If Ron Wyden hopes to have the backing of Democrats he needs to get on board a Democratic health care bill and stop promoting the GOP talking points (Dems are trashing Medicare, etc.), the myth of bipartisanship and his own hopeless bill (which has no shot). Is he going to vote for or filibuster the public option? ( He is listed on the whiplist as a question mark.) I would like to know. Sen. Chuck Schumer says Dems are going it alone and ready to pass it under Reconciliation. Where are you, Ron Wyden? Wandering in the wingnut wilderness it looks like to me.

Wyden is on the Finance Committee, and is one of just 15 Democrats (1/4 of the Senate delegation) who have NOT pledged support for the AMERICAN option.

I'm reserving final judgment until the final bill, but if the Senate fails to pass the American option, I'm switching my registration to Independent, and would canvass for Frohnmayer (really, for ANY primary opponent) in a heartbeat.

You can also expect any money that would have gone to political contributions to be diverted to paying my exorbitant private for-profit health insurance premiums.

Of course, I'm still hoping he'll come around to doing the right thing, like the Wyden I've always supported.

Even Jeff Bingaman of the gang of six says now maybe it's time for Dems to go it alone and forget this phony bipartisanship obstruction. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/bingaman-becomes-first-member-of-gang-of-six-to-broach-go-it-alone-plan-for-dems.php?ref=fpblg

Where are you, Ron Wyden? Hiding in the blue (cross) grass, it seems.

Dave Porter-(quoting Ross Douthat) "It will prove that Congress’s liberal leaders are lousy tacticians, and that its centrist deal-makers are deal-makers first, poll watchers second and loyal Democrats a distant third. And it will prove that the Democratic Party is institutionally incapable of delivering on its most significant promises."

Bill R. This looks like a good description of Ron Wyden right this moment. He has forgotten to dance with "the ones that brung him." And if the Dem. Party fails to realize this opportunity to govern, it will be extinct for at least another generation, and we will have consigned the country to decades more of utter ruin under extremist right wing rule.

Dave Porter-"I do worry that the Democratic Party will fracture, and, thus, contribute to its inability to govern."

Bill R.-Ron Wyden appears to be the one fracturing right now from the mainstream of his own party in support of the GOP agenda to obstruct on behalf of corporate insurers. And right now it looks to me that anything short of a public option won't pass the House, and likely the Senate too. There is every reason to be looking for a primary opponent while Wyden goes around touting right wing talking points.

Wyden would have to be photographed groveling at LaRouchePAC's door to lose Oregon Demo voters. A challenge would be only annoying, somewhat expensive, and take his focus off national politics.

I'm looking forward to the sacrificial lamb from the GOPers. A Washington County real estate agent of the year? A Klamath County Commissioner? A bible-thumping part-time dog-catcher from Pendleton?

Given Wyden's positions on the Israel-Palestine and health care issues it is difficult to see how a real progressive could support him unless the Republicans come up with a greater and scarier evil. It should be a safe bet that Wyden will have the Democratic vote sewed up because most Democrats are Democrats first and progressives second, or third, or whatever. Of course, as usual, the "progressives" can fall back on the old lesser-of-two-evils excuse.

I was going to say that, J.

Realistically we are talking about Frohnmayer, a former Bush Republican and current or very recent Independent versus the most popular Democrat in Oregon. That's not exactly AuCoin v. Lonsdale. Now if Wyden actually votes against public option and a DeFazio or Kitzhaber throws their hat in the ring, that would be fun to watch. No way Wyden votes against public option, though.

John Frohnmayer gives a great speech, but to be a serious candidate he has to reflect on what went wrong with the US Senate campaign.

I'm sorry--but someone could be as charismatic as Obama and have all the money in the world. But if the campaign is so poorly organized that it reserves a large auditorium and can't fill more than a fraction of it, that campaign is not going to seriously challenge an incumbent, no matter who that incumbent is.

And I agree with the first paragraph of Posted by: J Renaud | Aug 25, 2009 4:52:55 PM

A campaign based on "HOW DARE you still like Ron Wyden?" will not alone win a primary election.

"Our candidate is better than Wyden because..." could be debated, but don't bet anything serious on that outcome.

Let's call Wyden's bill what it is.

Political cover so he can say he supports health care reform. Hell, Grassley says he supports reform.

Wyden's silence speaks very loud to me.

May Steve Novick could be persuaded to run against him.

I should add that Grassley is a co-sponsor of Wyden's bill as was Norm Coleman before he left office.

