I'm really much more bemused than stunned.

Maybe they got him confused with Jeff Smith?

Don't know why everyone is so surprised. Mark Smith clearly has the best credentials to be our next Congressman.
Carnahan hasn't done much, Jeff's still a student and has no experience, and Barry is too conservative.
The Post made a fine endorsement!

Umm, Jeff is a professor.

From the former law students I've talked to, Mark Smith didn't have a reputation as an effective administrator.

To be perfectly clear--something Jeff has stressed--Jeff is an Instructor and he is ABD--he has about 200 pages written which is longer than most dissertations--he's looking to turn it into a popular book on reallignment though.

That said, the reason Jeff isn't done is because of his significant time off working for Bradley, The Missouri Dems, Paul Wellstone, and a lot of time spent in Jeff City on charter schools. I would argue--and will soon that Jeff's experience in amongst the liberal candidates is the strongest. he has put working coalitions together to get people elected and bills passed. Something Russ hasn't done and Mark's role on the police board is significantly different-though I'm not trying to denigrate it.

Of course, Barack Obama is an instructor too ;)

I don't know much about Mark and it looks like it will be hard to do so before the election. I reviewed his website and to say it is light on specific policy discussions is generous.

It is almost like Mark is just saying, "I bought the most TV ad time and I'm from South St. Louis city, so elect me." That is kind of the message from that bizzare press release from yesterday.

I need more evidence that he can discuss policy in a meaningful way before I would even consider voting for him. Everything I have seen from him or his staff to date indicates someone who has difficulty articulating a clear message.

Moreover, his flip-flops on choice are more than a little disturbing. If he switches sides on this important issue for political expediency, how do you know he won't do the same on other issues?

With four competitive candidates each polling above 10 percent, why would the Post-Dispatch endorse a candidate who hasn't really run a campaign and is polling under 8 percent?

Puzzling.

I love how the PD thinks Mark is so great for not being negative on Russ the same night that he unloads on Rusty's competency. Anyone think it's a coincidence that the PD failed to cover that? The PD punted by endorsing someone who doesn't stand a chance. The establishment in St. Louis has shown again that it is to weak to stand up for some from the outside. Jeff Smith clearly has the greatest capacity to be a leader for St. Louis and this country over the next 20 years. We don't need backbenchers like Russ and Mark. By endorsing a candidate likely to finish 4, 5 or 6 in this race, the PD has only confirmed it's lack of relevance to this commmunity. Nice work PD.

Oh, I doubt they did that on purpose--their coverage of the issues has been pretty mediocre on a consistent basis.

I received a phone call from someone running a poll last night asking me if "I was less likely to vote for Jeff Smith if I knew he was pro-life"? I know that Jeff is strongly pro-choice. What's going on? Is this Russ's people? Mark Smith's? Someone told me this is called push-polling? I couldn't believe that it was happening here in St. Louis. I am disgusted by whoever is behind this. Has anyone heard about this?

I heard something about the calls against Jeff. Somebody told me that Russ is the only one who can afford this kind of phone effort and he certainly has the motive. I wouldn't rule out Mark Smith either which would be ironic given that he is the pro-life candidate who is dressing up as pro-choice for this race. Maybe the calls are targetting Mark and not Jeff.

I know a number of young lawyers who are less than impressed with Mark during their days at WU Law School. I also heard that nobody on the police board or at Bryan Cave has been exactly impressed with his efforts in those roles. Hard to know what the PD was thinking.

To all the Jeff Smith Cronies out there:
Give it up. You have no chance of winning. Desperate times call for desperate measures. Nice try to discredit Mark and his stance. It hurts to see that only one week before the election, your true colors are coming out. You are all involved in dirty politics and now that people are finding out, you start to cry. Reality bites, doesn't it?

When was Mark Smith Pro-Life? I missed that time and place. He's always been a pro-choicer. I've done my bit of research now, and this is the only place that I can find that bit of Mark being Pro-life information printed.

Here's how my unbiased opinion sees this race shaking out:

I may get bashed to pieces for saying this, but here goes. As is well-documented by many of you, Carnahan (as the preordained front-runner) has yet to close the sale in the minds of many. With Barry, the Smiths, and Russ all trading barbs and terse press releases, it will be difficult for any of them to garner significant traction between now and next Tuesday.

