Salem Political Snark

I abhor the cult of Trump, and I won't join the cult of Biden

As I said in my preceding blog post a few days ago, "Why Biden should withdraw from the presidential race (but he won't)," along with countless other Democrats I consider Biden's debate performance to be an unmitigated disaster, so much so, another candidate should be chosen to replace him.

Over the weekend I've seen nothing that would make me change my mind. If anything, I'm even more committed to dumping Biden from the presidential ticket, though unfortunately that requires the willingness of Biden, since at the moment he's the Democratic nominee.

I'm irritated that so many Democrats are behaving just like Trump-loving Republicans: circling the wagons around Dear Leader to protect him from criticism.

I heard a Democratic operative say approvingly on MSNBC that after Trump was convicted of multiple felonies in his hush money trial, Republicans backed Trump strongly, while after Biden's horrendous debate last Thursday, lots of Democrats are calling for him to withdraw from the presidential race.

Ari Melber, the MSNBC host, responded just the way I'd hoped he would. He told the operative that Trump has formed the Republican Party into a cult that forbids any serious criticism of Trump, requiring that he be supported no matter what he does or says.

I have no interest in being part of a Democratic Cult of Biden.

But there's disturbing signs of this manifesting. On X (formerly Twitter) I follow many liberals and moderates who are active in politics. Quite a few -- more than I would have expected -- are saying in posts that Democrats should stop complaining about Biden's debate performance, because this will hurt his election chances.

Well, my response is that Biden, along with his campaign, is the one who's hurting his ability to beat Biden by failing to achieve the primary goal of the debate: reassure voters that Biden isn't too old to be a capable president. 

What we learned last Thursday is that Biden is incapable of even answering simple questions in a coherent manner, much less perform the duties of the leader of the free world. But members of the Cult of Biden want his critics to shut up and support his reelection no matter what.

Fortunately, most Democrats aren't like most Republicans. We think for ourselves. We enjoy the oft-heard metaphor that getting Democrats to agree on something is like herding cats. We don't want to be sheep all placidly moving in the same direction.

I understand that replacing Biden at the top of the Democratic presidential ticket would be a risky move. So would keeping him on. There's no risk-free option after the debate. Fifty million Americans, at least, saw Biden fumble and mumble for 90 minutes, looking like a befuddled deer in the headlights for much of that time.

My wife and I haven't donated to the Biden campaign yet. I was all set to do that after the debate, figuring that while Biden would make some gaffes, he wouldn't self-destruct. Which, of course, he did. Now we have no interest in making a contribution, since both of us want to see him withdraw.

A poll conducted after the debate found that 46% of Democrats don't want Biden to run. My attitude is that the other 54% should be donating to the Biden campaign, not those of us who want him to drop out.  Maybe after the Democratic convention I'll change my mind, but for now I don't want to express any form of support for Biden, as this will just encourage him to stay in the race.

I'm hoping that Biden and his family will come to realize that not only is it best for our country that Biden withdraw, it also is best for Biden. Because if he ignores the fact that 72% of voters don't want him running for president, then loses to Trump this November, Biden's legacy will be markedly diminished.

Most people won't remember all of his accomplishments as a Senator, Vice-President, and President. Instead, he'll be remembered as the guy who lost to Trump in 2024, giving Trump four more years to wreak havoc on our nation and the world. 

Sure, there will be no way to prove that another candidate would have fared better against Trump. But damn it, it's so important to defeat Trump, sticking with Biden is a risky move that will look terrible to presidential historians, given how evident it is that Biden has some serious mental problems that make him a weak candidate.

In 2020, I recall Biden saying that he viewed himself as a transitional candidate, setting the stage for a younger generation of Democratic leaders. This wasn't exactly a promise, but it came close to sounding that way. Now it's time for Biden to do just that: withdraw his candidacy and allow the Democratic convention to choose from appealing potential candidates like Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

I'd love to see a Whitmer - Harris ticket, two women running for president and vice-president. This would take the spotlight off of Trump and rekindle enthusiasm among Democrats like me who are decidedly unexcited about Biden's candidacy.  

Why Biden should withdraw from the presidential race (but he won't)

I recorded the Trump-Biden debate last night, as I wanted to go to my Tai Chi class. When I got home at 7:30, about when the debate was over, it wasn't a good sign when my wife told me, "Got a text from a friend. She says it's a train wreck."

