Novick Hit By National Blogger on DSCC Hypocrisy

November 29, 2007

Underdog Oregon Senate candidate Steve Novick’s primary opponent, Speaker Jeff Merkley, gets DSCC support. It is well known, we get it, Novick and his supporters aren’t happy about it. So yesterday, when the amount of DSCC assistance was reported, Novick’s fundraising appeal was no surprise:

I need your help to tell the D.C. establishment that Oregon’s primary election isn’t for sale….
Your contribution of $100 right now will help make that happen and send a message back to Washington: Oregon’s elections are not for sale!

However, I’m sure Novick didn’t expect the blow back to be as big, as national blogger and commentator, Senate 2008 Guru, took him to school:

If Mr. Novick is true to his principle (and isn’t just trying to take a quick shot at Speaker Merkley for enjoying some establishment support) that Oregonians, and only Oregonians, should be the ones to pick the nominee, and out-of-state fundraising is contradictory to that principle, will Mr. Novick agree to return every financial contribution to his campaign that comes from outside of Oregon? Surely, he wouldn’t want the financial contribution of a Washingtonian or Californian impacting the electoral decision of Oregonians. Will Mr. Novick further eschew financial support from the DSCC should he win the Democratic nomination (and willingly put himself at a major financial disadvantage against Gordon Smith, who will no doubt enjoy some support from the NRSC)?If Mr. Novick isn’t willing to return every out-of-state financial contribution, then this alert rings hollow. If Oregonians alone should pick the nominee, and Mr. Novick extends that sentiment to financial support, he ought to return every contribution that has come in from outside of Oregon, lest his charge seems hypocritical, like the argument of a candidate who shuns “establishment” support not for any principled reason against it but rather for no better reason than he simply lacks “establishment” support.

The Guru is right on with his comments. If Novick does indeed win the nomination, he will need the DSCC to bail him out with huge amounts of cash, to shore up his awful fundraising efforts, which only garnered $125k in Quarter 3. It is hypocritical for Novick to say that the DSCC is trying to buy the election and then if he wins go Oliver Twist begging them for money to help Novick buy the election the day after. If you believe the DSSC is buying the election, they either should get to buy the election or not. Primary or general it doesn’t matter.

Novick continuing these diatribes will only further Gordon Smith’s lines of attack against Novick. If Novick accepts the DSCC support needed to win, he would be participating in, what he calls, selling the election. No matter which election or which office your running for, hypocrisy is always a huge issue with voters. Novick needs to make a decision: either the DSCC and out of state help is evil or it isn’t. He can’t have it both ways. Novick should return all out of state money and pledge not to take anymore, or he should discontinue this attack against the DSCC and Merkley.

Forward Oregon asked the Novick campaign for a comment on the Senate 2008 Guru article, as of yet they have not responded. When or if they do I will update with their take on the issue.

UPDATE: Novick Campaign Manager Jake Weigler just got back to me.

When asked if Novick would return and forgo out of state funding to comply with his criticism:

“Unilaterally disarming by refusing to accept money from outside Oregon would do nothing to address the DSCC’s attempt to put their thumb on the scale in this primary.”

Also when asked if they would accept DSCC funds in the general: “Of course once the Democratic primary is complete, assistance from the DSCC is no longer a Democratic Party institution favoring one Democratic candidate over another – it is help in defeating a Republican. That assistance is completely consistent with the mission of electing more Democrats to the U.S. Senate.”

So, as Senate 2008 Guru suggests, Novick’s stance is clearly not principled, but merely a cheap ploy. Further, I don’t understand how Weigler can suggest that the DSCC would pick the wrong candidate for Oregon in the primary, but would pick the right candidate in the general. It seems like either the DSCC doesn’t know whats best for us, or it does.

Blogged with Flock

Tags: , , , , ,

Entry Filed under: OR-Sen. .

8 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Sarah Lane  |  November 29, 2007 at 3:44 pm

    Personally, it doesn’t bother me one bit that Merkley gets support from the DSCC. Merkley has proven to me that mo matter how much the establishment supports him, it has nothing to do with how he legislates and what he values. Merkley is different in that way from other Democrats who tend to cave to pressure from lobbyists and the Republicans.

  • 2. bdunn  |  November 29, 2007 at 4:04 pm

    I don’t mind the DSCC support either. Merkley has a long history of standing up for working people and is the best candidate to take on Gordon Smith. The DSCC recognizing that isn’t a bad thing.

    Novick’s hypocrisy on the other hand is.

