Apparently you left them somewhere back during the primary. "I'm not going to take a position because then some people who disgree with me won't vote for me" is pure cowardice.
Since you refuse to say whether or not you will support the state spending limit measure here is a more basic question: Are you going to vote for or against it? Or are you going to tell us that you will leave that bubble blank? Are you afraid of your opinions? Do you subscribe to the "say whatever I have to in order to get elected" theory?
This was during the Oregon primary:
"At a debate Monday, candidates were asked if Oregon should stop educating children of illegal immigrants. Only Saxton said it should."
But now when we talk about the 14th amendment and challenging the practice of giving away citizenship to people who don't deserve it you are going to "look at the law."
During the "should we educate them" time many people came out and said that it was a non-issue because this had been decided by the supreme court. I said that it mattered because it showed the attitude and opinions of the candidates.
I liked that attitude then, I am very disapointed now.
Unfortunately for those of us who want a better Oregon we are stuck with you. We have to choose between putting a large rock in our backpack or putting a large and sharp rock in our backpack.
You can hope that enough of us will still carry you through election time but you can bet at the next primary we will be looking for something different.
24 comments:
As a called to Lars pointed out today, Sleepy Ted avoided all tough questions during the last campaign and . . . won the election.
Looks like he is on track again.
Can you see a pattern here?
I for one don't want Ron to pull an Atkinson as sword falling is deadly.
It's sad that in a particapatory democracy the stealth candidate who can keep opinions and positions the most hidden is the winner.
Actually, the sword isn't that deadly - to anyone but Lars.
It was his decision to try to become "kingmaker". He played up Mannix, and lost. Went to WA, and again lost. He can't afford another loss. So while he puked all over Atkinson, he can't do it to a guy who now says essentially the same things. He has to go with his second choice.
You think Ron isn't fully aware that he was second?
I am amazed that Ron does not think the Illegal Immigration issue and everything it touches is an important helper in getting elected. Just this year our membership has increased 8 fold.
Who the heck is he listening too?
Was he threatened at a MEChA mtg.?
Or did Karl Rove call him after the mtg. with the National Council of La Raza?
Did the Open Border groups send him a pile of cash?
We already have a do nothing Gov. that makes this State the MAGNET, west of the Mississippi, for Illegal aliens.
Felix or Ron cannot figure out that doing the opposite of TED is a good idea?
I am also concerned that some of the 'conservative' bloggers are really Liberal Democrat plants.
How else can you explain them jumping on the hate Ron camp so quickly and so easily, without a viable option to get an R into the mansion in Salem.
I like Jason, but he is out of the race. Ben & Mary are far away from the money and people needed to win.
Bloggers what else should we do?
Searching for perfection does keep some busy for much of their lifetime.
Think what could be accomplished if they learned to accept excellence.
Saxton will lose and we will be blamed.
It's not our fault that he's gutless and we stick to our Conservative principles.
RINO is pretty close in his prognostication.
I have not decided to dump on Saxton. Unless he tries to placate the immature and duplicitous Lars Larson.
If he runs to Lars, I'm gone.
Ron has been rather consistent in his inconsistency. So we know what he is already. Lars on the other hand has become deceitful and petty.
Unfortunately for Ron he has been given some bad advice and gone running to Larson. So if Ron loses it won't be because some bloggers rightfully said "I told you so." It will be that someone told him to go back to Lars.
Consider that Ron only got 40% of the Republican primary vote. That means that the majority of Republicans did not think he would be the best nominee. Ok, tough position already. Now consider that Lars with his blow torch was performing the largest act of mouth to mouth resucitation in the history of mankind.
With all the power and might of Lars Larson he still could not break a majority of the Republican vote. Now extend that to a general election vote.
Now consider that Lars is making fun of principled conservatives in his attempt to assuage his own egotistical mistake. A candidate tying himself to that trainwreck can't be positioning himself correctly.
One more time Ron. Stay away from Lars Larson.
yip yip
Oh and Daniel...
I gotta admit GREAT lead in to your post.
Well, Rick, we warned you early on that Ron Saxton was all talk and no show. You and your boys played a big role in getting him nominated. Now he's your problem.
And I think it is funny that the same people who said us Atkinson bloggers would never be able to have any real influence on the primary are now up in arms because we are dumping on Ron. I guess now the theory is that we insignificant Atkinson bloggers are soooooooooo powerful and important that our lack of support is the only thing stopping the Saxton juggernaut.
I don't know whether to laugh, or take a nap.
once again we are stuck picking from who is worse. I am sick of being stuck with poor choices and windsocks for candidates.
Could someone with actual conviction and determination run for office?
Lars, Hicky Hillbilly and the rest of the mindless of the OR GOP jump all over Atkinson's back for doing what Saxton is doing over and over: ducking and dodging, and not talking about his position on important issues.