Check this link:

http://blog.oregonlive.com/politics/2007/10/wyden_gains_more_cosponsors_fo.html

Both Coleman and Grassley were cosponsors, but Grassley is not a cosponsor any longer.

Obama said he agreed with 90% of Wyden's bill, so I don't think we can call it political cover, but it sure isn't public option for everybody in America.

I wonder if the Wyden smear machine is already at work?

Realistically we are talking about Frohnmayer, a former Bush Republican and current or very recent Independent versus the most popular Democrat in Oregon.

Actually Frohnmayer was never a "Bush Republican" and he was forced to leave the NEA because he publicly disagreed with Bush I. And it wasn't because Bush I and the electoral base Bush I had started to court was too liberal or progressive. In the 1992 election Frohnmayer publicly endorsed Clinton. Are you old enough "anon" to have your own memory of that whole era?

Oh, and the Independent Party that Frohnmayer ran as Senate candidate under in 2008 endorsed Merkley in the general election.

So here's a challenge to all the Democrats here. Here are some of his positions from my notes about the 2008 campaign as I evaluated all of the candidates:

1. Healthcare: Supports single-payer.
2. Iraq War: Against it from the start and for immediate withdrawal.
3. Impeachment: For it.

The challenge is first for anybody who has further recollections of specific positions Frohnmayer took to add them. And second to compare those positions point-by-point with the stated positions and positions taken in official capacity by prominent Oregon Democrats starting with Kulongoski, Wyden, Westlund, and Merkley. I'm certain he took a few positions that would characterize him at best as a "moderate" Democrat, (and I few I know I disagreed with at the time). As noted above, however, he clearly took several positions that would characterize him as a "liberal" Democrat, and certainly so by standards of the DPO and party standard bearers.

For sure if he (re-)joined the Democratic Party and challenged Wyden (can anybody fact check this OPB item that says he has been registered as a Republican and a Democrat, and the years for each if it is correct?) we can expect a nasty reaction from Wyden supporters and maybe even some DPO officials. But will the public insist, and be honored, that the fight be on the actual positions the candidates take? An it might be surprising who is more in line with the values of Oregon Democrats, at least those outside the Portland metro area, and NAVs.

Anybody else think that would be a good use of this space?

People who think for themselves and are not locked into tribal behavior will not have a problem with Frohnmayer if his principles are right.

Frohnmayer may be a great and liberal guy, but the question is whether he would be a credible threat to Wyden.

No.

Oh, and Frohnmayer endorsed anybody-but-Merkley, despite what the non-Party Independent Party did.

Messaging, as others pointed out, and the public perception of the candidate combined with the effectiveness of his/her message determines the winner.

I wonder what the messages and perceptions will be in the next Oregon senatorial primaries and race. Too early to tell right now, I think.

"Wyden is the most popular elected official in the state, ..."

If true, how did that come about? His health plan in collusion with the Republican right showed his primary interest was and is the insurance industry that boosted his campaign coffers and not the people who need a plan that will give them decent care and they can afford. As for being popular, that is not automatically complimentary. It depends on the quality of the citizens or the mob as the case may be.

I seem to recall several threads ago that Wyden was pummeled on this site with very few people coming to his defense.

Wyden is the most popular elected official in the state, has no credible Republican opponent on the horizon, and the "progressives" are going to beat him with someone who has never run for office?

Just because Wyden is the most popular elected official in the state doesn't mean he is popular. Particularly right now, and with his base. Although a lot of people like to argue a politician like Wyden numerically can't get elected without playing to the middle, the math also shows he can't get elected if he loses the votes of progressive Democrats.

I think you'll agree Jack that this is an election where Democratic incumbents will be judged by what has and hasn't been accomplished since 2008 when voters demanded a change from the path to ruin we were being taken down by the GOP. And unless Wyden changes his position on health care, which seems unlikely, he's going to have a very long, unpleasant campaign season trying to regain that vote.

Now admittedly 2010 is not 1944 and the circumstances are not totally congruent. Does the name Wayne Morse ring a bell? College prof and Presidential appointee. Progressive Willamette Valley political challenger with no previous elected experience, unseated Portland-area Republican incumbent and strong environmentalist (for the time) Sen. Rufus C. Holman. Even switched from Republican -> Independent -> Democrat. The similarities are more startling than I realized until I looked them up.

Of course this is not to argue that John Frohnmayer is a latter-day Wayne Morse based on what we know right now. But election campaigns can take interesting and unexpected turns. I find the possibility of being pleasantly surprised quite appealing.

The bottom line:

If Wyden votes against cloture on the public option, he is vulnerable in a primary challenge.

Let's hope that more candidates float a trial balloon this fall, and that Wyden is watching.