Optimistic me thought Laurel was referring to Trump being his usual lying belligerent self. But no, it was Biden's poor performance that elicited the train wreck judgment. Which, when I watched the debate myself, I heartily agreed with.

So much so, this morning I sent this message to the White House via their contact form. I also sent a copy to Oregon Senators Merkley and Wyden, plus Representative Andrea Salinas, urging them to tell Biden he should withdraw from the presidential race.

President Biden: After last night's debate, where you performed very poorly, I urge you to end your campaign for president so someone who is much more likely to  beat Trump can be selected by the Democratic convention. As a lifelong Democrat, it pains me to say this, but the truth has to be spoken: you are too old and limited to run for president again. Being 75 myself, I know how aging changes us. 

This election is super important for a Democrat to win. Election of Trump would be a disaster for our country. You need to put the United States above your own understandable desire to spend another four years in the White House. This would be the patriotic thing to do and earn you a lot of credit for your commitment to saving our country from the ravages another Trump term would bring.

Please surrender your idea that you're the only Democrat who can beat Trump. You aren't. In fact, after your debate performance you are now one of the least likely Democrats to beat Trump. Clips of your stumbling over words, blank stares, and difficult to understand speech will be played incessantly in Republican campaign ads.

Do the right thing and announce that you are no longer a candidate for president. History will look kindly upon your decision to do this.

Now, today Biden said that he wouldn't be withdrawing. That's his prerogative.

But I think it's a big mistake, even bigger than the mistake Ruth Bader Ginsberg made when she hung on to her Supreme Court seat too long even though she was old and in poor health, gifting her seat to a Trump appointee. (This is why Biden deserves to be called Ruth Bader Biden.) 

I'm equally concerned about two things that rose to the fore of my mind after watching Biden stumble his way through the debate, speaking rapidly and almost inaudibly, being unable to come up with coherent responses to questions, and mangling facts that he should have readily known.

One, that given about 60% of people in this country, which includes me, believe that Biden is too old (81) to run for president, his horrible debate performance will only solidify that attitude among voters, making it that much tougher to defeat Trump this November. Two, leaving aside Biden's electability, he no longer seems to be capable of performing the duties of the presidency in a competent manner.

I say this because the debate was a better reflection of what a president should be capable of than reading a speech off of a teleprompter is, as he did at the State of the Union and a rally today. At the debate Biden was confronted with questions he needed to respond to cogently, persuasively, and quickly. He also needed to react to Trump's lies and insults on the fly.

Biden failed at both tasks, even though the Biden campaign got the early debate that they wanted to shake up the presidential race, given that Biden is trailing Trump in most of the all-important swing states. He had spent about a week preparing for the debate.

Yet apparently no one told him to speak slowly, clearly, and in easily understood declarative sentences, or Biden forgot to do this. Either way, this shows that the Biden campaign was incapable of achieving the most important debate goal according to outside observers: reassure a skeptical public that Biden isn't too old to serve another four years as president.

Instead -- and this is why so many Democrats panicked during and after the debate -- Biden did the exact opposite: acting like a befuddled old man who spoke haltingly and sometimes incoherently. I was worried that Biden would make a faux pas that would lead undecided voters to decide he was senile. I never thought that his whole debate performance would be a disaster, which is what happened.

I realize that given Biden's incorrect belief that he is the only Democrat who can beat Donald Trump, and his notorious stubbornness, it is very unlikely that anyone other than Biden will be the Democratic nominee. But I sure wish Biden would withdraw soon, leaving enough time for the convention to choose a replacement.

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer would be my top choice. She's a competent well-spoken female politician from a must-win swing state. Most Americans want a major-party alternative to Biden and Trump. An open convention would create a lot of excitement. Many countries hold national elections in the space of a few months, so there's plenty of time for the Democrats to choose a Biden replacement. 

Again, this almost certainly won't happen. It just made my wife and I feel a lot better to get our withdraw messages off to the White House this morning, since we'd been feeling depressed and powerless after watching the debate.

Today the New York Times editorial board called on Biden to withdraw from the race. I'm an online subscriber. That gift link should work for non-subscribers. Here's an excerpt from the editorial.

President Biden has repeatedly and rightfully described the stakes in this November’s presidential election as nothing less than the future of American democracy.

Donald Trump has proved himself to be a significant jeopardy to that democracy — an erratic and self-interested figure unworthy of the public trust. He systematically attempted to undermine the integrity of elections. His supporters have described, publicly, a 2025 agenda that would give him the power to carry out the most extreme of his promises and threats. If he is returned to office, he has vowed to be a different kind of president, unrestrained by the checks on power built into the American political system.

