I think this JTTF issue will be a very important issue but I think Sam Adams best friend is really Barack Obama. Why? Obama will bring huge amounts of young folks who will say "dude - that guy looks like Rivers Cuomo!" when they open the voters guide.

Sam Adams brought up a good issue.

I didn't see the debate, but I have heard about the Dozono's JTTF controversy on OPB Radio and on the Mercury's blog. Although I reluctantly favor Sam Adams, I was look for reasons to support Dozono. However, Dozono's support for re-entering the JTTF is a deal breaker for me.

I don't see how a private sector businessperson expects to have better negotiations on the JTTF issue than Mayor Potter, a former police chief with security clearance.

In a race that's had very few fireworks, Sam knew he needed one "gotcha" moment that didn't seem like it came from him.

I wouldn't say that he played Randy Neves, but Neves certainly bit when Sam offered up the JTTF line, and Sho's response was better than Sam ever dreamed.

It's the one moment that's getting replayed and will hurt Sho a great deal.

The question in my mind now isn't whether Sam comes out ahead on May 20, it's whether he can hit 50% and avoid having to debate Sho for another 6 months.

Pathetic.

In this corner, Sam Adams, a fiscally irresponsible hotdog keen to saddle Portland citizens with even more debt from even more stupid projects.

In the other corner, Sho Dozono, who is looking more and more like a doofus--the only doofus that the Portland Business Alliance could come up with--who offers Potter-style "visioning" pablum in response to every question.

Pathetic.

Can we have Francesconi back, pretty please?

Previously, Sho has appeared not to have any details. Now, he comes off as though he's trying to hide the details. Given his "I'm not stating a position on Wal-Mart, I just don't think you should have a sign opposing a Wal-Mart in Sellwood" position, I wonder what his "real" position on Wal-Mart is? I wonder what his "real" position on bikes and streetcars is?

And given his preference of a "strong mayor" role, I wonder what his "real" position on being "more collaborative" is?

Whats with these homies dissin' my tram?

In this corner, Sam Adams, a fiscally irresponsible hotdog keen to saddle Portland citizens with even more debt from even more stupid projects.

Irresponsible things like fixing the potholes outside of my house that have been there since the Katz administration or is it recycling a bridge that will be thrown away so walkers and bikers will have a safe route across I-405? Those are very irresponsible and holy cow is recycling a bridge that would otherwise be thrown in a scrap pile a stupid thing to do.

These are the facts- Sam wants to fix our aging infrastructure. Our roads are falling apart and need upkeep that hasn't been performed for years. If you haven't taken a peak at the Sellwood bridge you might want to because I guarantee you'll second guess yourself the next time you think about driving over it. We can't keep putting these things off. Quit passing the buck to your kids and own up to it. Someone is going to have to pay for it eventually and considering you're using all of it it might as well be all of us. Also what is more Portland than reusing a bridge to build a safer bike/pedestrian bridge? It's not that expensive and you've got to admit it's pretty cool.

The tram was kind of stupid but now that it's built I'm ok with it. My parents want to come visit me to ride it so there is a little tourism dollars to the city.

Also, Adams didn't create the tram. He became commissioner after that happened. He did make sure that OHSU, not the city, paid the cost overruns, though. And a lot of the complaints about "wasting taxpayer money" seem to fall apart when you realize that most of the spending isn't from the general fund, but from sources dedicated to a particular area, or a particular type of project, or to one project in particular. It's not as though, if the project weren't approved, more potholes would get filled. A recent example of this is people complaining about recycling the bridge. The money from that can only be used in the river district, which is a pretty limited area. People are saying the money should be used for something cheaper in Sellwood, or for potholes throughout the city, but none of those things are inside the river district. It's an ignorant argument.

Everyone wants to fix the aging infrastructure.

The fact that Sam Adams can talk such nuts and bolts about it is because he is the transportation commissioner.

Of course he is going to be able to whip out facts and figures--he worked in the Mayor's office for 12 years or so, and has spent two as a Commissioner.

However, that experience doesn't make him a good leader for our City.

I'm voting for Sho Dozono because I like what he has done working outside of and alongside of the city: his work supporting schools, his business experience and meeting a large payroll, his participation on numerous civic boards. I believe he can take his collaborative personality and leadership to the City and do great things at City Hall, for the citizens of Portland, and the State of Oregon.

Look, we all know that campaign supporters hop on here with messaging. That's fine. But let's focus on topics.