"Just because Wyden is the most popular elected official in the state doesn't mean he is popular. Particularly right now, and with his base. "

Gee, who else has been having town hall meetings in every county every year since elected in 1996? And who is his "base"? The people who show up to work on election campaigns? Or the people who have attended multiple town hall meetings over the years?

I have said it before, and I will say it again. You don't like Wyden? You think no Democrat should ever write legislation in cooperation with a Republican? Fine. Find yourself a candidate and start organizing a campaign and running against Wyden.

But I know from experience that "Our candidate is better than the incumbent because..." is more successful than "Forget you ever know this person because we are angry at his legislative actions".

BTW, where does John Frohnmayer stand on health care reform? Have you heard his stance from the man himself?

BTW, where does John Frohnmayer stand on health care reform? Have you heard his stance from the man himself?

My note, referred to above, was taken in a candidate forum in which Frohnmayer said he was for single-payer. So the answer to your question is "yes".

Gee, who else has been having town hall meetings in every county every year since elected in 1996? And who is his "base"? The people who show up to work on election campaigns? Or the people who have attended multiple town hall meetings over the years?

So are you saying, LT, that Wyden has an electoral strategy that depends on NAVs and Republicans (who are the numerical majority in a number of those counties in which he holds town hall meetings) to win. They don't get to vote in the Democratic primary. And perhaps it will be a concern to Democrats that Wyden is playing to NAVs and Republicans while undermining the Democratic Party's electoral chances by not working actively and enthusiastically for a public health insurance option.

Wyden may have trouble getting past a Democratic primary if he sides with the Republicans in a floor vote shooting down an historic Democratic Health Care bill because it has Public Option. Wyden's bill has no shot, so it's time for him to decide if he's a Democrat or a Republican. The word from Sen. Chuck Schumer is that it's going to pass under Budget Reconciliation so 51 votes are needed. Wyden better be one of them if he wants to stay Senator.

Speaking of which, there is a major Health Care rally-Saturday, August 29, 2009 at 10 AM Terry Schrunk Plaza, SW 3rd & SW Madison Ex-corporate insurance manager Wendell Potter turned whistle blower will be there to talk about the corporate insurance scam on Americans. http://healthcareforamericanow.org/page/event/detail/wfh

Ted Kennedy has died. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TedKennedy/story?id=6692022

It's time for Dem. Senators like Wyden to get their act together and leave a fitting legacy for the nation in honor of Sen. Kennedy.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=3549b049-68d2-4c39-b9d3-ec06b2d5ef73

These are Wyden's latest (public) job approval numbers, and in this ugly political environment, he is ridiculously strong with Democrats and self-described liberals. He is stronger with Democrats and self-described liberals than Merkley, who has been strongly for public option almost since he was sworn into office. How is Frohnmayer, with no money and no real issue going to go up against a guy with Wyden's gaudy numbers and who knows how many million dollars?

I personally don't care when he says he is for a public option as long as he votes for it when he has his opportunity. If he votes against it, it will still take a Kitzhaber or DeFazio to make him break a sweat.

Bill Bodden gets the award for the inane quote of the day: "I seem to recall several threads ago that Wyden was pummeled on this site with very few people coming to his defense." Do you really think that those of us who comment on BlueOregon are representative of the Democrats in this state? Were you being intentionally ironic? Please tell me that you were.

Posted by: anonfactcheck | Aug 25, 2009 10:28:11 PM

Were you involved in the Jan. 1996 election which sent Ron Wyden to the Senate in the first place? I was. He defeated DeFazio in the primary (otherwise it would have been DeFazio vs. Gordon Smith in Jan. 1996) and then ran in the special general election in January, 1996.

In answer to your question, I don't believe that Ron Wyden in August of an odd numbered year is giving a lot of thought to his electoral strategy. I believe he is primarily doing what he considers to be his job, which is representing Oregonians in the US Senate, doing his committee work, etc.

If you don't think there are Democrats in this state who admire Ron Wyden even if he never goes in front of a microphone and says "I promise to support the public option" as if that is the only health care detail that matters, then you need to get out more.

Ron has built up a resevoir of good will with lots of Oregonians of all political persuasions. Many of these are not activists and bloggers but ordinary people who know there is more to life than debating electoral strategy in August (esp. August of an odd-numbered year).

I am guessing that this week Ron Wyden will spend more time thinking about the loss of Ted Kennedy than about electoral strategy in 2010.