The Post endorsement could have tilted this race had it gone to Russ Carnahan or Jeff Smith. The Mark Smith endorsement simply muddles things further. I'm still not sure where Mark's base is coming from. With the negative attacks beginning, the fractured voting blocs, and no St. Louis City or County candidate having a battle-proven base, I see this thing setting up nicely for Steve Stoll to walk away with, if only by a slim margin.

We all know Stoll's geographic base is the strongest of any candidate, his organizational base (teachers) is as strong as any other, and his ideological base (with conservative/moderates) is less fractered than the left side is. His experience and calming persona should factor in and contrast nicely with some of the others. It will be interesting to see whether Catholic pro-life swing voters in South County vote GOP for the County Exec race or Democrat for the 3rd District. Right now, I think it looks good for Stoll.

To all of you, I would say choose and choose wisely. Incumbents are awfully hard to beat (especially in district like the 3rd where one party dominates), so pick one you wouldn't mind having for 20 years or so. To those of you working the campaign, take time to catch your breath, soak it all in, and enjoy it. The friendships and memories will last forever. And as Al Gore said last night, make you vote count.

When Mark was exploring the race he kept referring to his parish as conservative and that he had to be pro-life. Somewhere that story changed.

Not sure where you're getting your information. I met him when he was exploring and remember talking to him about the abortion issue. He was pro-choice then.

He was pro-life and switched because he didnt think he could get elected like that. ive heard it from dozens of people.

Huh? What does that mean he "switched?"

He's pro-choice.

He has never been elected to public office, and never had a public position on abortion. He decides to run, comes out pro-choice.

That's not switching.

Offline. I'm not sure if it was a switch or how one wants to characterize it,but it became a mini-toodoo at the beginning of the campaign when he threw some hissy fits over people calling him pro-life. That was poor form. I'm not sure that it's that big of a deal in terms of people voting--he seems consistent since he issued official positions. I found the stories of the whining much funnier than anything else.

The thing that is disturbing about Mark's pro-life to pro-choice flip flop is the extent that it was politically expedient and does not reflect his true convictions. That's where I think these stories started. In many ways I think he would have ended up as a stronger candidate if he had stayed pro-life. I am sure that he came out as pro-choice because he thought he could do well in Clayton, U-City etc. In the end he has been dominated in those areas by Jeff Smith. Mark seems to be doing better than expected on his home turf in south st. louis and I wonder if his pro-choice position is actually hurting him there. I would just like to know how he is likely to vote if he is by some freak chance elected. That's the only real question as we look to elect any of these candidates for the next 10-30 years.

Dave, Mark may not have switched positions, but he took a position on choice that is inconsistent with his personal beliefs. I have talked to many people who knew Mark before he was runnnig for office who say that he is not pro-choice in his personal convictions. It may only be a story to you if he has changed his public position on the issue, but to me as a voter and strong proponent of choice, I would much rather have a true believer defending a woman's right to choose over someone who "went" pro-choice to help win an election. For some reason I think the former will be a more vigorouse defender of choice than the latter.

As I understand it, Mark Smith is "personally opposed" to abortion, but supports a woman's right to choose, just like John Kerry. Those of you who would "much rather have a true believer defending a woman's right to choose over someone who 'went' pro-choice to help win an election" had better rethink Kerry, on whom we are counting to make the pivotal Supreme Court appointments.

Maybe switching from pro-life to pro-choice to win an election is just another way to emulate his fellow Southwest High alum Gephardt. Add Al Gore and Vince Schoemehl to that list too (opportunistic switchers, not Southwest alums). It would be unfair to single Mark out in this contest. It's a Democrat tradition.

That's a fairly reasonable point on the issue. If Mark were elected, he wouldn't be switching on the big issue at least.

To bad Mark's not going to be elected. He received some positive news this week, but I don't see how Mark Smith gets much traction in 7 days. I suspect he will still finish behind Jeff Smith, Stoll, Barry and Rusty. He will likely save himself from finishing behind Favazza.

Green perspective, certainly if the choice is between a pro-life Republican and a pro-choice Democrat who is not a true beleiver, I take the latter. That is not the choice we have in this race. I'll take the candidate who truly believes in choice as a personal conviction if I have that option. That's just one of many reasons Jeff is getting my vote.

eye of the tiger free the of eye tiger guitar