I understand Blue Oregon is generally in favor of Speaker Jeff Merkley to be our next senator, but is says something about Blue Oregon that they can still cover the facts on Steve Novick. Personally I support Steve Novick, but so far I have given to BOTH campaigns because both people are doing something we will never see from Gordon Smith, we get to see them. On October 24, 2007 the Washington County Democratic Central Committee was lucky enough to get a visit from Speaker Merkley. I am greatful that we, as Democrats can talk about the differences with out suppressing news about each other. Steve Novick and John Kroger(Oregon Attorney General Candidate) are two very progressive individuals on our ballots for the primary next year that would represent Oregon in a way many progressives would appreciate. Speaker Merkley would do a very good job as well, that is why I've given both candidates money. Their messages are what we've needed in our state, we only get a shot at Gordon Smith every six years, both individuals would be a welcome replacement. Its time for Oregon to be a misfit vote in the senate, we need not conform to the old ways any longer. Gordon Smith voting with Bush all of the time certainly isn't us!

I understand that Steve has many devoted fans. I have also been in conversations with friends who say that, graded on a scale of the most inspiring campaigns of our lifetimes, this primary is not even close. I understand there are those who haven't been involved in politics much before this and were brought into the process by Steve or someone else. That is great--new blood and all that. But enthusiastic volunteers alone won't win an election--it takes convince those who are swing voters, have no interest in partisan politics, may be thinking it is time for Gordon to go (in Jan. 1996 Gordon ran those ads saying "we're all real tired of career politicians", but at what point does he fall into that category?) but have yet to hear any reason which makes sense to them for changing US Senators. Primaries are supposed to be a battle of ideas, not just "our guy is great--vote for our guy".

Yes, we only get a shot at Gordon every 6 years, which is why it is important to attract the support of people who are not political junkies. I am glad that Steve and Jeff are appearing to Democratic groups who warmly welcome them.

But how many people who post here in favor of a candidate have taken a non-political friend to hear their favorite candidate?

Which of the candidates are talking about, for instance, Charlie Rangel's proposed tax cuts for middle class and lower income working people (which has been in the news recently)?

How often are they talking about the problem of National Guard troops being in Iraq when there is a disaster at home (Katrina previously, S. California fires now)? Which of the candidates is talking about veterans being re-integrated into society after long deployments--incl. education, job and health care concerns?

Everyone talks about health care, but how well does the COBRA system work when people leave a job where they had health care? Is that system working fine as it is (some companies contract with another company to handle all the COBRA paperwork) or should there be some government oversight?

And for any candidate (federal, state, legislative) what are their views on specific campaign finance reform proposals?

I've been involved in campaigns which changed from a Republican to a Democratic office holder. It is a lot of work. "We have a fine candidate" is not enough.

There are people already devoted to their chosen candidate who say "Our guy is a great guy! Look at the website, read the biography, watch videos of speeches and you will like our guy."

Except voters (even those who read blogs) have the right to say they are not impressed at this point by either Senate candidate.

Recently, I saw Tavis Smiley and Cornell West on Charlie Rose. One of the quotes (which I have emailed to a friend who has chosen a Senate candidate) was "Obama is selling hope, but where is the audacity?" (word play on Obama's book title).

I have known Steve for years, and have heard Steve speak locally. I watched Jeff as Speaker and heard him give a dynamite speech during the election--at a tribute dinner for someone.

That doesn't mean I am impressed with the campaigns so far. It is as if someone wrote a campaign plan based on what consultants in Portland decided would be the most important issues. And then those of us in the rest of the state are just supposed to choose a side and volunteer on that side. As if they don't have to work at gaining our support because Gordon needs to be gone so we need to choose a side and volunteer.

How did Gordon vote on the Webb amendment (as much time at home as deployed)? If he voted with the good guys, no matter how many stupid votes he cast it is important to be honest about that. Lest someone was leaning Dem and then heard a candidate misquote that particular vote and say "well, if they can't be accurate about his record...".

In Jan. 1996, Ron Wyden ran an inspired campaign. I know it is early but I have yet to see anything close to that from these candidates. Lots of speeches to Democratic audiences, lots of fundraising news and opportunities to volunteer. But where is the detailed discussion of issues?

As you will notice, I didn't pick favorites in this comment. If someone wants to post (on any of the US Senate topics) "Steve/Jeff had a great line at an appearance last night when he said...", or "Jeff/Steve supports the Rangel tax proposals" (or some other specific ) I would love to read about it.

Sen. Jim Webb was on PBS NewsHour tonight talking about his reaction to the Kyl-Lieberman amendment and subsequent actions on Iran.

It may be there are fissures between the (probably spelled wrong) Achmadinajad factions and some of the more moderate factions in Iran. Does either candidate know anything about that country? Kurdistan covers parts of what show up on the map as Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and also I think Syria and part of the old Soviet Union. I had friends in college who were considered themselves Kurds (regardless of what their passport said).

All of that is more complex than one-liners in a speech. If Steve and Jeff are as smart as they seem and everyone says they are, they'll look into that situation and be able to talk intelligently about it by the end of the year if not sooner.

<hr/>