Larson and his gang of fools demonized Atkinson and brought him down for the sake of "finding the best candidate". Now they are all getting theirs for supporting a stinking liberal. If a little smirk hasn't crossed Jason's face, I would be surprised. I bet a tear is crossing theirs.
Ron had more republican support in the primary than the other candidates, sure it was plurality but lot's of primaries are.
And I'm not sure why you would want him to stay away from Lars? Where would you have him go? None of this would even be an issue if it wasn't for Lars' program and his asking of these important questions. The alphabet networks are going to ask about the 14th amendment.
Lars has done us a great favor by exposing this, and any, politician who is squishy. The fact that Lars, like many of us, realize that we are past the primary and now is not the time to cut the throat of (an admittedly weak) candidate just shows that he recognizes political realities.
What would you have him do? Drop his endorsement?
I didn't vote for Saxton in the primary but I plan to in November. I think that most of you will too when you actually sit down with your ballots.
The most productive thing that we could do at this point would be to try to steer this ship in our direction, let Saxton know where sentiments lie on spending limits, anchor babies, etc.
Carping RINO, however accurate the description might be, isn't going to put this state on a better path.
Thanks for the compliment Coyote!
Divided we fail.
You decide.
Four more years of Teddy and Oregon is well past the point of no return, if not already there.
I hear gunfire as I write.
Real swell!
Press #2 for English
the best way for Ron to get elected, if that is your goal, is for him to abandon Lars and the conservative base, run as close to Ted as he can while staying *just* to the right of him, and coast to election. Republicans will mostly vote for him just because he isn't Kulongoski, and a big chunk of liberal-to-moderate voters, generally dissatisfied with Kulongoski, will be willing to vote for a "moderate" Saxton.
Of course, you end up with a "Republican" who is almost indistinguishable from a democrat. But, hey, it works for Gordon Smith, right?
This appears to be Saxton's plan, and it will work. For every right wing blogger who gets pissed off and threatens to vote for Mary Starrett, Saxton gains 10 Blue Oregon voters. For every Lars Larson listener who undervotes, Saxton gains 10 Oregonian readers.
If Ron runs as a somewhat left-of-center candidate while Kulongoski runs as a solid-left candidate, Saxton will win the biggest landslide ever, simply because the far-right is so conditioned to vote Republican no matter what, and he'll seize a chunk of the left. Westlund and Starrett will be non factors. They will each get low single digit support, and basically draw from opposite ends of the spectrum, cancelling each other out. With so many conservatives unwilling to allow another third party candidate to be this year's Tom Cox or Al Mobely, Ron has nothing to fear.
Ron will end up being far more liberal than most Republicans could have imagined, and yet will be unstoppable. Just like Gordon.
Expect Saxton to say he's for a guest worker program soon. Then Gordon Smith will tour the state with him, talking up the need to bring in farm labor to do the work Oregonians won't do. Expect Saxton to start talking about things like living wages, and the need for sustainable business and mass transit.
Oh sure, he'll find one or two core Republican conservative issues to cling to, in order to distinguish himself from Teddy K. He'll keep hammering the need to reform PERS without raising taxes. But that will be it. And, in true political form, expect him to TALK about these two things a lot, without actually doing anything about them. After all, if he fixes the problems, he won't have any problems to hold over our heads in 2010. He'll need to be able to say "you need to keep me in office so I can keep working on taxes and PERS."
That's how politicians stay in power: they identify problems they can never solve, so they can always campaign on them.
So your choice in November will be:
More Sleepy Ted?
Or a Sleepy Ted clone who will, at least when talking in public, oppose a tax hike and antagonize union workers, even if it's all talk.
That's really about it.
At least if you vote 3rd party, you're helping one teeny little bit to shift us out of this two-party abomination that always results in crap vs. smelly crap.
By running from Lars I mean to stop pandering to him.
He does not need Lars' show anymore and he does not need to go on Lars' show anymore.
Doing so will only harm Saxton. Heck Lars was complaining yesterday, all day. Then when Saxton went on air today it immediately started the party fighting again.
Ignore Lars. If the MSM picks up a spat between the Republican nominee and the extremist Lars Larson, it can only help.
That is if it is not too late.
Anon 10:15 your entry is so right on that I am going to follow your good advise. I will be voting Starrett. I am tired of being part of the problem by voting for people who undermine this state. I am encouraged to work for a solution.
Anon 1015 said...
"If Ron runs as a somewhat left-of-center candidate while Kulongoski runs as a solid-left candidate, Saxton will win the biggest landslide ever..."
Problem here is that Saxton is already running to the left of Teddy the K on several issues.
"Then Gordon Smith will tour the state with him..."
