Posted on 11/05/2008 3:15:23 PM PST by Chet 99
Oregon Constitution Party Probably Tips U.S. Senate Race
November 5th, 2008
Only three candidates were on the ballot for the Oregon U.S. Senate race, nominees of the Democratic, Republican, and Constitution Party. It appears likely that the Constitution Party tipped the outcome in this race. Although the votes counted (as of 2:30 pm Pacific time) show Gordon Smith (Republican) leading, the vast bulk of uncounted votes are from Multnomah County, which includes Portland and is very Democratic-leaning. The results now are Smith 663,126; Jeff Merkley (Dem.) 658,409; David Brownlow (Constitution) 75,968. Over 190,000 votes remain to be counted from Multnomah County.
It was 190,000 uncounted this morning, 6 hours ago. I like to think they can count ballots quicker than that.
Wow, who woulda thought that there were 76k conservatives in Oregon?
You people are freaking misguided. Smith will jump at any request by Lord OBAMA and cross over anyway. We have no stake in this race.
I think the green and libertarian candidates cost us a good conservative representative here in michigan’s 7th district. He lost by 2% and the greens and libertarians took 3% between them.
Give 'em a break! They're manufacturing votes as fast as they can!!!
“times like this” seem to occur every two years. When elected members of the GOP abandon Republican principles I feel free to abandon them. They can make the electoral calculation from there.
Ok, from the Oregon Sec State website, Smith is up 4,952 votes with 1,394,948 votes counted. Now there was only 1,441,100 votes cast for President in Oregon. That means there’s maybe 46,152 ballots left to count. Not 190,000 from left leaning Multnomah county.
You’d rather a guy with a 70 rating from the American Conservative Union be dumped for someone will net a 0.
Unbelievable.
You are not understanding the principle. We will have more than 40 one way or another. It is more important to have a strong mass of TRUE CONSERVATIVES than ever! Screw these half baked pussies!
Why do you assume that Greens and Libertarians would/should have voted for Walberg? Though I hate to lose anyone who voted against the bailout.
Gordon Smith is your typical milquetoast RINO. If I lived in OR, I'd have voted 3rd party too, and washed my vote down with a famous Portland microbrew.
Cost you? You have it exactly backwards. Republicans need to EARN the votes of the citizens. You want libertarian votes? Great go get them with policies that libertarians like. For instance, actually making the US government smaller, and I don’t mean just giving it lip service. The Republicans had the Presidency and both houses of Congress. What did they accomplish? Yeah, we went to war in the Middle East, and we lowered taxes (temporarily iirc). Did we reduce federal regulations? No. Did we balance the budget? No. Did we repeal unconstitutional legislation (e.g. GCA 68)? No. Did we close the border? No. Not a great record is it? So why would any self-respecting green or libertarian want to vote for our guys?
I don’t know that they would have voted for him. Unfortunately he was one of the congressmen that the GOP considered a lost cause. finishing only 2% down doesn’t sound like a lost cause to me. They should have given them their support.
The Democrat who won, promises lots of pork and taxes which would have driven lots of libertarians to Walberg.
I think that the same thing may have happened at the presidential level in North Carolina: I think that Barr + McCain might top Obama.
You don’t appear to know anything about Tim Walberg. I suggest you study up before bashing him.
You apparently can’t read english.
The democrats have to figure out exactly how many more votes they need to create to beat Smith first! Of course then we will find out that they had more than 190,000 votes still left to count in Multnomah county. We all know the game by now, they will find a box of votes they forgot to count as usual.
We Oregonians all know Smith is a RINO, but when you only have a choice between a RINO and a liberal democrat, you take the RINO. LOL!
Like I’ve said before, third parties like the Constitution Party exist for little more than spoiling elections and giving Buchananites a pretended high horse to sit on.
I have no respect for conservatives nominating a conservative fraud.
“So why would any self-respecting green or libertarian want to vote for our guys?”
It’s easier to beat up on the Libertarians than it is to fight with your own party. I have come to the conclusion that the Libertarians are the true conservatives, except for the extremist that exist in all parties, in this country. The Republican party has become the “big” government “neocon” party. It has forgotten its roots and become Democrat light. The Democrats are not our friends, but he Libertarians can be if we return to our roots. Machiavelli was right and this is a war for our children’s future.
With 100% of the precincts in, Smith is ahead by 1200 votes.
Unfortunately, that website is horribly confusing.
If you go to the Oregonian.com website, they state only 80% have reported, and most of the votes still outstanding are from Portland. It looks like Smith is done.
Here’s where a third party cost Republicans.
Smith had been increasingly erratic (and went gay for Obama it seems) but this is not cool. He tried to hard to appeal to the middle did Smith, Oregon is not so rattastic you must be a RINO to be elected Senator.
I’m a bit peeved at the Constitution party. Their affiliate in Cali cost conservative Tom McClinctock statewide office in 2002.