Mr. Biden has said that he is the candidate with the best chance of taking on this threat of tyranny and defeating it. His argument rests largely on the fact that he beat Mr. Trump in 2020. That is no longer a sufficient rationale for why Mr. Biden should be the Democratic nominee this year.

At Thursday’s debate, the president needed to convince the American public that he was equal to the formidable demands of the office he is seeking to hold for another term. Voters, however, cannot be expected to ignore what was instead plain to see: Mr. Biden is not the man he was four years ago.

The president appeared on Thursday night as the shadow of a great public servant. He struggled to explain what he would accomplish in a second term. He struggled to respond to Mr. Trump’s provocations. He struggled to hold Mr. Trump accountable for his lies, his failures and his chilling plans. More than once, he struggled to make it to the end of a sentence.

Mr. Biden has been an admirable president. Under his leadership, the nation has prospered and begun to address a range of long-term challenges, and the wounds ripped open by Mr. Trump have begun to heal. But the greatest public service Mr. Biden can now perform is to announce that he will not continue to run for re-election.

As it stands, the president is engaged in a reckless gamble. There are Democratic leaders better equipped to present clear, compelling and energetic alternatives to a second Trump presidency. There is no reason for the party to risk the stability and security of the country by forcing voters to choose between Mr. Trump’s deficiencies and those of Mr. Biden. It’s too big a bet to simply hope Americans will overlook or discount Mr. Biden’s age and infirmity that they see with their own eyes.

Couldn't agree more.

 

With the presidential debate looming tomorrow, the race currently is a toss-up

Suddenly the 2024 presidential race is seeming real. Well, make that much more real, because I've been fretting about the race for a long time. 

But tomorrow's debate between Biden and Trump marks the genuine kickoff of the campaign to lead our country. Until now, there just have been skirmishes between the major party candidates. The debate will be an all-out war. 

Being a Democrat, I worry a lot. 

Will Biden stumble and fall on his way to the podium? Will Biden make some faux pas that will lead undecided voters to decide that he's senile? Will Trump summon up the will power to actually act calm and presidential, which would be a smart thing for him to do? Will Trump rattle Biden with taunts when his mic is turned off, leaving watchers in the dark about what Trump is saying but getting into Biden's head?

To relieve my anxiety a bit, I just headed to the FiveThirtyEight forecast, which has been my go-to place for election prognosticating over the years. As of today, the site shows a toss-up.Hey, I'll take a toss-up at this point, given that there's been so much talk about Trump leading in many of the battleground state polls. It'll be interesting to see how the 50-50 FiveThirtyEight forecast changes over the next few weeks, following the debate. 

Here's the FiveThirtyEight commentary.

With 133 days until Election Day, our forecast still sees the presidential race as a pure toss-up. Right now, President Joe Biden is favored to win in 501 out of 1,000 of our model’s simulations of how the election could go, while former President Donald Trump wins in 496 of our simulations. There is still a small chance of the pure chaos scenario: In 3 simulations, no candidate wins a majority of Electoral College votes, which would throw the election to the House of Representatives.

Last week, Biden “pulled ahead” of Trump in our averages of national presidential election polls for the first time this cycle. I put “pulled ahead” in scare quotes because his margin topped out at just +0.3 percentage points — squarely within our model’s uncertainty interval for the state of public opinion today. The rising national tide has lifted Biden’s boat in Michigan and Wisconsin, too, though Trump still edges him out in Pennsylvania. Our model’s current estimate of the gap between the winning candidate’s margin nationally and in the Electoral College is currently D+1.4 points — meaning Biden needs to win the national popular vote by 1.4 points to be favored to win a majority of electoral votes.

On Thursday, June 27, CNN will host the first televised debate of the cycle between Biden and Trump. This will be the first big opportunity for the candidates to shake up the race; since 1976, in the two weeks after the first debate of the cycle, the margin between the two candidates in polls has changed by 2.4 percentage points on average, and up to 5 points in rare cases. But since Biden and Trump are known quantities, whether either candidate can really make a splash is doubtful. Check back over the next week to see how our model reacts to the first post-debate polls.

538's forecast is based on a combination of polls and campaign “fundamentals,” such as economic conditions, state partisanship and incumbency. It’s not meant to “call” a winner, but rather to give you a sense of how likely each candidate is to win. Check out our methodology to learn exactly how we calculate these probabilities.

