National media cover Gordon Smith's bogus ad
Kari Chisholm
There's lots of news - national news - about Gordon Smith's false advertising campaign, in which he claims that Barack Obama "says Gordon Smith helped lead the fight for better gas mileage and a cleaner environment."
First, an important point for the media hanging out here: Smith's claim is demonstrably false. Obama said no such thing. Demand the proof of the quote. Because the sources cited in Smith's ad don't actually source the quote. (Hat tip to MyDD.)
Update: KGW got it right. Check it out:
Now, to the national coverage:
The (Washington DC) Examiner has Merkley's response:
Democratic Senate candidate Jeff Merkley said Wednesday that a TV ad by Oregon Sen. Gordon Smith, touting his work with Barack Obama, shows that the Republican incumbent is desperate to hold on to his Senate seat."Smith is terrified of running on his record," Merkley told reporters on a visit to Washington. "He's doing everything he can ... to obscure the fact he has voted with President Bush 90 percent of the time. Now he's resorting to TV ads that are downright deceptive." ...
Merkley was in Washington Tuesday and Wednesday to meet with supporters and attend a fundraiser at a Capitol Hill hotel hosted by Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore. The campaign expected the event to raise about $100,000, said Merkley spokesman Matt Canter.
Politico notes Smith's disloyalty to McCain:
Everybody knows it's hard out there for the GOP, and especially in a state like Oregon. But Smith, an early backer of McCain in the primary, is making life difficult for his GOP colleague by breaking the ice for other blue-state Republican to hug Obama. And, keep in mind, Oregon is a state McCain's campaign actually has some hope for and where they went to have the candidate deliver a major climate change speech.
The Wall Street Journal explains why Smith is so desperate to tie himself to Obama:
Sens. Collins and Smith are both closing in on 12 years in the Senate, certainly enough time to establish a voting record, for constituents to form an impression about likability and for a significant portion of them to have some kind of personal contact -- whether a handshake on a parade route or a response to pleas for help untangling a Social Security question.The same is true for Mr. Allen, the challenger in Maine, who has served in the House for nearly 10 years.
Since he works in the Oregon statehouse and not in Washington, Mr. Merkley hasn’t had the same kinds of constituent-service opportunities as the other three, but he isn’t some out-of-left-field unknown, either; he is speaker of the Oregon House of Representatives. If the national dynamic plays a big part in the Oregon race, what matters is whether Mr. Merkley is a credible candidate who can make the most of the advantages of being a Democrat in a Democratic state.
When asked about the Republican Party’s challenges in Oregon, the Senate’s top GOP campaign official said there wouldn’t be any worries for Sen. Smith if not for the Obama effect.
And this summation from Real Clear Politics:
Still, if Democrats are in such good shape that even Republican incumbents are touting their work with Barack Obama, the GOP could face a seriously uphill climb to retain even the most marginal of seats this year. At the very least, the ad seemingly confirms that Oregon's transition from purple state to blue state is nearly complete.
And more from the New York Times, American Prospect, McJoan at DailyKos, Politicker OR, CBS News, the Associated Press, CQ Politics, NewsMax, the Boston Globe, Talking Points Memo, National Public Radio's All Things Considered, OPB News, Grist, and the National Journal.
Oh, and it seems the Washington Post gave all this the full-court press - with no less than three WaPo blogs weighing in: Channel '08 (their video blog) does a rundown of all the Smith ads so far; Chris Cilizza's The Fix notes that "having Obama at the top of the ticket will be a boon for Merkley"; and The Trail blog calls Smith "embattled".
Looks like our little Senate race just made the big time.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Jun 26, '08
Smith needs to go. He's had his ride and junkets. He's out of step with Oregon. Better for him to be selling peas and carrots again.
8:17 a.m.
Jun 26, '08
It's too bad Consumer Reports doesn't weigh in on political advertising -- Gordon Smith's campaign is basically engaged in multi-million dollar consumer fraud.
The good news here is Smith's handlers still look at the media landscape like it's 2002. But this year they're not getting away with it, and there are more built in checks and balances to prevent Smith's bogus anti-war claims and implied endorsements to go unchallenged.
