Interesting. "Tight race for position 2. . ." Am I missing something? Has there been some polling that a reporter would use to make that claim? Is this wishful thinking or is there a water cooler somewhere in Portland where we all can go to get the basis for this claim?

In any case, thanks for the write up. I guess it is possible to go to a fire and report on a flood.

JHB.

Well, until someone actually does a poll on this election I think it's fair to say it's a close race.

Considering there's five individuals running for the position I don't think anyone (Fish) is taking 50% during the primary and that will leave it wide open.

LOL. Knowing nothing makes all things equal. How "first round of American Idol" of you. I was just hoping for a little higher standard for "reporting." As in, knowing nothing means you don't guess.

Well, if we're to consider just the audience, there were a host of City Club members (judging by the conversations I overheard) who were completely torn in half after this debate.

I heard multiple people who said, in varying words, "I've voted for Nick twice before, but this time, I'm totally split," or, "This is going to be a really difficult decision.

And that is Nick's crowd!

So, since there's no actual polling, I think it's pretty safe to say that it's a tight race. Nick admitted today that they don't even have any literature that they've sent out (a WEEK before ballots go out), and you'd be hard pressed to find any lawn signs for him around town.

If Nick's got anything, it's residual name recognition from past runs at city council, which he isn't doing much to advance.

Oh, and hey, "jhbjrpdx," (aka Jim Blackwood), you might want to disclose on these comments that you're actually a staffer on Nick Fish's campaign.

Oh, hey redux, it was you, jhbjrpdx, who was pushing the wholly debunked conspiracy theory that Middaugh had somehow arranged for 1,700 people to give him signatures in November, but stay completely silent about it until January.

I didn't realize that the Fish campaign was officially pushing that whisper campaign. How Rovian! But it's classic Politics For Dummies campaigning: Use unfounded innuendo to turn your opponent's advantages into disadvantages. Karl Rove would be proud.

Duh... I don't think my identity or preferences in the race is a secret as I've posted widely before. I had a name tag on today at the debate. Glad to shake your hand and wish you well, like I did with Jim Middaugh after the debate. Except, Pappy, we don't know who you are, do we?

And, you'll note my criticism was not of Jim M. at all, but of the "reporting" of today's event.

As as for the confusion over the VOE timing. As Jim M. indicated today, there was reason to be confused as the process is an experiment and subject to all the growing pains of an policy in the making.

Sorry to burst your bubble, I am happy to be identified with my thoughts and clearly enjoy the free exchange of ideas. That's what a good campaign is all about.

So, does the Fish campaign know that you are representing them with your comments here and at BlueOregon? If so, you should probably state who you are, and not have the ego to assume that anyone knows who "jhbjrpdx" is.

Although, it's obvious that you're continuing on a campaign theme. With Michael Grossman laughing to WW about the presumptuousness of Nick not winning without a runoff, Nick today quipping arrogantly that he'll "have a lot more free time in about a month," and you here expressing disbelief that anyone could consider this race close (i.e., not a cakewalk for Fish), it seems clear that Fish's candidacy is based on shear self-perceived inevitability. Not on any issues or passion for the future of Portland, but on Nick Fish's own need to be validated by a majority of the city. It's an interesting place to be, and best of luck to you with that.

Yawn.

How come none of the candidates (not just the default two major ones) for Sten's old seat really jump out as being exciting or different? They all seem like boring politicians that spend too much time over-crafting their answers for the media.

I might just say 'to heck with it' and write-in someone with a decent opinion on web logs like Al Margul or someone along those lines. What, someone would rather I write-in Homer Simpson, Kang, Kodos, or someone else that doesn't exist?

Who says none of the candidates for Sten's seat are visionary? Why not try voting for a candidate that actually "walks the walk" like Middaugh? How many other candidates ride their bike to commute throughout Portland, have kids in public school and are pushing for affordable housing inside the city. At least he'll stand up for the things he believes in. Come on people, join with so many of us and vote for the best candidate who can actually make some positive changes for Portland; Jim Middaugh.

Jim made more direct and definitive points in the debate. He had a great answer for the question about what should be the standard for public financing of a convention center hotel. He was specific about racial profiling by Portland Police. I thought Jim demonstrated a breadth and depth of experience that clearly comes from deep engagement in this community.

After the debate, people who know that I'm a friend of Jim's made a point to tell me they are now considering supporting him because he impressed them with the breadth of his knowledge and perspective. Frankly, I think some knew him only as the "green" candidate. After demonstrating expertise on housing, accountability for city finance, how Portland can partner with rural Oregon, Jim really made an good impression.

I didn't say they weren't "visionary" - only that they don't strike me as being worth voting for.
We keep hearing the same old lines of 'kids in public schools,' 'rides a bicycle,' 'affordable housing,' 'arts,' 'loves Portland,' 'supports local businesses,' 'thinks recycling is godliness' (BTW, I recycle, but IMO the way it's done around here stinks), and on and on and on.
It seems no matter who we vote for every time, we get a city council that bends over backwards for luxury condo developers, mcmansion builders, big box pushers, auto dealers, and other crap that belongs in someplace more reminiscent of Hell, like Salem.
What we need is someone to stand up to all of this and say, "hey, this is Portland, Oregon, not Detroit, Michigan. Take crappy practices elsewhere!"

Middaugh is Sam Adam's mini-me. Sam is hoping for Middaugh and Branam, so he has a full deck for his future agenda. Middaugh is happy to go along with it.

I was thinking about this earlier. There are strong similarities between Middaugh and Adams when it comes to vision, attitude and style—they have common goals with regards to where they'd like to see the city go, and they both epitomize the things about Portland that the New York Times likes to profile (check out Adams' campaign video and Middaugh's "I Love My Portland" campaign song for evidence). They both also have a command of the details of running a city, which means they have the knowledge and skills to implement that vision (whether or not you agree with it).

But I don't know that you can put Branam in the same boat. On the vision, style and attitude grounds, sure. I see a lot of Adams' charisma and energy in Branam. But what I don't see is Adams' specificity. I'm not sure it's fair to expect that of someone who's never worked in city hall—and who hasn't spent years working on the fringes of city hall as an activist like Amanda Fritz—but it does provide some contrast.

That's not so much analysis as it is observation... but for what it's worth.