I for one think both folks meet the first test for mayor. But after the PSU debate then the Duin article, then last night's debate, it's clear that Sho hasn't taken the time to learn about the city he's trying to lead.

Not knowing abouttransportation funding sources. Not knowing about affordable housing. Waffling on issues when its convenient. These are things unbefitting of someone I'm asked to elect.

Sam's got plenty of baggage. So does Sho. But I'll take backbone, ambition and even ego over "back to basics" and "don't feed panhandlers" and eastside versus westside rhetoric.

I'm voting for Sho Dozono because I like what he has done working outside of and alongside of the city: his work supporting schools, his business experience and meeting a large payroll, his participation on numerous civic boards. You forgot his inability to answer a straightforward question seemingly only able to answer with some mumbling and rambling mixed with the word "collaboration" thrown in a few times, his lack of ideas, his association with the PBA, his apparent support of Wal-Mart, his support of the JTTF, and his lack of knowledge about a lot of issues facing Portland.

The fact that Sam Adams can talk such nuts and bolts about it is because he is the transportation commissioner.

Of course he is going to be able to whip out facts and figures--he worked in the Mayor's office for 12 years or so, and has spent two as a Commissioner.

However, that experience doesn't make him a good leader for our City.

Yeah cause Mayor Potter's lack of experience really has helped us out for the last 4 years right? I wonder what Sho's version of visionPDX is going to be or wait maybe I don't want another mayor in the mold of Mayor Potter? Sam's experience will let him hit the ground running where Sho's experience in the way a city works is sorely lacking in detail. From listening to Sho interview and debate he's made it painfully obvious he really doesn't have any idea what's going on. I'm sure someone in the PBA put him up to run because they knew they'd be able to push him around if by some miracle he won.

I am sick of the comparison of Sho to Tom Potter almost as much as I am of the comparison of Sam to Vera Katz.

Neither of these two candidates is a carbon copy of another mayor, past or present. They are both individuals. I'd like to see people quit trying to link either of them to Mayor's Katz and Potter in terms of style. Let them be who they are!

It's ridiculous that people are saying Sho Dozono = Tom Potter or is a protoge of Tom Potter. In fact, he worked collaboratively for many years with Mayor Vera Katz (and Sam Adams for that matter) on projects such as school funding, post 911 impact on business and civic life (which were huge, if you can stretch your memory back that far), and many other issues. Is it because he is not from City Hall or is it because he is a male over 50 that makes people equate him with Tom Potter?

Recent polls suggest that people are more or less happy with the City and how it is run, problems notwithstanding. Thus, blogging opinions about Mayor Tom Potter are possibly not all that relevant. That is, maybe the comparison to Tom Potter isn't terrible to have, it's just grossly inaccurate and baseless.

This discussion about the two candidates should be based on who's going to be a better captain of the good ship Portland. After all, we do not have a "Strong Mayor" of Portland. We have a system in which working together, working with the community, collaborating, and moving forward is what counts. The Mayor is not King or Queen and can do anything they want.

I happen to believe that Sho Dozono would make a better captain - he is smart, hard working, has life experience in both public (as on various civic boards) and private sectors, and has widespread community support. He is well liked. Maybe not so good in TV interviews, but I can overlook that because I know better. Other than the oft-quoted WW article about a business mistake he acknowledges and takes responsibility for, you cannot find people who talk down about him. That is expressly not the case for Sam Adams, a man who is widely disliked within the City of Portland and County -- the employees who make up the City. There's no question he's smart and hard working. He's just also brusque and dismissive and uninclusive and arrogant.

From Steve Duin about Sho Dozono: In the 90-odd minutes I spent listening to Sho Dozono on Wednesday was a marvelous adventure in ideology:

I have no idea what the man is talking about. I have no idea what the mayoral candidate "gets" that is beyond the reach of City Commissioner Sam Adams.

And Sho has no ideas.

Just the man we need in charge of our city right?

Maybe not so good in TV interviews, but I can overlook that because I know better.

I don't, therefore I cannot vote for him. I've got to base my decisions on who to vote for by media reports, editorials, and most importantly, debates and interviews.

I can't believe how terrible Sho comes off in public. He doesn't usually complete a sentence. His thoughts are often rambling. He didn't answer many questions I've seen posed to him. In the little time I've been tuning in, he has even contradicted himself on a few issues. Oh, and that Sho Dozono campaign sign that looked like a blue platter hanging on his jacket during the debate last night was pretty dumb.