But gee, if you want to get your friends together this week and start planning a challenge to Wyden, go right ahead. Think of how many people you know in how many diff. counties in Oregon. Call them up (or email) and ask if they would be with you if you started looking for a candidate to challenge Ron in the primary or general election. Let us know what you hear from your friends.

But please remember there is more to health care reform than "Do you agree we need a public option?". Howard Dean, certainly an advocate for public option, was just on CSPAN talking about the complexities of electronic medical records.

Do you care about such things? Or is your attitude "Ron Wyden must agree with people like me or we will make his life miserable next year"?

Whatever you think of him, Ron Wyden has earned the respect of many people from across the political spectrum. This includes the folks who helped him get elected in Jan. 1996. If you truly believe that every single volunteer who helped Wyden for Senate in Jan. 1996 will desert him in 2010 if he isn't ideologically pure on the public option, you are likely to be in for a shock.

These are Wyden's latest (public) job approval numbers, and in this ugly political environment, he is ridiculously strong with Democrats and self-described liberals.

All the standard criticisms apply here: Not a survey of likely voters, land-line only (so age demo is not accurate), not an A-B comparison, not questions testing knowledge of his position on issues, way too early, etc. The real wild card is what the various interest groups that rev up a primary campaign will do in this very unsettled political environment, and we honestly don't know.

What we do know is that your assertion about no real issue is a bit premature. Act 2 of the health care debate opens after the recess and the pro-public option side, which includes rural and small business constituencies who have been timing their entry into the debate, has been preparing a multi-pronged strategy. That includes actually working against Democratic Senators who don't affirmatively contribute to making a robust public option happen in a way we have not seen in modern times.

Right now, it is uninspired conventional politics for Wyden's people to be doing what they can to hype to build an image of invincibility in the electorate's mind as he is getting daily criticism from the base. The fact he is having to do that is what is telling.

So is your bet, Mark McGaffin, that Wyden will vote for whatever public option the proponents finally bring to a vote? If Wyden doesn't actually affirmatively contribute to bringing it to a vote, or doesn't vote for it, any credible challenger will find money and support coming his or her way as part of a national effort by core Democratic constituencies to change the terms of the discussion. (And he won't get props from the single payer crowd for not making a public option happen because he's already made it known he's opposed to their position.)

And with sincere apologies Carla, while health care may not be the simple key to unseating Wyden, it is a randomizing factor in the 2010 election. It will be hard to talk about Wyden's chances without referencing it. That's in large part because this is really a battle against ultimate corporate power in America that working people can't afford to lose and, after all the spin is shown for what it is, so far Wyden has unequivocally come down on the side of the industry in that battle. What is it that you hope people will be able to say about Frohnmayer? A lengthy statement is still up on his former campaign website and I don't know what reason anyone would have to think his views have changed from what he expresses there. Some of it is startling and probably not even particularly appealing to liberal Democrats, but it sure doesn't seem he is pulling any punches.

LT - If it makes you feel better in to assume that opponents don't have sufficient political experience, or understand the complexities of health care as a policy or political issue, in accordance with my comment above about Wyden's supporters desperately needing to build an impression of invincibility in voters' minds right now, I certainly am not going to spend any time trying to disabuse you of that belief. But I do have to say that Barney Frank's rather perceptive comment about kitchen tables, does come to mind as being as applicable to many Democrats and NAVs as it is to many Republicans.

I've voted for Wyden in the past but have always held my nose while doing so. The choices have always been undesirable.

Having met and spoken with Wyden (albeit, many years ago when he was in the house) it is hard for me to remember a more patronizing, arrogant politician.

Just because you're a Democrat doesn't make you good.

"Bill Bodden gets the award for the inane quote of the day: "I seem to recall several threads ago that Wyden was pummeled on this site with very few people coming to his defense." Do you really think that those of us who comment on BlueOregon are representative of the Democrats in this state? Were you being intentionally ironic? Please tell me that you were."

This is another example of how absurd political discourse can get when a fact is considered inane. I was, as should have been perfectly obvious to any careful reader, referring to this site - not all Democrats in Oregon.

From a strategic standpoint, I think a hardcore progressive running against Wyden would be great! And they should announce soon.

Would s/he have any chance of winning? No, not really. But it's an ideal race for progressives. How? 1. No likely strong Republican opponent in the general. (Can't be blamed for doing harm.) 2. One specific issue that can/could get a progressive a great deal of momentum. 3. By announcing now, s/he could push Wyden on the issue into a more progressive position. And that's the real goal.

RE: Frohnmayer? That ship has sailed.

Carla,

I've worked with John Frohnmayer and found him to be a man with great ideas and impeccable integrity. Most importantly he has the desire to serve. Not to climb, or grab glory, or position himself, but to serve this state and this country. When you look at his credentials you can see that much of his life has been in service to those in need.