Jun 26, '08
Once again he demonstrates his spineless nature. We look to votes Congressman, not TV ads. You seem to covet re-election at the price of your dignity. For those of us who know how you vote, these ads are an embarrassment. Instead of feeding us steady streams of cross-over, friend of the Ds propaganda, defend your record. That is why you represent us, to make tough choices on our behalf - not on behalf of wealthy donors, like the off-shore banking industry. You could do better, but, despite ample opportunity have not. It's time for change, it's time to don those gloves again and get ready for some real work.
Jun 26, '08
Thank you Senator Smith for your implicit endorsement of Senator Obama! Although McCain doesn't have an office in Oregon (?) and apparently isn't planning on visiting Oregon (?), we appreciate your recognition that change is in the air and will carry the day in Oregon!
8:51 a.m.
Jun 26, '08
I am truly impressed that the traditional media is playing this story and not letting Smith get away with it. There are enough stories out there now that the public is being made aware that what he says isn't true. His image is becoming the traditional politician who will say anything to get elected and you can't trust him. This will be really hard to shake.
At the same time he is running away from his Republican supporters and it is frankly embarassing. This must go over really well in Eastern Oregon.
Jun 26, '08
Clever editing Kari. Here is what Chris Cillizza actually said: having Obama at the top of the ticket will be a boon for Merkley who, to date, has been a less than stellar candidate."
Give us the whole story Kari, we can handle it.
Jun 26, '08
Hey Kari,
I read Merkley's typically empty words calling out Smith for his vote to invoke cloture on the FISA filibuster, but not a peep of criticism for the fake progressive Sen. Jon Tester that he repeatedly cites as his own role model, or the rest of the Democrats, who voted EXACTLY the same way. We know Merkley has always been and continues to be a hypocrite with no moral integrity, so it's nice to see you confirming that by citing Murdoch's WSJ as your kind of supporter.
And by the way, Obama says he "don't do no cowering", but he, Clinton, and "do do weaslin'". On Senate Vote 00158, the vote to cutoff the filibuster:
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting Clinton (D-NY), Not Voting McCain (R-AZ), Not Voting
The only other two "Not Voting", Byrd and Kennedy, have the legitimate justification they are getting treatment for medical crises.
Merkley will just do more of the same old selling out of our Party's values as he has done here in Oregon, and it's disgusting.
Jun 26, '08
Back in 02 and 04, when the President was still popular, Democrats across the country ran reelection campaigns that focused on their support of the Republican worldview (on Iraq, terrorism, taxes etc). Not surprisingly, voters came to the logical conclusion that if the President was so great and the Republicans were right about everything, why not just elect the Republican candidate? No one likes a watered down drink, right?
I see the same thing happening to Smith right now. He's tilting so far in the direction of "Vote for me- I'm practically a Democrat" in order to keep his reelection hopes afloat that it may wind up (ironically) costing him the electing. The more time he spends acknowledging the superiority of the Democratic worldview, the harder it will be to convince voters not to just go ahead and vote for the Democratic candidate in November.
Let’s face it, Jeff Merkely is never going to set the world on fire on the campaign trail, but all he really needs to do is say “I’m Jeff Merkely. Vote for me- I am a Democrat,” and he's as good as in.
No one likes a watered down drink.
Jun 26, '08
"Let’s face it, Jeff Merkely is never going to set the world on fire on the campaign trail, but all he really needs to do is say “I’m Jeff Merkely. Vote for me- I am a Democrat,” and he's as good as in"
However, there are people like my Dad (who is a D) who tells me that even though he and Jeff are both D's, it does not mean Jeff is entitled to my Dad's vote.
What does one say to that?
9:33 a.m.
Jun 26, '08
Your dad is exactly right. No one is entitled to anyone's vote.
But I think a quick review of a) Merkley's and Smith's positions on the issues; and b) a review of Smith's long history of saying one thing and doing another - would lead nearly all Democrats to come home to Jeff Merkley by November.
Jun 26, '08
"Here is what Chris Cillizza actually said: having Obama at the top of the ticket will be a boon for Merkley who, to date, has been a less than stellar candidate."
Ellipses would have been the accurate and ethical way to excerpt that bit. But, as we've all seen repeatedly for ourselves ... ... ...
