I really liked Randy when he was a legislator. But can he build a statewide coalition?

Where does he stand on legislation such as HB 2500? Is he willing to discuss why so many in management (college presidents, school administrators, etc.) have higher salaries than the Gov.?

Can he intelligently discuss the work of the Revenue Restructuring Task Force?

A very disgruntled Republican consultant at one of those post-election discussion panels on CSPAN owns a consulting company and sounded unhappy not only with the quality of the McCain campaign but how the Bush presidency had turned out.

"Next time around we need some skills testing and the level of scrutiny that small businesses like mine give to applicants in the interview process. "

The consultant went on to say that there was a lot of "he can win" buzz about GW Bush in 1999 (sounding like some Dem. complaints about Kerry 2004). Then said, "Obama won because he never listened to the people who said he couldn't win, he had good ideas, a good campaign, and he just kept listening to ordinary people and running an intelligent campaign. "

In other words, it is a long way from

"some legislators and lobbyists consider city Commissioner Randy Leonard a viable Democratic candidate for Oregon governor in 2010"

to building a viable statewide network and running an issue-oriented campaign which impresses people across the state.

And any campaign which takes pot-shots at any other campaign on something ordinary voters don't care about deserves to lose the primary.

Name familiarity alone won't build a statewide coalition. People like me saying "I liked Randy as a legislator" won't do that either---where does he stand on issues debated since he left the legislature?

What I would love to see is several quality candidates debating each other multiple times so we can decide which one we like. Anyone who says big time lobbyists (not ordinary folks) deserve to choose the nominee should remember that Hillary was considered to have a lock on the presidential nomination from the moment she announced until the Iowa primary. She was a "viable" candidate, but the voters chose another nominee.

Yes. Correction, make that hell, yes! Call it fickle, but I regard pols very different in different environments. I detested Willy Brown as SF mayor, but as a replacement for Feinstein I would love him. Same deal with Randy. At the gov's level, I could get very enthusiastic about him.

If Leonard as governor would be consistent with what I've heard/read/seen of him, that would likely accelerate my timetable for leaving Oregon. It's a big country with lots of nice places to live/work - time for a refreshing change...

The Repugs would be salivating like Sam Adams at a Boy Scout Camporee if the DPO was willing to nominate Randy.

I could go for Randy for Governor.

We definitely need to nominate someone who is younger and fresher than Kulongoski/Kitzhaber/Courtney - with enough moderation to win the general election and enough experience to effectively govern.

Other good options include former Sen. Ryan Deckert, Rep. David Edwards, Rep. Sara Gelser, and House Speaker Dave Hunt.

I don't see DeFazio leaving DC while the Dems are in the majority and they have the White House. Let's face it - governor of Oregon isn't that great of a gig. Leonard would win.

Kitzhaber would make a great Governor, again, and perhaps will if what I'm hearing is correct. Plus, he'd absolutely obliterate any Republican candidate who would run-- Walden, Atkinson, anyone.

And Salemite, you obviously don't know him if you don't think he brings enough energy and fresh ideas to the table (whereas some of those you mention are ridiculously inexperienced although may have potential some day--- Sara Gelser?).

I'm especially enamored of Randy Leonard spending campaign funds on $150 per head steak dinners with people who want to discuss city business.

But yeah, keep working on your delusional fantasy about Randy Leonard the Everyman, the blue-collar hero, the "gun-truck-and-dog Democrat from the Eastside, not a Keep-Portland-Weird Democrat nor a Pearl-District Latte Liberal."

Let's not forget the $7.25/gallon biodiesel that Randy is buying (NO, that's not a typo, the City of Portland is actually paying Seven dollars and twenty-five cents per gallon)... It's below $2.75/gallon at the pump, but Fireman Randy wanted to subsidize the Eastern Oregon canola farmers. That might earn him a few thousand votes from Oregon's least populous counties, but is likely to hurt him statewide when the "can you believe" commercials are blanketing radio and TV.

Oh yeah, biodiesel grown from food crops is also much higher in nitrous oxides, which is a much more dangerous greenhouse gas...Did I mention the price of cooking oils are likely to rise just like corn did during the ethanol boom?

Fireman Randy

There is plenty to criticize Randy Leonard for--I did myself up-thread--but this obnoxious "Fireman Randy" stuff is lifted straight from Jack Bogdanski, who has a cutesy, belittling nickname for everyone in public life, including at least some of Blue Oregon's editors.

He's a former firefighter/union boss -- ostensibly representing the Citizens of Portland -- to negotiate disability benefit and pension "reform" for an unfunded liability that is paid out of current tax revenues.

There can be no reform of a system that pays pension obligations that will last in perpetuity out of this year's revenue: the system will fail, and he knows it.

Would you prefer "hypocrite Randy" or "Fireman Randy".

Not going to happen...

Only if he promised to not get so uptight about Duct Tape and IKEA signs...and not to abuse the Firefighter card in his campaign.

