The majority rules, but do the people of Portland truly understand what a "majority" is in this case? Did the councilors run for office on the basis of the platform they now espouse? There has been only one instance where the Mayor was allowed to cast the tie-breaking vote nd that was over a budget matter.
The DSA has an agenda, and it should be made public. Is there a bloc of voters that hold a different position that might run for these offices? Portland seems to be almost apolitical, sitting on its hands while a small "majority" runs the city.
Unfortunately these candidates are pretty clear about their horrible platforms, so we can’t say they’ve been disingenuous that way. The issue is really threefold: 1. Many voters in Portland simply go along with what they consider to be the most liberal candidates, no matter how horrible their ideas or performance are in practice. We unfortunately are also dealing with a younger generation of Democrat voters far enough removed from real knowledge of life or history that basically have accepted that Capitalism = bad. Law and Order = bad. 2. Now with ranked choice voting, a candidate only needs a relatively small portion of the overall vote to get themselves into office - this was by DSA design and voted into reality by the aforementioned Portland voters. 3. Many residents in Portland are apathetic and complain about outcomes, but don’t educate themselves or bother voting - another large portion of moderate voters have moved away due to the destruction already done here over the past 6 years and are no longer voting.
My larger concern is not confined to Israel or any particular DSA policy. It is whether Portland voters are electing independent representatives or members of an unofficial political party expected to vote together. Edmund Burke’s trustee model of representation holds that elected officials owe their constituents their informed judgment, not merely obedience to a faction or predetermined program. Councilors will naturally form coalitions and often agree, but Portland’s formally nonpartisan system assumes that each representative will consider the evidence, listen to the public and decide each issue on its merits. Portland will remain a left-of-center city, but that does not give any one ideological faction a mandate to speak for all liberal voters. When a caucus says its members “coordinate like a party” and “frequently vote as a bloc,” voters are entitled to ask whether their councilor’s judgment remains independent—or whether the decisive vote was effectively settled before the public debate began. That should concern Portland voters regardless of the caucus’s ideology. For that reason, I urge voters to replace Mitch Green with a more moderate candidate and to retain Eric Zimmerman and Olivia Clark.
Once again, Portland finds a way to repel business development (which for all of the clueless folks out there, BRING JOBS & PAY TAXES!)
Why are local representatives bringing Israel into our politics? I care about local public services, proper use of tax dollars, resolution of the homeless crisis, & a well trained, supervised & funded police force. I vote for senators & representatives in DC to deal with Israel & Hamas.
You have to wonder what Mr. Miller's stand was on the yea-nay of the city charter. Or was he one of the many Portland elite who stayed silent or jumped on the media-led bandwagon. Considering that it passed in a landslide (another indication of the town's collective IQ), anyone complaining about what it produced should get a complimentary dunce-cap.
The socialists are disciplined and appeal to the moronic norm; they will be on a bedsheet ballot that will reward name-recognition and voters' aversion to homework. Legacy media, strapped for resources, will unilaterally declare most candidates "marginal," and will discourage anyone, except incumbents, from getting ink. The results are entirely predictable: if any current member of council goes down, it will be an Arnold-Zimmerman swap.
Especially since the local press calls the non Peacock councilors the “moderate block” and anything moderate gets crucified in this city. Plus Portland voters are lazy, they might look at what WW or the Mercury recommends, and not do an ounce of research.
Saw a video of college students being interviewed, with the interviewer asking them what is more positive, socialism or capitalism. All the kids said socialism, with many responding that it spreads the wealth out, provides equal opportunity for all etc. The interviewer asked them if they would be willing to give some of their GPA to other students who might be struggling, to help them get ahead and have better opportunities. Couldn’t believe how fast they switched, complaining how hard they had worked for their grades, why would they give something to someone who probably didn’t earn it. They had no insight into their responses, and couldn’t even see the irony and hypocrisy in their responses. This is what we are dealing with.
Robert Miller and each of the previous comments are very high minded; I choose not to be. I maintain that all DSA are miserable people who believe they are the only virtuous ones. They are parasites living on a still fertile city built by capitalists. The DSA mentality has ruined at least one generation by depriving them of the ability to think and evaluate. If Portland allows itself to be ruled by "the 7" its decent will accelerate: property values will decline and tax revenues will follow.
Ugh i didn’t realize this bs was coming up again. This seems to be a 1st Amendment violation such as the “freedom of association.” It’s also viewpoint bias. This just gives them more opportunities to grand stand on a podium while preaching their “us v them” dogma their voters so easily fall for. It gives them content for their reelection campaigns, while unifying their base around their hatred for Israel (and Jews 🤫).
Mitch Green needs to be voted out.
Excellent piece, thanks for publishing. Ditch Mitch this November!!!! And Morillo and TKL.