Jun 26, '08
The entire context of Cizilla's quote is important because too many Democrats like MKD seem to think Merkley's got it in the bag because the GOP brand is in the toilet.
The truth is that Merkley has underperformed as a senate candidate. Or, as Cizzila says, he has been less than stellar.
Jeff Mapes just reported the DSCC had to pump in nearly $400,000 (not including TV commercials) to boost Merkley past Novick in the primary.
Merkley does not have this in the bag despite the GOP problems hanging around Smith's neck.
This campaign has a lot of work to do if it expects to take out Smith. Suffering delusions about what a great campaigner or candidate Merkley is is not going to get you there.
Jun 26, '08
"Thank you Senator Smith for your implicit endorsement of Senator Obama! "
====
Smart man, that Smitty.
Many Indies, NAVs, and smart Democrats will vote for Smitty because he has more clout in DC than Merkley will have. Oregonians like clout (see Packwood and Hatfield). Keeping Smitty in DC provides Oregon with more bacon. Oregonians like bacon.
Smitty wins. Merkley loses. Obama doesn't get 60 Senators, thus has to nominate a moderate to conservative to the 3 SC vacancies in the next four years.
Jun 26, '08
It seems to me that in recent days there was some sort of a discussion on the radio of energy legislation, and mention of Obama co-sponsoring intelligent energy legislation with a surprising Republican from a different part of the country. If memory serves, it was a newer member, not someone who had been around more than a decade.
To Gordon's campaign, exactly how was Gordon a "partner" of Obama on this legislation?
Is his name on the bill as a co-sponsor? Did he actively campaign for it (bring the bill before his caucus, have a press conference to discuss his support of the legislation, talk it up in Oregon or in the national news)?
What CONCRETE steps did he take? And why are we only hearing about this now in an ad, rather than in 2006 in the news?
Gordon is known to be a well mannered guy who sometimes is statesmanlike but more often than not is slick. Saying in an ad and a staffer statement that he "was a partner" with Obama in 2006 legislation without any concrete evidence to back it up only ads to the slick reputation. And the staffer saying "Obama has been pretty vocal in praising himself..." is supposed to get those who voted for Obama in the primary to vote for Gordon? Talk about a cocky, out of touch campaign!
11:13 a.m.
Jun 26, '08
Pat Malach: Ellipses would have been the accurate and ethical way to excerpt that bit.
Ellipses, Mr. Malach, is what you do to separate related comments you want to put in the same quote. You never put ellipses on the end of a quote.
Again you whine about Kari's "ethics" without any foundation in basic fact, which continues to harm your credibility.
And to address the issue head on, as far as I'm concerned the judgements of any Washington Post columnist aren't worth the paper they're printed on. You are aware that they're an utterly different paper than the one that brought down Nixon, right? When Cillizza says "less than stellar candidate" what he really means is "unwilling to sell out to big donors for the cash necessary to go on air". And that's the kind of old-school DC candidacy I think isn't making it in this change election.
Jun 26, '08
Agence France-Presse has hit the worst clunker I've seen so far, referring to him as:
--unless by that they mean he's a "war Republican" who is, additionally, "anti-Iraq." You could argue that's accurate, I suppose.
Although they do manage this lovely bit of understatement:
Only the first?
bn
Jun 26, '08
Can I continue the conversation from the last thread about ads?
Like I said, I'm looking at Merkley putting up no ads, letting Smith establish his identity and grab all the media attention in the race. This is a tactic that has worked effectively for Smith before. When Merkley ran against Novick, letting this happen snowballed into higher poll numbers, big endorsements, and greater fundraising for Merkley's opponent. I contend that Merkley nevertheless won because of a better statewide game, winning most counties not named Multnomah. Pat M credits DSCC money and a negative ad. But whichever you believe, Merkley isn't going to have his advantage over Novick this time around. With Merkley leaving Smith with all the air time now, it already seems to have led to better polling, and if this holds, could very well lead to even better fundraising and big endorsements. So what will Merkley have at the end to counteract the snowball? He won't have a bigger bankroll, more TV spots, or a base outside Multnomah. And that's why I wish Merkley would invest in some ads now, remind people he exists, get people interested in him, and maybe even generate some enthusiasm that could translate into contributions. But I'm no campaign strategist, just a worrywart, it looks like.