Lastly, "Sho gets it. Sho gets it done." C'mon, that doesn't mean anything! What is IT?

I'm sure the guy is a great progressive business owner. I know someone that works for him and only offers praise. In my mind, I just see him as a weak, Potter type mayor. Someone whom in my opinion was a do nothing, no vision mayor for the most part.

What I cannot understand is what happened to the other candidates running for Mayor? Why weren't they invited to the debate? Why is the Portland media presenting the mayoral race like there are only 2 candidates? What happened to our democracy? I believe that the press is afraid to have real issues raised by real people......or perhaps they are afraid that one of other lesser known candidates will make their favored candidate look bad by bringing up REAL/current issues. Perhaps the press would have had something more interesting to talk about rather than the 2 candidates attire had they actually invited ALL of the mayoral candidates and had a REAL debate.

"Tax 'em Sam" Adams readily admits he's going to push for tax hikes, new fees and increases in existing fees if he becomes mayor. He wants to turn Portland into another San Francisco, and that would leave only the very wealthy to be able to afford to live here.

As a Portland resident, I think "Tax 'em Sam" Adams is not at all a good choice to lead Portland.

I'm voting for SHO.

My favorite part of the debate was when Sho was asked about the Cesar Chavez street renaming issue and what he would do differently - he answered the question by first saying that he would clearly explain the process for how a street is to be renamed. He then went on to talk about how he would not promise something that he could not guarantee. Sam's first response was to point out how Sho, "Didn't answer the question." Sam loves trying to point out how Sho didn't answer the question. I know Sho might mumble a bit or not speak clearly into the microphone like the polished Sam, but I got the answer the first time, and Sam was 3 feet away from him and paying attention. This little moment really speaks volumes about how I think Sam is. He doesn't listen to other people and he's quick to negatively criticize someone.

Sam, if you could learn to listen you would get my vote. You do get things done. But you certainly don't understand me and what I feel is Portland.

Sho, "Mr. Portland" hears me, listens to me and knows what I think Portland is.

Garrett So now the bridge gets done, not in a normal council deliberation but in a backroom deal between Adams and Salzman.

There's my complaint--why do we have to slam everything through while overriding public input and normal process?

This debate went just like the ones before and, after their meeting on OPB's Think Out-loud, after: Sho Dzonon reveals his utter lack of competency with regard to how city budgets are drawn, which city agencies do what, and bumbles into revealing something about himself that he would rather not have (I don't know where my opponent got that information... but its true) and Sam comes off as just a bit smarter than most people in Portland like their politicians to be. To me this often seems like a Gore-Bush election where the majority know damn well that one of the candidates simply doesn't know enough about government to in power and the other, despite his political smarts and policy knowledge just can't break through the folksy bumbling of his opponent and I think MC's comments reflect this. Sam frequently comes off as if he is in a hurry, but come on people its Portland are we not supposed to be about substance over style? Sho simply has no substance, no plan and will spend three years finding out ala Potter that he doesn't really like the work of being mayor or know how to do it. He, like Potter, wants to do the Ribbon Cutting, the Visioning, and the ambassadorial trips but he doesn't know what it takes to get a majority on the council or how to run an agency. It seems to me that most of Sho's considerable support comes from the he's-a-nice-guy or he-understands-my-problems vein and neither makes him a true progressive or competent to be mayor of this city.

"Tax 'em Sam" Adams readily admits he's going to push for tax hikes, new fees and increases in existing fees if he becomes mayor. He wants to turn Portland into another San Francisco, and that would leave only the very wealthy to be able to afford to live here."

Um... a whiff of homophobia? SF is a delightful place to live, that is why it is so expensive to live there; high demand. Taxes in and of themselves do not make a city and expensive place to live, nor do they inhibit growth, SF and NYC grow at a rapid pace despite an abundance of taxes. Why? Because the opportunities, financial and cultural are so vast and potentially rewarding that people will pay whatever it takes to live there.

<h2>As for taxes to fix the infrastructure, how else is it going to get done? You can not rebuild an entire city's aging roads (and by-the-by Portland is not on the hook for the Sellwood Bridge, Multnomah County is, the county owns, maintains and operates all of the bridges in the county, Ted Wheeler wants to form a regional transit compact or tax sharing authority to raise the funds needed to repair roads all of us end up using). When the infrastructure was first laid down it was built with massive levies and bond issues which are simply indirect taxes. At least with a dedicated road tax you know where the money is going and you can effectively evaluate if the funds are well spent or not.</h2>