The majority rules, but do the people of Portland truly understand what a "majority" is in this case? Did the councilors run for office on the basis of the platform they now espouse? There has been only one instance where the Mayor was allowed to cast the tie-breaking vote nd that was over a budget matter.
The DSA has an agenda, and it should be made public. Is there a bloc of voters that hold a different position that might run for these offices? Portland seems to be almost apolitical, sitting on its hands while a small "majority" runs the city.
Unfortunately these candidates are pretty clear about their horrible platforms, so we can’t say they’ve been disingenuous that way. The issue is really threefold: 1. Many voters in Portland simply go along with what they consider to be the most liberal candidates, no matter how horrible their ideas or performance are in practice. We unfortunately are also dealing with a younger generation of Democrat voters far enough removed from real knowledge of life or history that basically have accepted that Capitalism = bad. Law and Order = bad. 2. Now with ranked choice voting, a candidate only needs a relatively small portion of the overall vote to get themselves into office - this was by DSA design and voted into reality by the aforementioned Portland voters. 3. Many residents in Portland are apathetic and complain about outcomes, but don’t educate themselves or bother voting - another large portion of moderate voters have moved away due to the destruction already done here over the past 6 years and are no longer voting.
JW,
You summed this up nicely. I spent almost 30 years in Portland/Oregon politics and don't recognize the place or the governance.
My larger concern is not confined to Israel or any particular DSA policy. It is whether Portland voters are electing independent representatives or members of an unofficial political party expected to vote together. Edmund Burke’s trustee model of representation holds that elected officials owe their constituents their informed judgment, not merely obedience to a faction or predetermined program. Councilors will naturally form coalitions and often agree, but Portland’s formally nonpartisan system assumes that each representative will consider the evidence, listen to the public and decide each issue on its merits. Portland will remain a left-of-center city, but that does not give any one ideological faction a mandate to speak for all liberal voters. When a caucus says its members “coordinate like a party” and “frequently vote as a bloc,” voters are entitled to ask whether their councilor’s judgment remains independent—or whether the decisive vote was effectively settled before the public debate began. That should concern Portland voters regardless of the caucus’s ideology. For that reason, I urge voters to replace Mitch Green with a more moderate candidate and to retain Eric Zimmerman and Olivia Clark.
Agreed - in my opinion we should all throw support behind Eli Arnold as our third pick. No ranking of ANY DSA candidate.
Once again, Portland finds a way to repel business development (which for all of the clueless folks out there, BRING JOBS & PAY TAXES!)
Why are local representatives bringing Israel into our politics? I care about local public services, proper use of tax dollars, resolution of the homeless crisis, & a well trained, supervised & funded police force. I vote for senators & representatives in DC to deal with Israel & Hamas.
You have to wonder what Mr. Miller's stand was on the yea-nay of the city charter. Or was he one of the many Portland elite who stayed silent or jumped on the media-led bandwagon. Considering that it passed in a landslide (another indication of the town's collective IQ), anyone complaining about what it produced should get a complimentary dunce-cap.
The socialists are disciplined and appeal to the moronic norm; they will be on a bedsheet ballot that will reward name-recognition and voters' aversion to homework. Legacy media, strapped for resources, will unilaterally declare most candidates "marginal," and will discourage anyone, except incumbents, from getting ink. The results are entirely predictable: if any current member of council goes down, it will be an Arnold-Zimmerman swap.
Especially since the local press calls the non Peacock councilors the “moderate block” and anything moderate gets crucified in this city. Plus Portland voters are lazy, they might look at what WW or the Mercury recommends, and not do an ounce of research.
Saw a video of college students being interviewed, with the interviewer asking them what is more positive, socialism or capitalism. All the kids said socialism, with many responding that it spreads the wealth out, provides equal opportunity for all etc. The interviewer asked them if they would be willing to give some of their GPA to other students who might be struggling, to help them get ahead and have better opportunities. Couldn’t believe how fast they switched, complaining how hard they had worked for their grades, why would they give something to someone who probably didn’t earn it. They had no insight into their responses, and couldn’t even see the irony and hypocrisy in their responses. This is what we are dealing with.
Robert Miller and each of the previous comments are very high minded; I choose not to be. I maintain that all DSA are miserable people who believe they are the only virtuous ones. They are parasites living on a still fertile city built by capitalists. The DSA mentality has ruined at least one generation by depriving them of the ability to think and evaluate. If Portland allows itself to be ruled by "the 7" its decent will accelerate: property values will decline and tax revenues will follow.
Ugh i didn’t realize this bs was coming up again. This seems to be a 1st Amendment violation such as the “freedom of association.” It’s also viewpoint bias. This just gives them more opportunities to grand stand on a podium while preaching their “us v them” dogma their voters so easily fall for. It gives them content for their reelection campaigns, while unifying their base around their hatred for Israel (and Jews 🤫).