House blow-out. GOP losing 7 seats. Dems could reach 38

GOP loses 7 seats in “early” count, giving Democrat House possible 38 votes. Two more than needed for tax increases (36 votes). All numbers in flux

Four incumbent GOP lawmakers fall
Flores down 1,954 votes
Bruun behind by 207 votes (may change)
Wingard behind by 46 votes (may change)
John Lim down 2,000 votes

Three GOP vacating seats switch parties
Lindland down by nearly 3,000 (former Rep. Smith seat)
Kennemer down 800+ (former Rep. Wayne Scott seat)
Nelsen down 1,300+ (former Rep. Minnis seat)

New GOP guy
Weidner wins (replaces Rep. Nelson)

15
Andy Olson X 15,117 62%
Dick Olsen 9,229 38%

17
Sherrie Sprenger X 12,227 60%
Dan Thackaberry 8,294 40%

18
Vic Gilliam X 7,689 53%
Jim Gilbert 6,691 47%

19
Kevin Cameron X 9,041 56%
H. Day 7,007 44%

20
Vicki Berger X 13,411 55%
Richard Riggs 11,114 45%

23
Jim Thompson 13,268 57%
Jason Brown 10,063 43%

24
Jim Weidner 14,830 54%
Al Hansen 12,449 46%

26
Jessica Adamson 9,021 48%
Matt Wingard 8,965 47%

29
Chuck Riley X 7,632 62%
Terry Rilling 4,595 38%

30
David Edwards X 11,175 58%
Andy Duyck 7,655 40%
Ken Cunningham 430 2%

35
Larry Galizio X 11,499 66%
Tony Marino 6,022 34%

37
Michele Eberle 7,756 51%
Scott Bruun X 7,547 49%

38
Chris Garrett 9,073 67%
Steve Griffith 4,381 33%

39
Toby Forsberg 5,933 54%
Bill Kennemer 5,077 46%

49
Nick Kahl 6,075 59%
John Nelsen 4,307 41%

50
Greg Matthews 7,978 58%
John Lim X 5,815 42%

51
Brent Barton 7,976 57%
Linda Flores X 6,022 43%

52
Suzanne VanOrman 10,825 58%
Matt Lindland 7,934 42%

59
John Huffman X 14,657 59%
Mike Ahern 10,110 41%

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 07:49 | Posted in Measure 37 | 14 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • eagle eye

    I have thought for a long time that the Oregon Republicans were following a path that would lead to extinction. Since 2004 and much more so recently, I’ve thought the national Republicans were drinking the same kool-aid. Some serious reflection and rethinking are going to be needed, otherwise I fear we could be in for a very long time in the wilderness.

    • Richard

      can you explain more?

      • eagle eye

        A few random thoughts — no time for anything systematic —

        Oregon Republicans: Focused on tax cuts — long after this ceased to be an issue, thanks to their success in 1990 and a little later — dying timber industry, out of step on most people’s environmental concerns. Oregon conservatives: same as above. Hostile to public education to the point of detestation. Wacky ideas (like on this website) such as selling off Portland Community College. This stuff just turns most people off. A lot of hatred of colleges, professors, science.

        National Republicans: Insanely ambitious goals (remaking the Middle East) without the competence to pull it off. Bad attitude toward everyone else (see contempt comment above). If you’re going to alienate the world in advancing your agenda, better make sure the agenda works, you better get everything right. Reagan was much different. Bad attitude toward government (Bush and Katrina). Almost seems they think by making government fail, they are making the conservative case. Again, Reagan, while running against government, actually made things work a LOT better, this was one of the reasons for his great success.

        Of the nationals I’d also say there’s an anti-science pose that isn’t working. The McCain-Palin stuff on bear DNA, the fruit fly stuff of Palin. Global warming. A case to be made against global warming, but sneering at science isn’t the way to do it. The creationists in the Republican party are turning off the college educated, the professionals. The people that, like it or not, are increasingly dominating the country. The national Republicans aren’t even ahead among the banker/business/finance crowd anymore. As David Brooks said, quite an accomplishment!

        The final straw, of course, was the financial calamity. Lot’s of big talk for 8 years about conservative governance, markets, followed by reckless action and ineptitude.

        In practice, the national conservatives defended a leader and a party who were recklessly uncoservative. All the while they were getting more and more extreme in their conservative poses. A good example: recent books debunking FDR and the New Deal. What is the point of running against the New Deal while your guys are making the biggest expansion in entitlements since Medicare (prescription drug benefit)? What is the point at all? Nobody under 90 cares about whether FDR was really a bad guy. Nobody under 120 thinks Social Security is going to be undone.