—G. Elliott Morris

Here's a great message from Trevor Phillips, departing Ward 3 city councilor

Trevor Phillips, the Ward 3 Salem City Councilor, didn't run for re-election this year. Instead, he endorsed Nathan Soltz, a fellow progressive, who narrowly lost to Shane Matthews in the May election.

On June 20 Phillips posted a message on Facebook about Matthews' win and a look back at what Phillips was proud of accomplishing during his time on the City Council, and what he regretted: the decision to impose a employee payroll tax on Salem workers to meet a budget shortfall. 

I liked the message a lot. Honest. Nicely written. Substantive. You'll be missed on the City Council, Trevor. But your reasons for leaving made a lot of sense. Here's the message. I corrected a few typos.

Trevor Phillips

Mr. [Shane] Matthews received sufficient votes to serve on the Salem City Council for Ward 3. His 4 year term will begin in January 2025. This is the normal cycle for Salem City Council volunteer positions. I plan to complete my term and serve through the end of this year.

 

This was a close election. While this is not the outcome that I had hoped for, I accept the results of this election.

 

I would like to thank Nathan Soltz for running a great campaign. Both Nathan and Shane have said that they will try to work together on behalf of the residents of Ward 3 and Salem moving forward.

 

Nathan's campaign was out spent by a margin of $21,000 to $73,000. I have very real concerns about the influence of big money in all elections, but especially in these local nonpartisan small government elections.

 

My experience on Salem City Council has been transformational on a personal level. I've put in a ton of volunteer time trying to quickly catch up to speed with our local processes and current issues.

 

I am proud of the work that our City has accomplished in the last 3.5 years. When I first decided to run, I never imagined serving during a worldwide respiratory virus pandemic. COVID-19 was really really rough for everyone. Being both a local leader and a full time emergency room physician during the pandemic was just next level stressful more frequently than I would prefer.

 

Serving in those two positions during Forest fire smoke of September 2020 (as a Councilor-Elect), the Ice Storm of 2021, the heat dome, and entirely remotely for the first 2 years on Council was a lot.

 

Positive things that stand out include:

 

Passing the comprehensive plan update, passing the strategic plan update, investing millions of ARPA funds and State funds into our local managed micro shelters and the navigation center, passing the infrastructure and Livability bond, unanimously passing a resolution to declare healthcare a Fundamental Right, passing so many policy changes to help / begin / continue to address safety issues for all modes of transportation, hiring a new city manager... These were worthwhile experiences. I am hopeful that our City will benefit from these things for decades to come.

 

Locally, seeing Reed Road built was really cool.

 

And yes, we have got real and profound issues left to tackle. Every city in Oregon and every school district in Oregon is stuck with a structural budget issue that just sucks. No city or school board in our state has sufficient revenue to continue services at past levels. Our property tax system is broken.

 

My response to the math was to advocate for a solution that was feasible to implement. I am sorry for putting my colleagues and our community through the process of considering the deeply flawed payroll tax.

 

It was a mess. It was easy for the opposition critique. It was impossible to get sufficient residents and voters to approve. My "hope" was that we could just fix the staffing crisis in our city and build out more resiliency in libraries and first responders as a council action. I thought that there was a chance that an insufficient number signatures would be collected to force a vote. And at a bare minimum, I thought that by going all in on the need to raise revenue we could at least elevate peoples awareness of the math and realities we are dealing with.

 

I feel like we / I clearly failed on that front in the short term, and it's at best incomplete in the moderate to long term. More work and decisions will come from the revenue task force and council moving forward. I wouldn't do things the same way knowing what I know now.

 

And, not that anyone asked, after March or April of 2023 I knew that I couldn't run for re-election. I have had too many close family members deal with problems like strokes and other health issues that I just couldn't keep volunteering 20 to 30 hours a week while working full-time in the ER. It's too much. I needed to tap out. I am grateful for all of the volunteers, colleagues on Council, community members and outstanding staff that I got to meet and learn from along the way.

 

If I could part on one note, please don't give up. Voting matters. It has a profound impact on so many things. There's a huge for profit effort to convince so many of us that we and our votes don't matter. They are wrong. We have real power. Show up. Vote!

 

Sincerely,

Trevor Phillips, MD

Salem Ward 3 Councilor

Why liberals have more to fear from the 2024 election than conservatives

Last Saturday my wife and I hosted the monthly meeting of a Salon discussion group that we've been part of for many years. Everybody in the group leans liberal, some more than others, naturally, because us liberals, like cats, are notoriously resistant to being herded.

