The reason I initially began to write these posts stemmed from some recent news on Oregon politics (regarding the Bush Administration's attack on the Doctor Assisted Suicide law). As the number of readers on this blog increased after my first two posts on Oregon politics, I thought it would behoove me to welcome the positive response by writing more on Presidential politics in Oregon. So here goes...

In my two previous posts (here and here), I looked at some of the historical trends that might impact the Presidential contest in Oregon. In short, it is my supposition that Oregon--like Illinois, for example--has been trending Democratic over the last decade and a half, and that this trend will continue with a Kerry victory in the state in November. My second thesis is that Bush's attempts to overturn the Death With Dignity law--in effect, an attack on the state electorate as a whole--while shoring up support among the most conservative in the nation, will do little to garner the necessary majority in the state.

This afternoon's post focuses more on current politics, rather than historical trends, as I examine the possible effects Oregon's Senatorial race on the presidential race in the state.

Just below the Presidential race on the ballot, Democratic Senator Ron Wyden is a clear favorite to win reelection. With close to $3.5 million in the bank as of the last filing deadline (which was three months ago, so he has more now), he would be extremely tough to beat by anyone other than perhaps a Mark Hatfield (whose 30 years in the Senate was sufficient in his mind). Additionally, Wyden, a moderate who appeals to the state's bipartisan history, is an extremely able campaigner.

Nevertheless, it's puzzling that the Republicans were so reluctant to run any real competition against the senior Senator. Although Wyden defeated his 1998 challenger John Lim by close to a 2-1 margin, the Republicans did not even try to field an up-and-coming candidate to raise name recognition for a future election. Oregon's GOP ended up selecting Al King in the May 18 primary to run against Wyden; as of the June 12 filing deadline, King had $209 available on hand. Not $209,000... $209!!!

So why are the Republicans not trying to defeat Wyden--a Democrat in a "battleground state"--when the Senate is on the line?

If there is no impetus--no obvious reason--for Wyden to actively campaign, (why should he spend $3.5 million when he could save it for another day when he really needed it?), it is most likely that he will choose to either keep his money for later or distribute it to other Senatorial candidates across the nation to aide any future run for party leadership.

As noted above, Wyden is an able campaigner with a lot of money to spend in the state, for both advertising and GOTV (get out the vote). These two costly activities, if implemented in earnest by Wyden, would undoubtedly aide the state's Democrats up and down the ticket. What is more, if undertaken by Wyden rather than Kerry, which would save Kerry money to spend in actual battleground states. If the Republicans are able to lull Wyden into thinking he is a shoo-in for reelection--as they may have with the uninspiring King--they may believe it will be easier for Bush to steal the state.

Regardless of Karl Rove's machinations and theories about the effects of competitive Senate races on close elections, I don't think the Presidential race in Oregon is tight enough for Wyden's lack of spending to make a real difference. Though it would certainly be helpful for Kerry if Wyden unloaded a sizeable chunk of his warchest to ensure high Democratic turnout around the state, I don't think Oregon's Senate race will affect the Presidential outcome (unlike in Colorado, where Ken Salazar's lead in the polls has turned a Republican-leaning state into a possible pickup for Kerry). As a result of this, and other reasons, I think Oregon will remain safely Democratic in 2004.

This is the third in a series of two articles on the race in Oregon (the series has been expanded)