        It seems like the farther they got from conservative policies, the more they retreated into a fantasy world.

        Similar to the local Republicans, to return to the beginning. Forget about the spotted owl, the timber industry. Forget about Sizemore. It’s over. At least for a very long time.

    • dean

      Eagle…your “few random thoughts” should be framed and hung over the desks of the few remaining conservatives. The only thing you left out was abortion politics, which works in some states but is an albatross in most. Even South Dakota voted down an abortion ban measure yesterday.

      Conservatism has to be re-thought through for a modern era, and has to be anchored to pragmatism. And unless this happens fairly soon we liberals are going to be allowed to run amok.

      • eagle eye

        Thanks for the kind words.

        I left out abortion because I am pro-life. I don’t think that will play in a state like Oregon. On the other hand, it’s almost irrelevant now, thanks to the Obama victory. He is likely to be able to appoint a couple of Supreme Court justices who will essentially foreclose the possibility of abortion ever coming under the control of the people, where it belongs under any sane reading of the Constitution. To the everlasting shame of our country.

        The issues that do still have a practical import are the ones where the Republicans are clobbering themselves.

      • CRAWDUDE

        I am sweating the Minnesota senate race, lol! I think Coleman pulled it out but it was a close one. I can’t stand Franken, the worst comedian ever!

  • Rebecca

    I think Chuck Burley has lost too.

  • Dond

    Chuck did lose and by a fairly large margin of about 2k votes….

  • CRAWDUDE

    EE said it best ” It seems like the farther they got from conservative policies, the more they retreated into a fantasy world.”

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Definitely true. If you look at the McCain campaign there were only two points where he seemed to advance in the polls at all. The first was bringing Sarah Palin in. That got him something like an immediate 6-8 point bump right out of the gate. Then she had a couple of bad interviews. Biden had a couple of nutty moments as well and both Biden and Palin were put in the off stage lock box. That’s ok for Biden, he has been around, how crazy are the press going to go on him? For Palin it was disaster as it gave her no chance to recover. How in the world can someone come back from a bad interview if you keep them locked up? The second moment was the Joe the Plumber moment. That got McCain some talking point and when he hammered them he went up another couple of points right there. Frankly those were the only two moments in McCain’s entire campaign where he seemed to get any traction at all. Both were conservative themes.

      How well did McCain’s moderate themes do? Pretty poorly. He blew the first two debates by not hitting on any conservative themes at all and instead going on about some sort of crazy scheme for the federal government refinance peoples mortgage at the new their now devalued house price. That went no where. What else? Well, he had a nutty health care plane to tax everyone’s health care and then give them a $5,000 tax credit. What in the hell is that? raise taxes and then rebate it back? That went no where.

      Then we had the third debate, the only one where McCain went after Obama’s wealth redistribution and the only one that there seems to be any consensus he maybe tied, after losing the first two debates. All would agree McCain’s third debate performance was the best of the three. It was the only one where he sounded conservative themes.

      I think the bottom line one can take away is this:

      Regan – Conservative, judged a successful presidency.

      Bush 1 – Moderate – judged a failed presidency

      Clinton – Liberal first two years with national health care and gays in the military.

      1994 – Republicans take house for first time in forty years sounding conservative themes with the Contract for America. Clinton later moves right, signing welfare reform.

      Bob Dole – Moderate, goes down in flames faced by now less liberal Clinton.

      Bush 2 – Moderate – judged a failed presidency for a lot of reasons, no small part of it being run away spending and growing deficit. Deficit balloons due to added programs like prescription drug plan, a left leaning move which got Bush nothing in the way of moderate support and helped increase the deficit. Signed every spending bill that came across his desk and got Bush nothing.

      2006 – Democrats take both houses of congress with very liberal leadership. Congressional approval ratings plunge top levels measured in angstroms rather than percentage points.

      2008 – Obama elected. Even though he is rated the most liberal Senator, this is never brought up as a campaign talking point. Obviously they were right in assessing highlighting Obama’s liberal credentials would not be a good thing. Tries to downplay “spread the wealth around” flub, his one mis step of the campaign.

      A pretty strong pattern starts to emerge. Moderate Republicans do not win. Does that mean conservatism is an election strategy that could work for Republicans? Could be, but since we haven’t had a conservative election victory on a national scale since 1994, one could argue it may have worked then but might not now. However this would be difficult since the only up tick in McCain’s numbers came when he amplified conservative themes.

