Greg Walden: Safe from the Right.

Greg Walden sounds moderate but votes hard right. The GOP moved, and Walden moved with it. He protected himself on the right.

But he still sounds like Good ol' Greg Walden. Nice guy. Unflappable.

The Greg Walden in the popular mind of many Republican voters is the mild-mannered, Main Street, Chamber of Commerce Republicanism of Gerald Ford, Bob Dole, Mitt Romney.  In the District he looks and sounds the part.

Mild and calm amid angry crowd.

Primary Threat. Some Republican incumbents are facing competition from the populist Trumpist right. Polls show GOP voters back Trump, and the winning GOP style is Trump populism-nationalism. Steve Bannon threatened a primary attack on every Republican Senator except Ted Cruz. Incumbents watched Richard Lugar in Indiana lose a primary election, and up and coming House leader Eric Cantor--with a presumed 30 point lead in the polls--lose to a Tea Party insurgent. The word went out: the real risk to an incumbent in a safe seat was from an insurgent on the right.

Walden was theoretically vulnerable. His tone is not Trumpist. He is mellow-establishment, not insurgent. Primary challenges to people like Walden are emerging. For example, Mark Sanford, GOP Representative in South Carolina, faces Katie Arrington, an unabashed Trump-supporting Republican, who calls Sanford the "Jeff Flake of Congress."  The shooting in Parkland, Florida created pressure on GOP incumbents to be "flexible" on gun registration and on assault type rifles, which creates a risk. Anything less than a pure "A" rating from the NRA gives a GOP incumbent's opponent an opening to attack from the right, but which might leave the incumbent looking insensitive to gun violence.

It is a dilemma. CNN reports the comments of a GOP strategist in Florida: "Damned if you do, damned if you don't.  If you don't, you may not win the nomination. If you do, you may not win the general election."  Click 

A strong Republican primary challenger might have pushed Walden to the right.  

Greg Walden has no primary threat. 

Paul Romero, Jr., who calls himself a Constitutional Conservative, filed against him as a Republican. A person with a "Constitutional Conservative" label would be the trademark signal of an opponent on the Tea Party insurgent Trumpist right.  

Romero shows no sign of a viable campaign. He holds no public office and has what he calls a "low budget, grassroots campaign" using his own personal funds. He cites some issues, none of which are a real threats to Walden. Romero wants to protect Social Security, citing a 1999 vote by Walden. Romero says he opposes illegal immigration, supports good federal land management, says he supports more jobs, wants to lower taxes, supports the 2nd Amendment, supports keeping dams, and supports term limits. All of these are standard GOP positions, none of which are directly a threat to Walden, except term limits. On the hot issue, guns, Walden has an "A" rating from the NRA. and is one of the top recipient of NRA financial support. 

Romero's only real criticism of Walden is that Walden has become wealthy and powerful while serving as a Congressman, and that he can no longer relate to his constituents. It is a powerful argument if he could make it with force, and it echoes what Democrats are saying.  But he is nearly invisible. I see no sign of campaign beyond a few personal appearances, the Voters Pamphlet, his website, and a personal Facebook page. 

Webpage: http://romero4oregon.com    Facebook:  Click: Romero Facebook 

An Independent candidate, Mark R. Roberts, is the sole filer on the Independent ballot slot, but at this point his campaign focus appears to be running a write-in campaign on the Republican ballot. He has both an active web page and frequently updated Facebook page.

Roberts' billboard

Webpage: Shake a Million Hands  and  Facebook: Mark Roberts  

The activity of his Facebook page suggest an intent to run a real campaign, but his omission from the Voters Pamphlet suggests the opposite. In any case, billboard advertisements urging people to write in "Roberts" instead of voting for Walden is not a viable insurgency.

If Roberts could raise and spend money he might be a significant factor. He has detailed policy positions and he makes direct criticisms of Walden.

What this means for the general election:  

It means Walden is safe in presenting himself to the voters as Mr. Nice Guy moderate. The near invisible agitation from the right helps Walden. Walden gets to tell donors that he has been pressured from the crazy Tea Party fringe, which positions Walden as some kind of responsible centrist within GOP establishment donor circles.  

Empathy

Every Democratic candidate has a parallel criticism of Walden. The Democratic message: Walden isn't what he appears to be. He became a captive of the Trump-Tea Party-GOP caucus. Look what he did on the ACA. Walden is part of the Republican House disfunction that cannot even keep a Speaker. 

It would have been an easier argument to make if Walden had needed to protect himself from the right and have associated himself with Tea Party radicals. But he didn't.