  • 3. Jake Weigler - Novick for Senate  |  November 29, 2007 at 5:42 pm

    Bradley,

    As you’re not dealing with a word limit when post online, I think it is helpful to post the full responses I sent to your questions:

    Q: Will you refuse individual donations from people outside Oregon?
    A: The purpose of the DSCC is to elect more Democrats to the U.S. Senate. When an institution that some see as representing the Democratic Party provides nearly $100,000 in early help to one candidate in a primary, it undermines that primary process and that processes’ ability to ensure Democrats put up the strongest candidate against Gordon Smith. No individual, of course, can provide $100,000 in help to a federal candidate. But moreover, unilaterally disarming by refusing to accept money from outside Oregon would do nothing to address the DSCC’s attempt to put their thumb on the scale in this primary.

    Q: Will you refuse help from the DSCC in the general election?
    A: Of course once the Democratic primary is complete, assistance from the DSCC is no longer a Democratic Party institution favoring one Democratic candidate over another – it is help in defeating a Republican. That assistance is completely consistent with the mission of electing more Democrats to the U.S. Senate.

    You’ve drawn one conclusion from them, I’ll let readers draw their own.

  • 4. Jake Weigler - Novick for Senate  |  November 29, 2007 at 5:43 pm

    err… postING online. Which i also now realize means the lack of an editor.

  • 5. bdunn  |  November 29, 2007 at 6:12 pm

    Hey Jake no worries about the lack of the editor. I can’t spell worth anything. I would like to thank you for commenting on the story.

    I did post most of what you wrote, including the full answer to the second question. The entry was getting long and I didn’t want to make it War and Peace. Do you think I misrepresented your views?

    The language coming from the Novick fundraising appeal talks about Oregonians deciding for themselves. I honestly don’t see the difference between Novick’s DC fundraiser with his DOJ buddies and Merkley getting DSCC money which is not just raised by the often villified “DC insiders” but from regular people as well. The cash advantage you cite isn’t as big as it seems if Novick got 20 of his out of state friends to give the legal maximum it would be equivalent to the money that the DSCC gave to Merkley. Either way its still not letting Oregonians decide.

  • 6. torridjoe  |  November 29, 2007 at 6:35 pm

    you don’t see the difference because you don’t want to–or you’re simply a dumbass. I’m running out of excuses not to tag you with the latter, and this doesn’t help:

    “Further, I don’t understand how Weigler can suggest that the DSCC would pick the wrong candidate for Oregon in the primary, but would pick the right candidate in the general.”

    You don’t seem to have the capacity to understand the fairly obvious point that THERE IS NO CHOICE TO MAKE IN THE GENERAL.

    If voters truly don’t like hypocrisy, I’m sure they will view with disgust the Merkley team’s abject smearing of their opponent’s character–while whining about the “negative vibe.” Rovian projection is not what we need in the Senate.

  • 7. bdunn  |  November 29, 2007 at 7:28 pm

    Mark, you are more than welcome at my blog, but do not think that you can come over here and come unhinged and start using ad hominem attacks. When you go off like this, whether on my blog or on yours, you discredit yourself and your candidate.

    If, in the future, you care to civilly discuss the race, please come back, but if this hateful discourse you have recently descended to, is all you have left, please go somewhere else.

  • 8. ameeks  |  November 29, 2007 at 9:35 pm

    torridjoe-
    Actually, there is a choice for the DSCC in the general election: they can choose to invest their limited recourses into other campaigns. Recall that our federal government presides over a union between Oregon and 49 other states, five of which are currently considered to be more likely pickups than OR in 2008.

    Both of our primary candidates exude strong progressive values. The difference is that Jeff knows how to not be a dick about it, something voters in general elections tend to responded favorably to.

    Judging by your tone, I’d say you’re feeling a little insecure and a little bitter about your candidates prospects in this primary. There are certain specialists who can help you face these difficult emotional issues http://www.angermanagementseminar.com/states/Oregon.html

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Anonymous on Busted: My Experience With Lyi…
Mike on Why Smith is Scared: Jeff Merk…
Amuroroghok on Breaking: Candy Neville Did No…
barbara wright on About Forward Oregon
utteseEnlinny on Breaking: Candy Neville Did No…

 

November 2007
M T W T F S S
    Dec »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Archives

Blogroll

Feeds

Categories

Tags

2008 2008 Democratic Senate Primary Act Blue AFL-CIO AFSCME AFT Barack Obama Barbra Roberts bdunn Bill Sizemore BRO Card Check Cyreena Boston Democratic Primary Endorsements Environment Forward Oregon Forward Oregon Endorsements Franking Gordon Smith HD-45 Head Start Hillary Clinton IBEW Im Back Jeff Merkley jraad Kate Brown Labor Labor Unions New Year OR-Sen Oregon Legislation Oregon Senate Polling Shared Responsibility Model Sierra Club SoS State House Steve Novick Thesis Web Video why?