Um, the greens are RED as in socialists, they would have gone Dem.
They’ve cost us more than just those races. They’ve cost some other statewide races (such as when Mannix ran), and we lost Congressman Rick White in WA state with an affiliated 3rd party (White wasn’t perfect, but he was potential statewide material).
I’ve noticed the Constitution Party boys seem to run the strongest in the three Pacific Coast states, which is exactly where they’re causing us the most damage (you almost never see them in the South, or they get so few votes you don’t even notice them). I know those states can be full of RINOs, but they don’t recognize when someone good comes along. Actually, I don’t think the CPs in these states care much for Republicans at all, they’re probably happy to cause mischief whenever they can.
Smith is partially to blame for his loss. He called the Iraq policy “criminal,” which wasn’t going to get the moonbats off his back. He intially struck me as being quite conservative for an Oregon Republican, more so than Hatfield or Packwood, and wasn’t afraid to say he was pro-life (Hatfield was too, but he was also very dovish, had other attributes that you wouldn’t find in an orthodox Republican). From what I read, he ran to the right when he first ran against Ron Wyden in 1996, and a little less so when he ran for the other seat the same year and won. And after he won probably by the best margin an OR Republican had in memory in 2002, you’d have thought Smith knew his stuff. But he seemed to just go off the rails. He kept trying to endear himself to the Portland market with his support of gay rights while still running as a social conservative in East Oregon, which is probably why the Oregon CP ran a candidate against him. I think his son committed suicide in the past few years, and that may have caused him to act more erratically.
It’s ironic that he should lose at the same time two of his cousins, the Udalls of New Mexico and Colorado, won election to the Senate.
The CP (and its sister protest parties) has been a disaster for the GOP in the Pacific states, indeed. Of course, you’re right that Smith played a substantial role in his loss. You can’t piss off your base voters in such a way (especially Conservatives) and expect them to continue to stand by you and validate the leftward lurch.
Actually, Smith lost his first race (the early ‘96 special) to Wyden because of a 3rd party Conservative that deprived him of almost exactly what he needed (Wyden won a bare 47.8% plurality), all the more frustrating since Smith ran as an unapologetic Conservative. In hindsight, though, it may have been better Wyden won that particular race, since Smith would’ve had to defend the office in ‘98, and Wyden more than likely would’ve won the November regular (since I have no idea what prominent Republican would’ve even run, let alone won, that year).
I rather mocked a couple of liberals earlier this year when they gleefully declared the outcome for the 3 Senate contests (I expected we’d still retain Smith, albeit by an unimpressive margin, and had an even shot in Colorado, though NM was uphill), but their prediction turned out to be correct. Smith lost and the Udalls won.
Although I have some reservations, this may give Smith an opening to run for the open Governorship of OR in 2 years. He’s really the only one of any prominence that could make a legitimate go for it, and he came from the OR legislature to begin with. It will have been 28 years since a Republican last won that office in 2010.
Depending how the economy is in 2010, it maybe our turn for the OR Governorship. Ted K’s approval ratings are poor. If the Communist Organizer’s approvals are sub-par as well, then the Or could have its first GOP Governor since Mark Hatfield?
***the Constitution Party boys seem to run the strongest in the three Pacific Coast states, which is exactly where they’re causing us the most damage (you almost never see them in the South, or they get so few votes you don’t even notice them***
It has to do with state laws concerning ballot access. The West Coast has lenient laws for 3rd parties raising money and gathering signatures.
I agree. Smith even ran ads that talked about his love of working with that steaming pantload 0bama. This will be no big loss.
No, no, not that long ago. Hatfield was Governor from 1959-67 (he actually won the office from a Dem incumbent in one of the worst GOP years in the 20th century). Hatfield was followed by the very popular Tom McCall, a slow-growth RINO, from 1967-75.
A Conservative ran to succeed him in ‘74, but lost in a 58-42% landslide because of Watergate, but the Dem that won, Bob Straub, was a disaster, and that same Conservative made a comeback 4 years later and won, 55-45% over Straub, and served two terms, that being Vic Atiyeh (1979-87). Atiyeh was the last Republican to win, despite some fairly decent nominees in the years since (had the highly unpopular Barbara Roberts, for example, tried to run for a 2nd term in 1994, ex-Congressman Denny Smith probably would’ve taken it, but the more popular Dem John Kitzhaber ran and won).
Interesting to note that when Atiyeh won his landslide in 1982 (63-37%), his Dem opponent was none other than Ted Kulongoski.
Aside from Kitzhaber’s unusual landslide reelection in ‘98, the Dem wins have been underwhelming (52% in ‘86; 46% in ‘90; 51% in ‘94; 49% in ‘02 & 50.7% in ‘06).
IF the rats have a 1-seat majority 4 years from now it will seem much worse.
I think Hatfield was the only GOP Senator to vote against the balanced budget amendment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.