http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/11/jeff_merkley_defeats_gordon_sm. html

Congratulations, Jeff Merkley. I never, ever gave you a chance. I'm glad you proved me wrong. Bye bye, Gordon Smith!!!!

Andrew

Man, the polls had Merkley leading around 8 points . . . what happened there? Anyway, thanks to Gordon, I'll be looking at hot dogs a bit differently now.

Polls in Alaska after Ted Stevens's conviction showed him going down big time, too; the BEST poll for Stevens had him losing by only 7 points(!), but that polling also has turned out badly wrong. www.fivethirtyeight.com has a piece on it:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/what-in-hell-happened-in-alaska.html

Obviously, polling is still far from perfect. Just glad the polls were RIGHT about Obama!!!

Andrew

Er, no, land doesn't vote.

Andrew

Cokaholic: Merkley Wins!

Apparently you missed the title of this thread and the URL I posted at the top?

Andrew

I knew that he could do it. This is a middle class guy from Myrtle Creek with solid ideas and a good record. He is the kind of Oregonian that ought to go to D.C. on a regular basis. In the end, Merkley reached out to folks in a way that Smith did not. Once the rest of Oregon had a chance to get to know him better, he was able to pull enough rural voters to make it happen. He was also the only person running for Congress who had a spot cut by President-elect Obama. I am looking forward to seeing Jeff working on the Hill!

Skep, do you think Gordo's cheap-shot "hot-dog" ad backfired on him? That was a mean, sleazy ad.

Merkin, I really do think that turned the tide. It's not that Merkley is real, um, exciting. But the endless barrage of negative ads associated with this particular race hurt Smith much more than Merkley.

Yeah, I'm with Warner too.

My wife and I kept making fun of Smith every time a hot dog ad aired so yeah, the ad backfired.

It's hard to say whether negative ads "work" or not. Ask any voter and they'll claim they hate negative ads and don't pay attention to them - but studies show that they do, indeed, work, regardless of what people say.

I thought the "hot dog" ad was ridiculous (so much for being able to talk about issues!), but who's to say whether it helped Smith or not?

Andrew

My wife liked Smith, but the negative ads drove her away I think. That's her business so I don't ask.

Andrew, the hot dog ad is an example of the way the cons talk to their base, slow and simple.

So, the question is, could Novick had beaten Smith? I don't think so. Look at the spread between votes for Obama and votes for Merkley. Quite a few Obama voters voted for Smith and I think more would have voted for Smith if Novick was on the ballot.

I too doubt Novick would have beaten smith. I thought he appealed to the heart of liberal Democrats more than Merkley did in the primaries, but Merkley looks and sounds more like what people expect in a Senator - not that that should matter to anyone, but apparently it does. Steve Novick is brilliant, but I don't think independent voters would have warmed up to him.

Andrew

Hmm... Don't know where my post went on this one...

Do you guys think we shot ourselves in the foot for electing Merkley? Many I know were swept up in the wave of Obama but I think keeping Gordon Smith would have done this country much more good than harm.

1. Gordon Smith has been in the senate since 1996 which makes him senior considering all of the other changes going on. We now have to start over with getting Merkley into any committees or high ranking groups. Personally I could deal with a moderate if it meant we had 2 senators working for Oregon first with some clout.

2. Obama is going to need some sort of bridge between the remaining Republican minority and the Democratic leadership. Smith had worked with Obama before as well as Republican leadership and it would have been one of the best ways to get Oregon out there and have our Senator matter more than many others. I think that benefits Ron Wyden much more than anyone could imagine.

Yet here we are now without those two things above. Maybe you personally think that Merkley will be better, but I'd rather have a big voice than a tiny one.

Oh and PS... just because he's a good guy from Myrtle Creek doesn't make Smith a bad guy. And the only reason Obama cut him an ad was because Smith used a great tactic and showed he worked together with Obama on numerous occasions.

Smith wasn't a bad guy, but he was no moderate, either. On many issues (especially 2003-2006 recently) he was voted with the right wing. He enthusiastically supported Bush on the Iraq war up until the 2006 election, when he suddenly noticed the first Democratic wave. He supported in 2005 the nominations of Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Alito, two right-wing extremists (Wyden voted for Roberts too, on the reasoning that Roberts would be replacing another right-winger and maintain the balance of the court; Alito was different.) In 2005 he was one of the supporters of the so-called "Nuclear option" that aimed to change Senate rules to get rid of the filibuster for judicial nominees, when Republicans had a strong majority.

So forgive me if I don't feel a lot of sympathy for Smith's departure. To me, when I think "moderate Republican" I think Bob Packwood or Mark Hatfield, not Gordon Smith.

Andrew

Oregon would have shot itself in the foot had it re-elected Smith. There's nothing better than holding a politician accountable at the ballot box. Smith voted with Bush a majority of the time. I say good riddance.