No Gordon will not travel the state with Saxton. Gordon does not want a Republican governor. Gordon likes being Oregon's top dog R. If he helped to elect an R governor he would be helping to put someone in office with power equal to his own. Nope, Gordo the Magnificent will not help to elect Saxton.
A history lesson: political parties fail to elect candidates when they are divided. Political parties came into existence for two primary reasons: First, to promote ideas and policies that the members believe should be government policy. Second, to elect candidates to office that the party put forward after nominating them by vote of the members.
Politics is the art of addition as Coyote has stated before. Generally it means putting together coalitions that add up to the most votes. Compromise is crucial to successful winning politics.
Look at the Republican party's founding history: President Lincoln won the presidency in 1860 principally because the opposition Democrats were divided. Lincoln was himself a compromise candidate picked because he was viewed as the candidate with the best chance to win. He did not win on the first ballot at the convention, in fact he got LESS votes than William Seward on the first ballot, but when it was clear Seward would not get over the top, then Lincoln won, AND the convention then moved to be unanimous because they knew a united party was crucial to election victory. Actually, it was quite common to move for unanimity after a decision was reached to emphasize the need for unity.
That unity is needed today if Republicans are to win the Governor's office for the first time in 24 years.
By the way, Lincoln was considered a moderate on the slave issue and was criticized by total abolistionists, but the party knew victory was the best policy, and there were other candidates at the 1860 Republican National Convention at each end of the political spectrum who did not get the nomination because they were viewed as not being able to win.
Compromises were made on the most vital of issues, the issue (slavery) that caused the creation of the Republican Party.....Why? Because election victory was crucial to stopping the Slavocrats.
The rest is history.
Are any of our present issues any more important than our founder's issue of slavory? Can we take lessons from them and move united to victory in November? I hope so.
I agree with you boys about Lars, about Saxton and about imigration. It is just sad that it took imigration to make any of you act like conservatives. Coyote, Rino, and Daniel. If you boys were all fine and good with the man with two faces before he did not define himself well enough for you on imigration, then you let all the other lies and moderations go... Abortion? Recipical benefits (i am sure I spelled that wrong) but you get the point. CONSERVATIVE! That is not asking for perfection like some boob said, that is asking to vote the Republican platform. Now, how would Jesus vote? We know he hated evil right? My guess then the answer to that would be that he would not vote for the lesser of two evils.
Amy Rabon
Bruce,
Ron Saxton has a long track record as a LIBERAL. His history as a hard-core conservative who would fight illegal aliens began in January and ended this week.
Do you SERIOUSLY think he is now running some sort of "stealth" campaign, to try to appear moderate, so the left will accept him, and he can then hammer them once in office?
Are you THAT blind?
The stealth campaign was to WIN THE PRIMARY.
Some of us said last spring that Saxton would appear far right, then surprise us all by being liberal if he won the nomination. Now we are being proved right.
Now you expect ANYONE to believe that THIS is the trick? That THIS is "conservative" Ron's plan to fool the liberals into voting him in so he can be conservative?
Was he conservative when he hired Neil Goldschmidt's brother?
Was he conservative when he gave money to Bill Clinton and Ted Kulongoski?
Was he conservative when he opposed Measure 7?
Let me guess: you think that, for the last 20 years of Oregon politics, Ron Saxton was secretly building up a long track record of supporting liberal causes, on the off chance that, some day, he could be elected governor in a liberal state and then, kind of sudden like, say "haha stupid liberals, I've been conservative all along and now I am going to rule this state like a good Republican should?"
Are you on drugs?
Now you know why I didn't vote in the primary, because THEY'RE ALL GOING TO LIE TO GET ELECTED. And no, when they get in office he will not enforce our immigration laws, because from day one, he will be working on re-election. It's a never ending cycle of crap!
So we're screwed in my opinion...
For every right-wing extreemo that votes against Saxton there are 10 Libs that will vote for him as although they are not talking about the Illegal Alien problem they are damn scared and darn worried.
I am Coyote
How exactly can you dump Ron Saxton when you can actually vote for him?
I am not voting for either one of these son's of bitches. Saxton doesn't support the spending limit. I emailed him and told him that I didn't see much difference at this point between him or Kulongoski. Of course, there is some differnece, but either way, Saxton is a RINO.
Not that I care about walmart, but with Beaverton shooting it down tonight 5-0, I don't give the first fuck about what happens in this state anymore. The sooner I can get the fuck out of here, the better. Fucking weirdos. I've had it.
The only thing worth voting on around here is the Ballot Measure. Everything else doesn't seem to matter.
I give up. I am not from here; I've got to get the hell out of here. Good luck. You guys are fighting a losing battle against these socialist assholes here.
Some of you will accuse me of being part of the problem. Look, if I was from here, I'd fight because where else would I really be at home? But I am not from here, so fuck it. I am done.
Post a Comment