! Open your eyes and see it for what it is - an illusionist trick.

That's awesome that there are so many volunteers.

Though I hope it's not because they're all automatically checked when you vote. I'll certainly be helping the Galizio campaign. One of the many candidates the PSU College Democrats have put on our list to lend a hand.

This is a technical question (and should not be taken as a criticism of what Blumaneur and Wyden have done with their money contributing to candidates for Oregon state offices). Anyone know the limitations on how this money could be spent for issues advertising to get a coherent Democratic message out there, independent of candidates who may or may not be emphasizing certain aspects of the Democratic message in their races?

Our party is still suffering from a failure to follow the first rule of politics and PR: Have a single message what we stand for that resonates in the gut with voters (like "it's the economy stupid" and all that followed from that in 1992), and repeat, repeat, repeat that message in as many forums and as many times as possible.

Tell ya what, ace strategist-- I've got a way for you to take a message and repeat, repeat, repeat as many times possible. It's called phonebanking.

JB Eads -

You know, that kind of smart-aleck remark to a serious question is exactly why a lot of the electorate think our party is mainly the party of a bunch of self-centered, clueless, juvenile jerks and don't vote for us. You also would do well to at least consider the possibility that people are asking serious questions based on experience (perhaps, but not necessarily, before you were even born) doing things like volunteering in campaigns, phone-banking, GOTV, precinct walking, etc.

So here is an honest and serious question on which you might have some insight that could help a lot of Democratic candidates like Blumaneur and Wyden decide how to spend funds to help our party win: An increasing proportion of the population uses wireless mobile and online means as their primary communication modes rather than the land-lines targeted by phonebanking. In addition, that population skews younger and lower-income, which are demographic groups that have increasingly lower rates of participation in politics and voting. What is the message and mass mechanism for communicating that message the party should be developing with the help of interested elected officials like Blumaneur?

A lot of people are trying to figure this out because it will be the key to overcoming the structural advantage the radical right-wing has built up communicating their message to their base through certain media and evangelical/fundamental religious channels.

At least for now, you can't phonebank to cellphones, and MySpace and YouTube ain't it.

Political candidates seek youths at MySpace, YouTube http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2006-08-17-politicians-myspace_x.htm

Politicos beware: You live in YouTube's world. http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0818/p01s03-uspo.html

As effervescent as the first article is, Angelides isn't favored right now and no one believes it made the difference for Lamont. The second article illustrates how the viral and visceral nature of these media means a candidate or party will find it hard to control the message, if this is even possible, without being considerably more agile and skilled than folks like Blumaneur and Wyden (and the DNC, DSCC, DCCC and the state party) are right now.

askquestions1st,

Myspace isnt very effective to get the youth vote. Most high schoolers (such as I) will join lots of groups and never actually pay attention to the groups or to profiles of candidates. Most people use Myspace to talk with friends and such not to do political action. But I like that candidate are exporling ways to reach the youth especailly since many college age people live in dorms or locked apretment buildings where you cant go door to door.

AQ1: As usual, your brilliance is matched only by your modesty.

I'll be sure to let folks know about this You Tube thing while I'm out ruining the Democratic party.

Thanks, btw, for your ongoing and insightful to this site. Yay you.

to get a coherent Democratic message out there

Isn't it more important to have local messages? Or are you saying a hot topic in Salem will win votes in Medford, or a hot topic in Portland will win votes on the coast?

There are districts where having actually met the candidate is more important than "party message".

There may not be districts like that in the Portland area, but there are elsewhere in the state.

16yearoldwithopinion -

Thanks for the insights you offer. You make two good points about reaching youth if our party is to regain power: 1) Some of the trendy "Web 2.0" venues aren't necessarily good channels for political communication with younger people who really incorporate the online world into their daily lives. 2) Some of the old-fashioned methods for politicking are also not good ways to reach out to younger voters either for a host of reasons.

The interesting question is whether the new ways that politicians are trying to reach people to which allude inherently have a sufficient multiplier effect that they will reach enough people, with a sufficiently compelling message that will actually motivate them to vote, to make a difference. The right wing has done this in a very concious way through control of certain media channels and a concerted effort to communicate that they share the values of fundamentalist/evangelical religionists.

LT -

To be fair, we have to be look at the facts here: If what you describe as the key to winning in many districts has indeed been the case in recent elections, it has given us our current bitterly divided legislature, and a governor who to date has exhibited suprisingly poor leadership skills to boot. So it's hard to see how that is a recipe for good governance. What's more, the right wing has grown to dominance in many states, and fought to a draw in the Oregon legislature, in large part by articulating a coherent message that party candidates echo in their local districts. A message that resonates with certain values of voters in the absence of a more powerful, more resonate competing message from our candidates.

My impression is that you might be mistaking hewing to a party message, regardless of whether or not that message conveys a set of meaningful governing values, with articulating a set of meaningful governing values that the parties' candidates embrace, and communicate as the governing values their local districts want them to defend.

Nice gesture, but these chosen ones are targeted anyway and the $1,000 each will mean nothing. THose are the ones that Future PAC will give gobs to , while ignoring everyone else, and maybe that's the way it has to be.

In recent years, we have, against the odds, almost knocked off Republicans like Betsy CLose, Tim Knopp, John Mabrey, Jim Hill (not ours but the former Hillsboro Rep.), Jane Loken, and Mannix in '98. Many of the Dems received little or no help, and, if so it came too late. It bothers me that not only FUTURE PAC but most PACS don't really try to find winnable races outside of the box.

<h2>Still, the contest was a good idea. Thanks, Earl!</h2>