#1: “Oregon isn’t all that blue”.  Speaking of Feingold, neither is Wisconsin.

#2:  I hate the word “Progressive”, but it is something I just have to learn to live with.

#3:  A red flag went up recently.  A reference to Jeff Merkley as being “well, he is what he is — Jeff Merkley” — “Someone who will not excite anyone”.  Which reminds me of several Democratic Presidential nominees.  In terms of a Senate bid, I suspect this would work well in an open election, but against a reasonably entrenched well financed incumbent, a challenger somehow needs to break down that barrier and garner an emotional response.  It is one liability that off-sets Novick as being to the “Hard Left”.  Though, maybe just barely…

#4:  Mind you, Peter Defazio was a better bet.  As was John Kitzhaber.  After that, things are a little dicey, methinks.

#5:  Speaking of Kitzhaber…

#6:  The DSCC — credit them and fault them accordingly.  Clearly a tapping of Bob Casey, Jr — against the desires of any number of liber– er — Progressive Interest groups was wise in taking down Santorum in Pennsylvania.  For that matter, the same with Harold Ford, Jr in Tennessee — pegged forever as the magical Democrat #51, who ultimately lost.  But then there’s Montana, where they tapped a “John Morrison”, figuring his DLC centrist credentials would sway this red state.  Squinting at the primary from afar, I could sware that I saw no way Morrison could win, and I could see how Tester, preferable to probably your tastes as well mine, might.

#7: I suppose it won’t do my “Democratic Party Unity” card to suggest that I had a secret desire to see Ford lose in 2006, though through the entire Summer I hoped Jim Webb in Virginia would supplant Ford for the elusive “Democrat #51″, and that if I were in Nebraska in 2008 and Bob Kerrey had been slated for the Democratic side, I would vote for the Republican (never mind he is the Democrats’ best shot in deepest Republican state).  The last one is made easier by the numerics of the Senate — Democrats will add some seats in the next election, and probably fall below the magical mark of 60.

#8:  Ralph Nader.  So, what was your opinion of the man circa 1998, and if it was somewhat negative, could you have stomached a positive opinion? And is it okay to be ambivalent about a Dick Morris lead Bill Clinton, circa 1996?

If I may suggest something regarding Al Gore. (Deep breath). So, his poll numbers were sagging and clearly behind W. throughout the first half of 2000, somewhat sputtering along. At the convention he settled in and focused his campaign, and thus was born “The People Versus the Powerful”. With this as his focus, his poll numbers stabilized and the race reached the “dead heat” stasis it was from there on to the election. The post-convention bounce was not illusionary. This campaign theme seems clearly formed in large part to handle the threat to his left, meaning Nader forced Gore to his focus point.

Granted, after that, Nader was the Spoiler everyone remembers him as. Until he reappeared in 2004, at which point he sent a quick shock through the Democrats’ spines, but turned out irrelevant. As he iss now. Though, frankly, he was only a spoiler in Florida (clear on the eve of the election) and New Hampshire (only obvious in retrospect). Nader voters in every other state are free from blame from saving us from, um…

The 2008 presidential campaign of Joseph Lieberman.

#8A: Historical corrolary: Hencry Wallace’s campaign aided the 1948 election of Harry S Truman. This is not a precise match, as part of Wallace’s aiding came through good old fashioned red-baiting of an easily
baited (backed by the Soviet Union, after all) Wallace, but the political campaign Truman’s advisor forged for him was to forge him to a specific liberal positioning to run against the platitudous Dewey, a firm position necessary to get through to the electorate, the coordinates determined in large part from his left plank in Wallace.

#9: Election Campaign logic tends to amuse me. A primary contest can present a candidate who is said to be dividing the Party’s base. Never mind that Steve Novick was there first.

#10: Wait a week and I may well argure for Jeff Merkley. Or Charity Nebbie, for that matter. Candy Neville.

This entry was posted on Monday, March 17th, 2008 at 8:15 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.