One thing that we all agreed on is that it's going to be tough to maintain a semblance of calm between now and the 2024 election this November. President Biden is roughly tied nationally with Donald Trump, but Trump has the edge in some of the all-important swing states.

I tried to be as understanding as possible toward conservatives when I told the group that while us Biden supporters worry that if Trump is elected it will be a disaster for our country, supporters of Trump feel the same way about Biden getting another four years in the White House. 

However, while this is true, there isn't a genuine symmetry between the anxieties of liberals and conservatives. We on the left have much more to fear than you on the right.

Conservatives worry that if Biden is elected, there will be a continuation of: an influx of migrants through an excessively open border, inflation wrecking the purchasing power of Americans, wokeness infecting our schools, morality plummeting through attacks on religion, abortion remaining legal in many parts of the country, our adversaries not taking the United States seriously, and budget deficits markedly increasing via liberal spending -- among other concerns.

Liberals worry that if Trump is elected, he will create massive problems in just about every aspect of domestic and foreign policy. So in this regard, the concerns of liberals are more or less a mirror image of what worries conservatives about Biden being reelected. 

Here's the big difference, though. 

There's no substantive concern among conservatives that if Biden wins this November, democracy in our country faces a serious long-term risk. Sure, Trump blathers on about the 2024 election being stolen from him just as he fantasizes the 2020 election was, but there's zero evidence that such is going to happen this year, or that it did in 2020.

Thus the worst-case scenario for conservatives is that they'll have to endure a painful additional four years of a Biden presidency, after which they can both hope and work for a victorious Republican presidential win in 2028. 

After all, this is what those disappointed with their favored candidate losing a presidential election have done since our country was founded: lick their political wounds and move on to the next battle. 

This prospect is much less likely if Trump is elected this November and has four years to implement his undisguised plans to aggressively take over every aspect of our democratic institutions. Not Democratic, democratic, as in what supports our democracy. 

A story in Democracy Docket tells the tale well, albeit scarily. Here's an excerpt from "Donald Trump's Plot Against America."

Donald Trump is plotting to overthrow American democracy. It is not a secret, and he is not subtle. The only question is whether enough people will care enough to stop it.

Trump is not hiding his intentions for a second term. Echoing Hitler’s rise to power, he has called his political enemies “vermin” and promised his supporters that, if elected, he would be their “retribution.”

Trump’s enablers have outlined a plan for him to replace tens of thousands of career civil servants with MAGA loyalists and to take personal control of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to prosecute his political rivals. He is almost certain to use an old law — the Insurrection Act — to convert the military into his personal domestic police force.

Since his power comes from a bottomless capacity to lie, he has contempt for the free press, which he calls the “enemy of the people.” He recently suggestedthat the government should censor or shut down media platforms he dislikes.

His most brazen attacks on democracy manifested in the aftermath of 2020. Since his loss to President Joe Biden, Trump has advocated for discarding lawful ballots, tampering with election certification and throwing out entire states’ results. 

He supports voter intimidation and voter suppression, often with a racist dimension. Recently, he unveiled a new “guard the vote” strategy, urging his supporters to monitor the vote-counting process in blue cities like Atlanta, Detroit and Philadelphia. If Trump regains power, these abuses would just be the beginning.

Though state laws generally govern elections, Trump would assuredly use the federal government to seize voting machines and ballots. Anyone who thinks that a re-elected President Trump would not insist on controlling ballot counting and certification has simply not been paying attention.

Authoritarians like Trump are able to use democratic institutions to rise to power, then destroy those institutions from within, which makes it next to impossible for opponents of the authoritarian to unseat him. 

This is the biggest fear of liberals like me -- that Americans will be swayed by Trump's rhetoric and their dislike of Biden to elect Trump in November, after which Trump and his cronies will dismantle the institutions that Trump used to get elected.

Conservatives have no comparable fear, because Biden is an institutionalist who would protect our democracy if reelected. Hopefully that's what will happen. Otherwise the United States will be in deep trouble. 

Giant Sequoia in NE Salem at risk from developer's tree variance request

The City of Salem is unduly proud about being awarded a Tree City USA designation, given that more than 3,400 cities have that title, which doesn't require very much:

Become a Tree City USA Community

1. Maintaining a tree board or department.
2. Having a community tree ordinance.
3. Spending at least $2 per capita on urban forestry.
4. Celebrating Arbor Day.

