When I saw that Rick Metsger was running for Secretary of State I said, holy shit, what is that, four mostly indistinguishable liberal Democrats? and the Republicans haven't found a soul to volunteer (although I hear that the always entertaining Kevin Mannix may be on deck).
I promise I am going to spend some time trying to figure this out myself, based on looking at their web sites and at their news coverage, but in the meanwhile, can somebody out there please help me with a clue as to what the substantive differences are between Brad Avakian, Kate Brown, Rick Metsger, and Vicki Walker? And how would those differences translate into the way they would do this job?
I looked at the Secretary of State website and it did not seem to me that any of these people would be any more or less qualified than the others.
So what's the deal?
Friday, November 23, 2007
back to politics
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I think all four candidates are good public servants. I'm leaning towards Metsger or Avakian because I don't think that statewide offices are something we can take for granted forever.... Brown and Walker are pretty polarizing politicians. Metsger has shown that he's able to pull plenty of Republican votes in his own district and I'm looking foward to seeing him do the same statewide.
If I were a down-ticket house candidate, I'd rather have Metsger above me on the ballot that Walker or Brown.
Ms. Walker is my representative, and I was totally underwhelmed by her last campaign. She seems to emphasize personalization over issues. This makes her a lightweight in my opinion.
I disagree strongly with LDJ. Vicki Walker is a tough campaigner who did what she had to do to beat a strong opponent in 2004.
Of all the SOS candidates in this race, I believe that Walker is the one who will work the hardest for the public interest.
I saw Sen Avakian speak recently, and I was disappointed at the extent to which he was willing to pander to the crowd, proposing campaign finance reforms, such as limiting the amount that campaigns can spend, that have been illegal for more than 30 years in the United States.
I think that Sen. Metsger and Kate Brown are in it to serve themselves first, and corporate special interests second.
That leaves Walker, who has never shied away from taking on powerful interests in support of the people of this state.
I don't buy the "Metsger serving himself first" argument.
All the candidates are stand-up public servants, and they all have good records on the things that matter to me.
Consider, then, that Walker (Eugene), Brown (Portland), and Avakian (Portland-Beaverton) all racked up those records in districts that expected it of them.
Metsger (Hood River, Welches, etc) racked up his record in a district of mostly Republicans... and then keeps on getting re-elected!
I like Walker, but getting elected as a Democrat in Eugene shouldn't require a "tough campaigner," and the fact that it did makes me wonder about vulnerability in the general election.
"Metsger has shown that he's able to pull plenty of Republican votes in his own district and I'm looking foward to seeing him do the same statewide."
He does it by taking some Republican positions, like making the DMV into the INS. Since Oregon is not a legislative district, I see no need to elect someone to bring the state rightward. How about stronger Democrats, instead?
How much can you know about politics in Eugene if you don't regard former Eugene mayor, Jim Torrey, as a tough opponent?
I agree with Torrid about Metsger's record. He's AOI's main guy.
A Democrat is going to win this office. I'd like that person to be the most progressive candidate, not a Republican-lite candidate using it as a stepping stone.
The best way to lose the statewide offices are to take them for granted.
And the best way to lose the House is to spend $2M on a Secretary of State's race that we could win for $1M.
What makes Brown and Walker so polarizing?
I have my own opinions of both but I'm not sure why: I like Brown and I don't like Walker.
Do you think any of it has to do with their gender?
I agree with oregon dem; We need a Secretary of State who will fight hard for progressive issues. Brown and Walker are alright on the issues, but they don't excite me for this position like Avakian does.
To me, Avakian rises to the top of the field not only because he's a hardworking progressive, but because he has demonstrated leadership on the specific issues that the Secretary of State has the power to influence: fair elections and land use.
Avakian is a civil rights attorney - who better to serve as the guardian of our elections than someone who has spent his career fighting for fairness and transparency?
The SoS is one of three members of the Oregon land board, which manages the use of 2 million acres of publicly held land. Avakian is recognized as a leader in the legislature on environmental protection. In fact, he chaired the Senate Environmental Committee last year. He'd make sure we protect Oregon's natural beauty and resources.
So you can see I'm a huge Avakian fan ... he represents my district and I've been thrilled to watch him develop into such a strong progressive leader.
Post a Comment