I have great admiration for the man and hope that he finds his way past the political system that nearly requires institutional support to be considered viable.

I'd prefer a system where great ideas, impeccible integrity and desire to serve the people of Oregon were what made you viable,

not deep pockets.

"I'd prefer a system where great ideas, impeccible integrity and desire to serve the people of Oregon were what made you viable,

"not deep pockets."

It would also be of great help if the people appreciated those qualities instead of continually going along with their tribal representative.

pacnwjay nailed it.

We need two strong progressive senators from Oregon. I could care less if that means Wyden tacking a bit left or losing a primary, but the former would be a much easier task than the latter.

A donation to a primary opponent's campaign is probably the best way to achieve either goal.

Please run a "pure" progressive against Wyden. I will gladly change from NAV to democrat in order to vote for Wyden in the primary. He has been good for the people and the entire state of Oregon

With all due respect, it's not a randomizing factor at all ... We can jaw about the health care thing again and again (and frankly, there have been a shit-ton of opportunities on this blog to do it..I'd rather this thread talk about Frohnmayer) and I just don't see how the politics work even in a cursory way.

Carla, you're not asking for advice, but this is offered as a gentle courtesy that you might want to hold back unqualified assertions about 2010 until we know more about what is really going to happen:

'Win One for Teddy,' Say Dems Pushing for Health Reform Key Question Is Whether Kennedy's Death Can Rally Fellow Democrats http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TedKennedy/story?id=8420408

Poll: 86 percent say insurance, public or private, should be available to all http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13203651

Among the 1,000 Democrats, Republicans and independents surveyed on Aug. 12 and 13, 79 percent say they believe a federal government health insurance option should be available for people to buy.

Unless you want to argue that Oregon Democrats are out of the Democratic mainstream to the hard right, than Wyden is way out of step with Democratic primary electorate with his carefully, vacuously couched position he is for a public option if, but only if, it is "paid for" (meaning deficit?, revenue? neutral) according to a standard that private insurance is not held to --- Wyden wants to use public funds to subsidize private insurance.

Health care is a randomizing issue because: 1) We don't know right now what effect the rallying cry above will have on Democratic legislators, 2) We don't know right now what effect Act 2 of activism for health care I mentioned will have on the public dialogue, and 3) We don't know whether Wyden will do, an specifically if he will fall in line by dumping his plan and become an enthusiastic advocate for a public option if 1) and 2) break for reform that has a robust public plan.

If 1) and 2) do break that way, and Wyden becomes perceived as joining a few other Senators to be stubborn obstructionists who are damaging the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party in the 2010 election to benefit the private insurance industry, Oregon Democratic politics will become a free-for-all. And you know as well as anyone here that the mainstream media will be on the side of encouraging the free-for-all to Wyden's deserved detriment.

That is a lot of "what-if" but the odds aren't nearly as slim as Wyden's people want to make people believe that Wyden will find himself on the opposite side as the Democratic majority in the House and plurality in the Senate. And note well that if it comes to pass, the only way out for Wyden is to be seen as playing politics just to keep his job by changing his position, not to stand by his guns and fight for his own plan. Oregonians sometimes really like to dump politicians who are shown to be nothing but empty-suit politicians.

In any case, if John is serious about running in the Democratic Primary, he will need to re-register as a Democrat in the next few weeks, as Oregon law requires a candidate running in a partisan primary election to be a member of the party for at least 180 days prior to the filing deadline which is sometime in March.

Does anyone here know for a fact that the reason for him to be talking with Democrats is NOT because he's deciding whether to re-register as a Democrat for the primary? (Read that carefully.) I don't think it has been given due consideration by Carla or others that some commentor's claims here clearly make the assumption he would run as a third-party candidate in the general against Wyden, while some of us have actually been assuming he WOULD re-register as a Democrat and run against Wyden in the primary because this election actually has to be a battle to re-claim the DPO if Wyden sticks with his pro-private insurance ndustry stance on health care reform.

Mr Bodden--Just wondering: does your criticism of voters for "continually going along with their tribal representative" extend to those who vote for candidates other than D or R?

Also, I'm sort of disappointed that Harry Kershner has not weighed in here yet ;-)

"Mr Bodden--Just wondering: does your criticism of voters for "continually going along with their tribal representative" extend to those who vote for candidates other than D or R?"

Yes.

<h2>John's chances have been undermined by Dave alienating people all over Oregon. John might have better luck securing a high paying job over at Nike.</h2>