Where Salem has fallen short historically is the folks at City Hall not doing enough to protect street trees from being cut down for no good reason and allowing developers to remove trees that should be preserved.

The most egregious example of this was Public Works Director Peter Fernandez engaging in a backroom deal with the U.S. Bank president to allow five beautiful, healthy trees on State Street to be removed in 2013 for (you guessed it) no good reason. 

That caused a lot of outrage among tree lovers in our city, which is why I called my tell-all report of this travesty Outrage: Salem's U.S. Bank tree killings. Thankfully, nothing this bad has happened since, but smaller tree outrages have popped up over the intervening years.

Hopefully the tale of a Giant Sequoia growing on land slated for development in the area of Center Street and 23rd Street NE will have a happy ending.

My wife and I learned about this yesterday, Saturday, from Delana Beaton, a board member of the Northeast Neighbors (NEN) neighborhood association, who shared this image with us in the course of a meeting of a monthly discussion group we're a member of, along with Delana and her husband, Russ.

Unfortunately, the deadline for submitting comments on the housing development plan by Portland's Green Light Development ended at 5 pm last Friday. However, my wife, Laurel, emailed City of Salem Planner Aaron Panko anyway about her concern that the developer has requested a variance on the requirement to protect the critical root zone of the Giant Sequoia and four other trees.

She just heard from Panko that her comment can't be considered, since it was received after the deadline.

So what my wife and I are going to do, which I recommend anyone else concerned about the variance request should do, is use the Green Light Development contact form on their web site to send a message directed to Tim Lawler, the developer's representative on this project, expressing concern about the variance request. Here's how it's described on the City of Salem project application. 

A Tree Variance to allow encroachment greater than 30 percent into the critical root zones for five trees dedicated for preservation.

I'm going to ask Lawler why the variance is necessary.

More bluntly put, why the heck can't Green Light Development comply with the City of Salem requirements for protecting valuable trees like the Giant Sequoia? They're almost certainly going to make a lot of money from this development. Why not make sure the Giant Sequoia and four other trees are adequately protected during construction, instead of risking their health by requesting the variance?

Bush Park baseball stadium expansion moves forward with Parks Board vote

The Salem Reporter is doing a great job keeping our community informed about plans for improving the Willamette University baseball field at Bush Park, which would host summer games for a new Salem for-profit team that would join the West Coast League.

Yesterday a story was published about a Thursday meeting of the Parks Advisory Board where the baseball project moved forward. Here's an excerpt from "City parks board advances plans for Spec Keene Stadium."

Members of Salem’s Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on Thursday voted in support of an updated agreement with Willamette University advancing plans to use a stadium adjacent to Bush’s Pasture Park for a for-profit summer baseball league.

The agreement would allow Willamette University to encroach slightly on the city park for improvements at the university-owned Spec Keene and McCulloch Stadium.

Following concerns raised by neighbors, the board recommended a final agreement including a requirement Willamette offer shuttle service and other measures intended to address concerns about parking and impact.

Willamette and Salem Baseball plan to use the stadium as the home field for a new team in the West Coast League that includes the Portland Pickles. The team would host about 27 games each summer. The university would also update the softball stadium at 501 14th St. S.E.

The plans include added accessibility, new fencing and a new field light pole. The project received $3 million in taxpayer money from state legislators earlier this year, primarily because the development will allow local high schools to use the field for free. Lara Tiffin, who directs athletics for the school district, said high schools will use their own fields when the weather’s nice, but the turf fields will be a benefit when it’s rainy.

Neighborhood opposition is having an impact on the project, though I suspect that this won't be enough to derail the stadium improvements. 

After all, there's been quite a bit of buy-in from the City of Salem, Willamette University, the Salem Baseball Club, and the Salem-Keizer School District. 

In December 2023 a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into by the City of Salem, Willamette University, and the Salem Baseball Club. In January 2024 the West Coast League announced that a Salem team would be added, name to be determined later, since Salem Baseball Club is just a placeholder. (Hopefully the name will be more appealing than Portland Pickles, a current league team.)

Friday, the West Coast League happily announced the addition of its 17th member in Salem, Oregon, opening play in 2025. The Salem Baseball Club will join the Springfield Drifters, Bend Elks, Corvallis Knights, and Portland Pickles as the league’s fifth Oregon-based team.

