What I don't understand is why the Party still supports him, is it so they can say we have a D from here to "represent" us and better than an R, isn't it? is it?

Am thoroughly disgusted with the Party on both sides, they present and/or support such top notch candidates!!

He's not running for re-election, so no one cares.

I'm sure the Washington-NY commute is killing him and those pesky tours once every 6 years of Oregon probably bore him to tears.

Besides, like Wu, the party faithful got what they want - a D in the office, no matter how marginal.

The problem always is what is the alternative? No powerful Democrat runs against Wyden in the primary which means Republican principles added to the Senate or staying with the evil we know but at least is not Republican.

Perhaps Senator Wyden, after cutting some EPA slack for the big timber and the big industrial polluters could nudge the EPA outta' our faces from LT2 and the billion dollar water/reservoir fiasco getting rammed down our throats? Oh, wait...NYC is making some progress on that front. Jack is correct: Wyden, R-NY

Oregon needs a Mark Hatfield for the 21st century.

Damn right I vote for the turd with the D after his name to the national legislature, where sending people with an R after the name means voting the Wrecking Crew into power.

Wyden has definitely gone native, but anything that reduces Merkley's influence is bad. Putting Jeff in the minority is bad. Ergo, vote for Wyden, so at least we will have one democratic senator from OR worth a damn (Merkley).

The reality: This bill will protect tree farmers like myself from over regulation. I only have 37 acres of 20 year old timber yet I must do everything the Sierra Club, Greenpeace or Oregon Wild says. And when I'm 80 in a few years I'll want to harvest to pay for me assisted living. But the above along with the EPA, US Fish & Wildlife and DEQ probably won't let me harvest.

Yes, Sen Wyden is a smart guy and he's right on this one.

This is why I said I was disgusted with the D and the R Party.
Seems they both went off the track and platforms.
We had a Republican Party that brought us President Eisenhower, locally, Senator Hatfield. We had a Democratic Party that stood for Democratic values. Our current President does not.

http://cstl-cla.semo.edu/renka/ps103/Fall2008/presidential_elections.htm

Primaries and Electoral College: Free Agents Need Not Apply Top; Next Down

For over a century the two major parties chose their presidential nominees at suspenseful national nominating conventions. These events were worth watching, and political reporters flocked to them. This is no longer true. Now they are "giant infomercials" for candidates who are chosen in advance, during state primaries and caucuses.

...Despite this unusual development, I warned last spring and summer not to count on any serious excitement at the Democratic convention itself. The reforms of post-1968 put a firm end to that in both parties. For example, the Republicans' 1952 national nominating convention was exciting to watch, as every political reporter was elbowing to get there and report back the intrigues and moves that would ultimately decide that party's national ticket. That was the year General Eisenhower threw his name in the ring in June 1952 and ultimately overtook the former front runner Senator Robert Taft of Ohio ("Mr. Republican" in those days) to win the Republican nomination. The Democrats held an open convention with many contenders, ultimately choosing Governor Adlai Stevenson of Illinois in a raucous Chicago affair (Parades, Protests and Politics in Chicago, 1952). But that's the old system. The post-1968 conventions became scripted infomercials hardly worth the extended television time they still can capture. This is clear to some political reporters. One leading television journalist, Ted Koppel of ABC, actually bolted the 1996 Republican convention in San Diego after saying on the air that nothing worthwhile was happening and thus he had no reporting to do. The true value of Convention watching now is to hear the pre-chosen candidates give their speeches. Beyond that, year 2008 in both parties resembled 1996 far more than 1952. Delegates were not free agents able to switch from a Taft to an Eisenhower or back again.

I used to watch these on TV when delegates from states would state their choice...fight for their values...what happened to those?
Now is it just "the fix is in" and they go to rah rah rah?
Since our current President has shown his "change", I would have expected a huge conventional debate to put forth other candidates, alas, that was the old system.

Wyden has NEVER made one comment about the EPA LT2 issue.

Meanwhile Senator Schumer from NY has just told the EPA to cease and desist all regulation of LT2.

Even Mayor Bloomberg has flipped the bird to the EPA about LT2.

Meanwhile our mayor is clueless and dishonest, saying that the city of Portland has done everything possible to prevent Bull Run from being destroyed by LT2.

These guys are so out of touch and irresponsible it is getting close to citizen litigation time.

There was briefly some drama at the Dems' 1980 convention when Ted Kennedy tried to get all the delegates released from their first-ballot commitments. After that parliamentary Hail Mary pass failed, he delivered a rip-roaring speech in which he "congratulate[d] President Carter on his victory" but pointedly did not endorse his re-election. That was the last really newsworthy occurrence at a major party convention.