Over on the topic " A Puzzling Budget Mess" there is a long comment I agree with. A small sample:

Posted by: Ron Buel | Feb 26, 2009 5:14:50 PM

.....need some new political leadership in Oregon not wedded to the bashful politics of our recent 20-year past. A gubernatorial candidate who wants to detach himself or herself from special interest politics in order to look to the public interest and the future of Oregon. I don't see anyone talking that way yet. Not Bradbury, not DeFazio, not Novick. <<

This is a view of politics that people of a certain age may never have experienced. But some of us older folks would like to return to the days when such concern about the public interest (not just about what pundits think, who has name familiarity, who "can win", or "if you want to know where he stands, just ask him") was fairly common across party lines. The Reaganites didn't like that attitude and did their best to stamp it out, but how many people who didn't vote a straight Republican ticket in the last couple elections still say nice things about Reagan? How many still say nice things about Tom McCall?

It is not the duty of a citizen of a county south of Mult. Co. to seek out a Portland public figure and say "tell me where you stand on these issues". Anyone who believes that has been hanging around consultants too long.

A candidate who only wants the votes of people who personally ask questions is not going to get very far. A candidate willing to stand in front of a roomful of people (townhall meeting, local Democratic Party meeting, etc), answer questions and engage in dialogue deserves support or at least respect. Randy, if you are seriously considering this campaign, I suggest you write a post here on what ideas you would campaign on.

You said “People have come and talked to me,” Leonard said when asked about the speculation. “I won’t say who they are, but I told them I would think about it.".

Randy, even if those folks commit by Easter to donating a specified amount of time and volunteer help (and letting their names be known by next winter) every month from now until the primary, if you can't tell Oregonians your vision for the future and where you stand on various issues before the legislature the way someone like John Kitzhaber is able to connect with a town-hall style audience or writing an opinion piece, then I suggest you think long and hard about what kind of a campaign you want to run. We don't need vague soundbites. If you don't like the way someone voted years ago, keep it to yourself given that such a strategy didn't win the primary for Novick last year.

We the people deserve serious issue debates. I have no idea where Randy comes down on any number of issues. I do not see it as my duty to ask him what his priorities are--if he is a serious candidate, he will tell us.

I like Kitzhaber or Westlund or someone else for Gov. who has not only been active in statewide issues but actually lived outside of the Portland area

I don't think the next Gov. will be decided on name ID alone, or whether people this far ahead of time should try to decide what voters will do. Case in point: Kari, who were you saying would be nominated for Pres. in Feb. 2007?

For all the insider gossip, I believe Michael Steele might be underestimated as RNC chair if he continues to talk the way he did on the Tavis Smiley "State of the Black Union" panel on CSPAN. He was asked about the organization of the Obama campaign and how that changes politics.

He said it prevents either party from doing the same old, same old.

He said a dispirited GOP was trying to figure out "how can we run against the black guy?" and that the Clinton faction of the Dems was wondering "how do we run against the black guy?".

Meanwhile, Obama was talking to folks in such a way they thought there was no filter, he was talking directly to them.

Steele said this is a lesson for all future campaigns regardless of party.

If he transforms the RNC the way Dean transformed the DNC, we might see 2 competitive parties in the future, with the "Conservative" CPAC crowd becoming marginalized as the old Mondale Democrats were after 1984.

I believe we are living in a time of paradigm shift. Put another way, I do not believe that a campaign tactic which worked 3 years ago will work in the 2010 election. And I believe people paying attention to the point of discussing the relative success/failure of various campaign tactics will be discussing not only what

Posted by: jlosass | Feb 28, 2009 6:48:41 PM

Posted by: joel dan walls | Feb 28, 2009 4:30:39 PM

said but also what they thought were the success/failure of tactics in many other races incl. Presidency and the US Senate race.

People change over time, and just because I liked Randy as a legislator doesn't mean it is my obligation to pin down where he stands compared to Novick, DeFazio, etc.

I will wait and see what develops. But "he's got name familiarity and can win" will not convince me someone is or should be a viable candidate for Gov.

I helped convince a swing voter (leans Republican) friend to vote for Kitzhaber. Do any of you have a similar experience with non-political individuals you know?

I did so by saying good things about Dr. John Kitzhaber and how long I had known him, and saying "You're a Rotary member, go see him next week and let me know what you think". The response was "His speech had so much substance I took notes. Do you want to hear them?".

My point is this: If Novick or DeFazio or any other candidate has name familiarity in each of the 36 counties, has consultants and pundits predicting victory, but does not have individual voters saying nice things about the candidate to their friends, how do we know it isn't a "Hillary WILL get the nomination--the train is leaving the station, will you join the campaign?" situation?

One thing we learned in 2008 is that consultants and pundits do not have a perfect batting record when it comes to predictions. If Kari doesn't like that attitude, not my problem.

Labor is none too happy with Leonard at the moment. He has forgotten who worked their butts off to get him elected City Commissioner!

Take that and then factor in his propensity to cronyism, his recent questionable spending of public funds and other eyebrow raising and unpredictable behavior (loose cannon and bull in a china shop come to mind) and clearly he does not have the makings of a Governor!