“When you look at a map,” said WCL Commissioner Rob Neyer, “adding another team in the Willamette Valley is an easy call for us. We were simply waiting for the perfect situation, and with the Salem Baseball Club, that’s now exactly what we’ve got.”

The Salem Baseball Club name is a placeholder until a new team name, logo, and mascot are determined and unveiled to the public. SBC will play its home games at Willamette University’s ballpark in downtown Salem.

A March 2024 Salem Reporter story, "Fans abound for stadium upgrade but critics worry about impact on Bush Park," noted that the for-profit team will use unpaid college players for the summer league. 

State legislators recently earmarked $3 million from taxpayers to pay for upgrading the stadium.

University officials propose to replace grass with artificial turf, install new and taller field lights, open more entryways and add field netting.

The university then would turn over the stadium for the summer to Salem Baseball LLC. The company is led by Luke Emanuel, a Salem native who worked eight years as director of baseball operations at the University of Oregon.

Emanuel’s company bought the Salem franchise for the West Coast League and wants Keene Stadium to be its home field. The league features college players who are between school seasons.

As Emanuel envisions the scene, up to 1,500 fans would settle into stadium seats for 27 home games a season. They’d have access to concessions, including beer, and likely pay no more than $10 for a ticket to a game, Emanuel said.

...The request came with a host of endorsing letters. The Salem-Keizer School District’s coordinator of athletics said high schools expect to rent the fields “on a regular basis.”

The Boys & Girls Club of Salem Marion and Polk Counties said it anticipated using the ball field for summer camp, flag football and fundraising tournaments. The Family YMCA of Marion & Polk Counties said the project would “provide space for youth and adults to participate in multi-sport camp programs.”

Upgrading the fields would help Salem’s economy, Travel Salem said in its letter.

“The positive ripple effects of this investment will be felt through increased tourism, local business engagement, and the overall enhancement of Salem’s reputation as a sports destination,” the organization wrote.

As I said in my first blog post about this project, this is one of those issues where proponents and opponents each have valid arguments for why the stadium expansion and summer use by Salem Baseball LLC should either move forward or be stopped in its tracks.

The stadium expansion does seem like a done deal, since most of the money for it has been raised. However, it requires approval by the Salem Council, given that part of the expansion would be on Bush Park land.

If that happens, seemingly use of the stadium by Salem Baseball LLC would be a matter decided between the LLC and Willamette University, which owns the stadium. But I could be wrong about this.

Expanded baseball field in Bush Park draws opposition and support

"If you build it they will come." Most people think this was a famous line in the movie Field of Dreams, as regards a baseball field, but actually the line was "If you build it he will come." One person, not lots. 

Here in Salem, there's both a lot of anxiety and a lot of excitement over a proposed expansion of the Willamette University baseball field into Bush Park (yeah, its official name is Bush's Pasture Park, but few use it). Opponents worry that if the stadium is built, they will indeed come, causing noise, parking, and other problems for the neighborhood.

A story in today's Salem Reporter by Abbey McDonald, "Neighbors question public benefit, impact as Spec Keene Stadium plans advance," starts off this way:

A procedural vote Thursday that would advance plans to develop an existing baseball field adjacent to Bush’s Pasture Park for professional play has become a rallying point for Salem residents opposing the project over concerns about parking, noise and neighborhood impacts.

Salem’s Parks and Recreation Advisory Board is scheduled to vote in a 1 p.m. meeting on an update to the city’s agreement with Willamette University for the university’s use of Spec Keene Stadium, McCulloch Stadium and Bush’s Pasture Park.

The update is a step in the Willamette University and Salem Baseball plan to use Spec Keene Stadium as the home field for a new home team in the West Coast League that includes the Portland Pickles.

The plan for the stadium includes installing synthetic turf, new lights, an adjusted entryway and field netting at John Lewis Field, according to a report from Parks Planning Manager Rob Romanek. The plans also include added accessibility, new fencing and a new field light pole. 

The project received $3 million in taxpayer money from state legislators earlier this year, primarily because the development will allow local high schools to use the field.

Though the stadium is owned by Willamette University, its location is surrounded on three sides by Bush’s Pasture Park. That has brought questions from some neighbors about the impact large sporting events and new equipment would bring to the historic area.

The well-researched Salem Reporter story has many more details about the stadium, including how it will be used by local high school teams who lack synthetic turf on their own fields. 