      Liberalism – Pretty tough to argue it is in ascendancy. Obama portrayed himself to the right of his voting record and pretty much disowned every liberal he had been involved with in his past. Time will tell, but I think if nothing else, Obama is a pretty smart politician. I doubt very highly we will see a sea change of the political zeitgeist coming out of Washington from Obama. I think we will see tax increases across the board, at the very least with expiration of the Bush tax cuts. National Health care? Maybe, but I tend to doubt it, the money simply isn’t there. Expansion of government involvement in mortgages? I think that will happen. The sad thing is at this point we can rest assured there will be no investigation into what happened and no one brought to answer for it. The FBI investigation into Chris Dodd? That will vaporize. One will wonder then, where all those concerned about the US Attorneys fired under Bush will be. My prediction on that one is they will revert true to form. No questions asked when Clinton fired the US attorneys. Huge outrage when Bush fired attorneys. No outrage when investigation into Dodd is halted. Maybe in that sense, traditional liberalism will have returned.

      • dean

        OK…you aren’t talking to me…fine. But I can talk to you. You have a somewhat half baked analysis Rupert.

        1) McCain ran as a conservative first and foremost. Yes he sent mixed signals, as Bush did before him and did Reagan, who raised taxes after he lowered them. But that is modern conservatism. Say one thing and do something else, because most voters want an activist government even if they say they want a minimalist one. So show them tax cuts and pretend that will increase revenue. Magic.

        2) Reagan was a rhetorical conservative who cut taxes, did not cut spending, and then raised taxes. Result was an exploding deficit. Easy to look up his actual record.

        3) Bush 1 was a moderate who became a fake conservative, won a war, and then was all but abandoned by his own party for being responsible on the budget and raising taxes. Go figure.

        4) Dole had a somewhat moderate record but ran as a conservative. He also had to in effect run against a very unpopular Gingrich led Congress against a popular moderate president. A “more conservative” candidate would probably have done worse, not better.

        5) Bush 2 a moderate? No. He ran as a “compassionate conservative” to get elected. If he had run as a paleo conservative Gore would have cleaned his clock. Then in office he tried to triangulate enough to stay in office, hence pandering to the geezers and “no child left behind.” He cut taxes, which I suppose is conservative, and failed to cut government. Hey…worked for Reagan. Why not try it again? He appointed morons to run important agencies and started wars he couldn’t finish. Then he managed to break the entire financial system. Conservative? Moderate? Whatever he was….he has been incompetant.

        6) Obama was rated “most liberal” by one conservative magazine that wanted to brand him. It had nothing to do with his actual record.

        7) I did not hear him downplay “spread the wealth around.” I heard him basically ridicule McCain for making an issue out of it, since Republicans and Democrats, including McCain, have been “spreading the wealth around” since Teddy Roosevelt. Not to mention Palin raising taxes on oil companies and sending checks to every breathing Alaskan. If that isn’t spreading the wealth, then what is it?

        I’m a liberal, and I don’t think “liberalism” is in the ascendency. What I think and hope is that pragmatism, e.g. what actually works is in the ascendency. If you have the most expensive health care system in the world and get the 37th best results, you try something different. If you have a $10 billion a month occupation of a hostile nation, you phase out of there. If you have 3% of the world’s oil and burn 25% you develop different energy sources. If the climate is warming due to C02 emissions then you cut back on carbon based energy. If your roads are potholed and your bridges spauling or rusting out you fix them. And if your future depends on well educated people you help pay for their college expenses.

        And if all this works then maybe your side can take notes and start nominating and appointing people who can get the job done as well or better instead of playing tear down.

  • Coyote

    McCain ran as a conservative?

    What tha heck race were YOU watching?

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Yep.

      McCain ran as a conservative? Ridiculous.

      • dean

        If I had a nickel for every time McCain called himself a Reagan conservative during the primary, and as a regular old conservative during the general election, I would be able to retire even with today’s crashing stock market.

        He waltzed away from his opposition to Bush tax cuts because conservatives never raise taxes, or so he said. He touted his 100% anti abortion positions, his patriotism, his warrior status, his opposition to regulation (always he said…until the financial crash, when he changed his mind,) and he said drill baby drill. He ran against government spending, particularly earmarks. He said he wanted to cut spending further. He picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. He walked away from his ealrier support for immigration reform and joined the border security yahoos. He was for private school vouchers. He was for privitizing social security. He voted against the Bush Medicare expansion. If this was not running as a “conservative” then I don’t know what it was.

        He walked the plank for you guys and your entire platform EXCEPT global warming denial, and now you dismiss him as not conservative enough. Its delusional. A more conservative candidate would have lost by a far greater margin.

        Moderates and independents voted for Obama in heavy numbers, while the dwindling number of self described conservatives voted for McCain. Case closed.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)