So, what's the winning strategy?
12:00 p.m.
Jun 26, '08
Actually, Smith has been losing endorsements, not gaining them. The few that he's still using have been with him for years now. But that list of "Democrats for Smith" has been shrinking.
The winning strategy right now is to be out talking to voters. People won't remember ads in June and July come November. The average voter's memory when it comes to this stuff is a few months, max.
When you're running in a primary where you don't have much name recognition, you have to run ads. Both Merkley and Novick did so, and their name recognition went up.
The way to win is to be doing what Merkley is right now - taking on activities that actually win votes. I guess people just don't get that study after study recently has shown that you get almost no votes from running commercials. And that the #1 way to gain votes is from a person hearing from a candidate personally, followed by having a volunteer at their door telling them about a candidate, and then having a volunteer call a voter and talk to them. This is exactly what is going on right now.
Merkley's out speaking all over the state. Volunteers are talking to voters at the door. Volunteers are talking to people on the phone. At the Third CD Delegate Convention a few weeks back, we had lag time between voting and results. Do you know how they filled that time? Phone bank for Merkley. They had call sheets and scripts all read - all you needed was a cell phone. Don't have a cell phone? There are staff members and such that have extra ones you can use.
Believe me, I was critical of how things were run in the primary. But I've seen some big changes since this has become the general, and I'm seeing a winning campaign strategy being run. They aren't wasting funds running response commercials in June - that's what Gordon Smith wants.
But they do need our financial support so that they can begin running commercials when the time is right - commercials that aren't just a response to Smith. And I'm so tired of this "well let the DSCC fund you." Yes, it sucks they poured so much money into the primary. I've already contacted them and asked to be removed from all their lists, that I will not be supporting them anytime in the future, etc. But that doesn't mean I am going to kiss our chances of winning in November goodbye. Yes, the DSCC will give Merkley money at some point - just as they would have for Novick. But you can't win on DSCC money alone.
Jun 26, '08
My point was not that Merkley has anything in the bag or should take anything for granted- merely that I see a parallel between the failed Republican-lite Democratic campaigns of 02 and 04 and Smith's current Democrat-lite campaign. When a candidate has conceded that his opponent is right about everything (as Smith seems to be doing), the raison d’etre of their candidacy evaporates.
Smith’s campaign will soon acquire the stench of pointlessness if he keeps talking up his Democratic bona fides. The best spin he will be able to put on the question “Why are you running?” will be: “I am slightly less credible and have a slightly worse record than my opponent on all the issues we basically agree on.” I don’t think voters will find that to be a particularly compelling argument.
Merkley needs to get out his fan and start wafting that stench of pointlessness in the voters’ general direction.
12:53 p.m.
Jun 26, '08
James, the Merkley campaign is extremely aware that they don't have ads on TV. They want to get on air, but simply don't have the money right now. So if you want him to win, don't complain - open up your checkbook.
Jun 26, '08
Steven Maurer
You're the worst kind of apologist: a stupid one.
Stick with the 1s and 0s little buddy.
Jun 26, '08
Jenni says running ads now isn't very effective, since Merkley already has name recognition, and Steve says Merkley wants to run ads now but doesn't have the money.
So does Merkley want to run ads now or not? Does Merkley really not have money? What's the name rec for Smith and Merkley?
3:07 p.m.
Jun 26, '08
No, I don't think ads are that effective right now - maybe in a few more weeks, but not now. TV viewership right now is low, but will go back up in a few more weeks.
However, unless you want to just throw a commercial together, they can take a little time to shoot, edit, etc. And you often purchase your tv time in advance in large chunks so you can get a better deal. All of this costs money now, even if you're not going to run commercials for a few more weeks.
4:19 p.m.
Jun 26, '08
I know Steve and he is neither an apologist nor stupid, in fact, quite the opposite of both. You on the other hand... (note the use of ellipsis)
Jun 26, '08
"I know Steve and he is neither an apologist nor stupid"
Then I must congratulate him on his acting skills.
