Respectfully disagree----what a concept! This is why I find the 5th District primary more inspiring than the US Senate primary (or what the presidential primary is turning into). And possibly this is an argument for shorter contested primaries!

This was as civil (meaning common courtesy, consideration of others) as the substantial issue debates in the first (1982) 5th Dist. Primary! Very impressed with both Kurt and Steve---how nice to see candidates who obviously like and respect each other. What a concept!

Hooray for Kurt and Steve not being afraid to talk about legal procedures needed rather than just debating what "amnesty" is.

Now, I am sure there are Novick supporters who will say they didn't like this because they want their candidate "to have an edge". Fine--each individual is allowed to say what they like, but NOT to say "everyone should like what I like".

Let me make this point. If Novick wins the US Senate primary, my energies in the fall will be directed in favor of the 5th Dist. nominee and our local legislative candidates---people who are a pleasure to be around, don't consider themselves to be the ayatollahs of Democratic "principle", and don't always sound angry.

I want problems solved. I don't think angry people solve problems as well as negotiators. (To use an old example, I think Sen. Pres. Kitzhaber was more successful than Sen. Pres. Fadeley---a man who was as edgy and angry and "shoot from the hip" as Novick is now.)

If that means I am not a "progressive" or some such rot, tough luck.

I admire Kurt, Steve, and any other candidate who can make their case without sounding angry. I have that attitude, and I VOTE!

If that doesn't meet with the approval of Stephanie, TJ, et al, not my problem.

I was frustrated by this interview.

I like Kurt personally, and his heart is in the right place, but his voting record and positions are also significantly more conservative than Hooley on a range of issues. Steve Marks seemed like a candidate to challenge him who was both more progressive and electable. But from watching this interview, Marks seemed completely incapable of drawing any meaningful policy distinctions between himself and Kurt, even though I know for a fact they exist on issues ranging from the environment, to labor, to justice, where Kurt is more conservative than both Steve and Darlene.

I'm not saying in tone Steve should be negative or angry -- but he should be able to articulate the case for his candidacy comparing himself to his most serious opponent. Not being able to name a single vote that Kurt has cast with which he disagreed was a killer for me. It makes me think he really is better off as the behind-the-scenes policy wonk and not the politician.

I guess it's Kurt by default.

<hr/>