This is one of those issues where it's easy to sympathize with both those who think the stadium is a great idea, and those who think it is a terrible idea. The Salem City Council has to approve the plan, since it involves some parts of Bush Park. They'll have to consider the pros and cons, then make what likely will be a tough decision for most of the councilors.

My wife, Laurel, is opposed to the stadium, believing that it will harm the character of Bush Park. She shared with me a message from Joan Stembridge, who is one of those leading the opposition. 

Dear Friends and Neighbors and Interested Salem Residents,

 

I am offering each one of you the opportunity to sign your name onto public written testimony that I will be sending to the Salem Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (SPRAB) very soon.  The Board is meeting next week. (Thursday, 6/13/24)  The Board advises the Salem City Council.

 

The issue is this:  Willamette University and the City of Salem want to expand the footprint of Willamette University's baseball stadium further into Bush park for the purpose of having a for-profit summer league college level baseball team to take up residence in Bush Park's John Lewis Field.

 

The for-profit team would play evenings in June, July and August.  With a home season of at least 27 games....  With the games starting around 6pm and going possibly late in the evening when the park is now closed.

 

The owner of the team hopes there will be at least 500 cars of fans coming to each game.... which will completely overwhelm the 420 parking spaces in Bush Park. 

 

Bush Park is a well loved and heavily used park, especially in the summer months when families and friends from all over Salem come to enjoy evenings of picnics, walking, jogging, and free play.  This is why I am so concerned about the idea of a baseball business moving into Bush Park.  Those Salem residents who want to drive to Bush Park for a relaxing family evening will likely be "out of luck".

 

Please read the written testimony.  And, if you are wanting to support keeping Bush Park as a inner city oasis of beauty for the whole community to enjoy, please respond back to my email with your name and Ward number or your neighborhood association name.  (If you are in doubt, please just give your address and I will find your ward/neighborhood association information.)

 

If you have friends and neighbors who enjoy Bush Park and would be concerned about having the summer evenings usurped by a for-profit baseball business, please send my testimony to your friends and let them know they would be welcome to sign on to my letter to the Salem Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.

 

I will also be sending this letter on to the City Council, as the Salem City Council will be voting on this proposition in the future.  It will be educational for the City Council to know how residents all over Salem feel about having Bush Park taken over by a private business.

 

Thank you for your consideration,

Sincerely,

Joan Stembridge, Ward 2

Here's some images of the stadium that were in the Salem Reporter story, courtesy of Willamette University. 

Trump would never write the message Eisenhower did in case D-Day failed

Today I heard MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell read the message that General Dwight Eisenhower, commander of the D-Day allied forces that invaded the beaches of Normandy in France on June 6, 1944, wrote the day before the invasion -- to be shared if D-Day failed.

(Eisenhower wrote the date as July 5, rather than June 5. Hey, the guy had a lot on his mind. His writing isn't highly legible, so I've shared the text below the image.)

"Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops. My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and devotion to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone."

I agree with O'Donnell that there's no way Donald Trump would ever write such a message, taking full responsibility for a mission he led that failed. Trump is a coward who fails to take responsibility for anything that goes wrong. 

He lost the 2020 election because Americans wanted Joe Biden to be president rather than him. But instead of congratulating Biden and acknowledging his defeat, Trump has spent the past four years acting like a cry-baby, falsely claiming that the election was rigged despite mountains of evidence that it was free and fair.

Dwight Eisenhower, by contrast, was a Republican who stood up for honor, decency, courage, and the other qualities that made him both a successful military commander and a successful president. I was eight when he successfully ran for a second term in 1956.

My mother, an avid Republican, loved Eisenhower. One of her best friends, who she played bridge with frequently, was an avid Democrat who loved Adlai Stevenson, Eisenhower's opponent in both the 1952 and 1956 presidential elections.

However, I'm pretty sure her Democratic friend respected Eisenhower for the competent and decent man that he was. 

Donald Trump has brought those days of mutual respect to a crashing close. I can envision Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George Bush all writing a message in the style of the Eisenhower D-Day failure message. While I disagreed with these Republican presidents on many of their policies, I never doubted their basic commitment to the laudable qualities Eisenhower demonstrated.

But Trump... he's light years away from representing what the Republican Party used to stand for.

Which included supporting our allies in the fight for freedom (Trump wants to weaken NATO and end support for Ukraine in its fight against Russia) and recognizing the sacrifices members of the American military have made (Trump reportedly said that those in a WW II military cemetery in France were "losers" and "suckers.")