Jun 26, '08
Posted by: lestatdelc | Jun 26, 2008 4:19:03 PM
<h1>I know Steve and he is neither an apologist nor stupid, in fact, quite the opposite of both. You on the other hand... (note the use of ellipsis)</h1>Lesta was not able to finish his sentence, so I will. "You on the other hand are quite correct, Steven is a dweeb, dolt, dufus and deranged."
Lesta is also a halfwit...
Jun 26, '08
lestadelc, both you and Steve Maurer constantly prove your both a couple of egotistical pinheads who NEVER have anything intelligent to add to the conversation.
For the record, Steve Maurer is full of it when he asserts, like the pinhead who pulls stuff out of his backside that he is:
You never put ellipses on the end of a quote.
There is no god of English who dictates such things, and not even prissy style manuals such as my trusty Perrin and Ebbitt "Writer's Guide and Index to English" (the next thing one frequently graduates to after using Strunk and White) says any such thing.
In summary, ellipses are used when one omits words from a quote, but not so many words that the quote itself should instead just be surrounded by quotes (for braindead putzes like lestadelc and Steven Maurer, those are the funny little '' '' marks.)
So, if you omit words before or after a quote, and particularly if the omitted words potentially would mean you are taking the quote out of context, you are being intellectually dishonest if you don't include the ellipses. Concepts like "'lectual dishonesty" clearly are beyond superficial thinkers like lestadelc and Maurer though.
Jun 26, '08
Really, you guys? "Stupid?" "Dweeb?" "Dolt?" "Doofus?" "Halfwit?" "Pinhead?" I would call you guys trolls worthy of banning for your ad hominem attacks on commenters, but you're almost too feeble at ad hominems to bother. If you're going to behave that way, at least have some flair about it.
Jun 26, '08
James X, I agree with you on this:
"I contend that Merkley nevertheless won because of a better statewide game, winning most counties not named Multnomah. "
But I also think that running ads for a November election in June only alienates those who get tired of ads by the time of the primary. Most people have other things than politics on their minds this time of year.
Seems to me that it might be wise to "give Gordon enough rope" by not running ads right now--rather, spending the money, time and energy on talking to folks around the state directly.
It would be better to have well done ads in the fall.
Bruggere "defined himself" in 1996 for all the good it did him. It became very obvious there was little to his campaign beyond "I fought a war, I founded a company, I am not Gordon Smith".
Jeff would be smart to spend a lot of time listening to the folks who come to his events. That way, in the fall, he could run ads saying "As I traveled around Oregon this summer, what I heard was...". Gordon would be stupid to respond to that by saying, "No really, what Oregonians want is..." because he has no idea what folks say to Jeff.
And when was the last time you saw Gordon Smith in person?
Only consultants think ads alone will win any election. Oregonians like to think for themselves.
12:52 a.m.
Jun 28, '08
"When Cillizza says "less than stellar candidate" what he really means is "unwilling to sell out to big donors for the cash necessary to go on air"."
He was saying it when selling out to big donors for TV cash was EXACTLY what Merkley was doing...
Jun 28, '08
Yes, 12 years in office is "certainly enough time to...have some kind of personal contact." Smith's problem in part is that he absolutely shuns personal contact, except for like minded--business folks. Smith totally avoids announced town hall meetings, because he knows that his policies are anathema to many of us. Merkeley needs to start exploiting Smith's country club aloofness.
9:13 a.m.
Jun 28, '08
Mitch, Pat, Steve...
The primary is over. Move on.
Jun 28, '08
Given that there's something called the Congressional Record and plenty of organizations that summarize voting records in a non-partisan way, doesn't the fact that a bogus ad. can alter perception of his voting record say more about the quality of the voters than the candidate?
Jun 28, '08
Doesn't anyone here remember Gordon Smith's other campaigns? The man will say and/or do ANYTHING to get votes...lying, even in the most blatant and easily disproven manner, means nothing to him. Oh...I forgot...that's how we do politics in this country.
Jun 30, '08
What's the problem? It's not like he's a Merkley surrogate. ;-)
And to a lesser extent perhaps Merkley ("I just want to win")
9:40 a.m.
Jun 30, '08