I'll never forget the appointment of one of his own staff to a Deputy Bureau Director position who got busted for buying crack rocks in Old Town Chinatown. And only because the Police refused to work with the drug-affected staffer did Leonard decide he should leave his post. ICK! Please don’t make the entire state of Oregon endure THIS – it’s bad enough at the City!

Well, as a Baker Co Democrat you'd not be giving me much to work with would you? Portland City Commish isn't a real hot selling point in these parts. How am I supposed to sell Portland city battles as experience? I'm sure Metro or some such will really resonate. I know, where he landed on renaming some street would do it.

By the way, DPO isn't going to nominate anybody. Not their job. Not in their job description.

Staunching the bleeding enough to get Jeff Merkley elected was tough and he had some real solid rural connections. You might think we're negligible but 2pts less out here and Gordo is Sen Smith.

The next governor is going to preside over a terrible budget situation, a bad economy, and a fiesty legislature. Job retention and creation are going to be front and center in the election cycle. The Rs are likely to put forward a moderate, and with Alley in the race maybe someone with private sector experience. The ability to manage a large bureacracy will matter. The Ds in Salem are doing a lot of speculating - I hear more about DeFazio and Kitz than anyone else. Multnomah's Wheeler and Metro's Bragdon are getting attention, as are some legislators like Mark Haas...

Chuck asks a very cogent question. I guess what his supporters are thinking is that he would run a Carter style candidacy, emphasizing character over experience, which is corrupting. Fair question, tho.

Posted by: Union Rebel Girl | Feb 28, 2009 8:17:37 PM

Labor is none too happy with Leonard at the moment. He has forgotten who worked their butts off to get him elected City Commissioner!

Take that and then factor in his propensity to cronyism...

Woa! Doesn't that last sentence contradict the opening one? I mean, you find someone into cronyism and you find a union supporter. Among his supporters, the perception is that he is the anti-crony. If you want to dent him, that's where to aim.

Posted by: alcatross | Feb 28, 2009 12:22:09 PM

If Leonard as governor would be consistent with what I've heard/read/seen of him, that would likely accelerate my timetable for leaving Oregon. It's a big country with lots of nice places to live/work - time for a refreshing change...

What a leg up for Randy! How many candidates can demonstrate helping the quality of life in the state merely by winning the election? Refreshing, indeed! Assuming, of course, everything I've heard/read/seen of you on this blog is representative.

...a Keep-Portland-Weird Democrat...

We're a major block. Totally to be ignored? That's his attraction to people wanting him to run on this thread, for the most part.

If DeFazio runs, he probably has an edge on the labor/ populist vote, with Novick getting his share. I think Randy has a shot only if DeFazio doesn't run, and he would still have a tough time defeating Steve, with his name ID and activist support from the '08 senate primary. Bradbury is popular with many activists, but is seen by many as more of a DLC moderate.

The only good thing about that would be that it would give Portlanders an opportunity to replace that anti-free enterprise, pro-corporate-welfare-for-sports-stadium guy with a commissioner who might be against that deal. By the way, how is the "progressive" effort going regarding making sure that this corporate welfare, government/buisiness partnership deal doesn't happen?

Tap, tap, tap. ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz........

Come on, people, there aren't enough Cascade Policy Institute supporters in Portland to stop it, so we must rely on the so-called "progressives" who claim to hate this sort of thing (except if Sten does it, etc). If any city has a population that could stop this, I'd think it would be Portland. I guess not.

Bob Tiernan Mult Co.

By the way WTF exactly is a "Keep-Portland-Weird Democrat"??

I could give a rip about keeping Portland weird, but I could certainly do with this sort of stuff:

--repairing potholes --making sure my daughter's school doesn't close a week early and that the staff for all those "nonessential" subjects like foreign languages and art aren't laid off. --doing something about the Sellwood bridge so I'm not in fear every time I cross it. --not giving away public moneys to rich men for sports stadiums (not just a libertarian position, Mr. Tiernan!).

Weirdness be damned. I want boring old effective government.

Joe Dan Walls:

--not giving away public moneys to rich men for sports stadiums (not just a libertarian position, Mr. Tiernan!).

Bob T:

Again, I never said it was. But even though progressives (so-called) aren't free enterprisers, they claim to be opposed to corporate welfare. One would think they could be part of a coalition to stop this sort of thing (and don't just refer to it as an example of a rich person getting tax dolalrs -- see it also as an example of government spending our money on its own ego trip and thinking it as part of normal city infrastructure).

Anyway, if Portland is mostly progressive in varying degree, this stadium junk won't get anywhere. Free marketers can't do much in this city. So it's up to you. I'm not holding my breath. Sten played a big role in using $35 million in a stadium deal after a closed door meeting, and this was ignored for the most part. Why should Leonard et al. think it'll be different this time?
Remember, no team owner can get a penny from us without government help and force. So which is the tool that nees to be watched?

Bob Tiernan Mult Co

Randy must be ashamed to know he only garnered 32 posts on this thread. So much for grassroots enthusiasm.

Go Buy Biodiesel!