August 10, 2006
Darcy Burner's 1st Ad

Darcy Burner has released her 1st ad, as covered by David Postman, and fawned over by Horse's Ass and the NW Progressive blog.

I'm with Postman, it really doesn't end well at all. I would argue 60 seconds is too long an ad for any Congressional candidate of either party, but I thought this ad really fell apart at about the 40 second mark...and it didn't have much of a message sinking in at that point anyway.

Posted by Eric Earling at August 10, 2006 09:49 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Saw it tonight for first time...but with the sound off. Interesting to see the text/talking points pop up. Easy to see what the main message was without all the audio garbage.
Poor little girl...
Military roots (dragged all over the place apparently)...
USAF veteran ...
Worked herself thru college (apparently her parents thought her not worth the helping)...
Microsoft hard worker...

Nothing about what she stands for (or hides behind)

Posted by: sokala on August 10, 2006 09:53 PM
2. LOL, where's the tylenol...?

For many families the American dream is slipping away....and it's those damn politicans fault....but our savior...Darcy Burner is on the way......To...Congress!

I feel better now...my headache has LEFT!

Posted by: Andrew R. on August 10, 2006 09:57 PM
3. Interesting. Up through the 20 second mark, the ad could have been about almost anyone, including myself. Even after that, it got only slightly more specific.

But what's with the "and so do we" thing at the end? I first saw that on the freaky Ned Lamont-Kos ad, it struck me as bizzare then, and it still does.

Ad odd ad, strategy-wise. She can't be foolish enough to want to fight a battle of the biographies with Reichert, can she? Reichert may be vulnerable, but certainly not from that angle.

Posted by: Timothy on August 10, 2006 09:57 PM
4. USAF veteran

I don't think so........

Posted by: sgmmac on August 10, 2006 10:21 PM
5. She missed a key item in selling herself to the voters---but I'm not gonna say what it is! Don't wanna help her campaign. But Dave Reichert will definitely not make the same mistake.

Posted by: Misty on August 10, 2006 10:22 PM
6. To be serious....IMHO 95% of television ads for candidates of both parties are pretty annoying and lame.

I was able to meet Doug Roulstone (Republican challenger to Rick Larsen in Washington's Second District) yesterday at his new campaign office in Everett.

So now I want to give my impression of both Darcy Burner and Roulstone, both challengers of imcumbents but from different parties.

From Darcy's campaign I get this sense that she feels she needs to be elected to Congress, that it's life or death...My guess is that her campaign will become nasty and she will go down in flames...I hope not literally! IMHO she would not be a good fit for the 8th district! She reminds me of Gregoire...Did I spell that right I don't speak French?

I checked and I did spell it right:)

Doug Roulstone is a very good man and as time progresses I come away with a better feeling about what kind of Congressman Roulstone would be! I asked him why he was running and he told me that he wanted to get Congress back on track by being a leader, something that he has been all his life! Roulstone told me that he does not need to become a Congressman, which reminds me of Dino Rossi telling us that he would be happy out of politics. I believe them both. I also asked Roulstone one last question...what are his hobbies??? He didn't come out with any specific answers except for travel, and that he likes to work to get things done. I hope for the sake of Washington that they both will be elected sometime sooner rather than later.

Posted by: Andrew R. on August 10, 2006 10:37 PM
7. One last thing before I make it to bed...To prove my point Darcy Bruner has been running for Congress since at least July 2005 against a rookie Congressman (Jan. 2005)??? Roulstone started last year as well but Rick Larsen has been in Congress since Jan. 2001! Darcy Burner is not running against Dave Reichert or Bush, but for herself and her own self-interests, which is good in most respects, but I do not respect the people who will do anything to look favorable...That's why I believe this election will become very nasty from the Burner campaign.

Posted by: Andrew R. on August 10, 2006 11:02 PM
8. Gary Locke also used to spend an annoyingly large amount of time campaigning on his father's veteran status. I remember thinking, "Great, Gary, your dad sounds like he was a real stand-up guy, and maybe I woulda voted for him."

Now Darcy has one-upped Gary with both a veteran father and a veteran husband, but it still says nothing about HER. In fact, it burns up ad time without having to talk about HER, which is most likely a key point.

Posted by: TB on August 10, 2006 11:35 PM
9. I'm sorry, but can someone help me with why anyone should vote for anyone because they have relatives that are veterans or are actively serving? THEY aren't running, SHE is. And this veteran thinks her effort to present as "veteran light" is despicable.

Posted by: Hinton on August 10, 2006 11:46 PM
10. Hinton,

Damn good point. This veteran thinks so too!

Posted by: pbj on August 11, 2006 12:14 AM
11. I've long thought she was long on talking about her family's military connections and short on talking about herself. It's as if she's trying to give the impression that SHE was in the military when she wasn't.

Posted by: Me on August 11, 2006 01:36 AM
12. Following the timeline, the ad was good until she started talking and getting face time in her own ad?

Very perceptive of you all. Good work.

I hate these ads that say they are for Social Security, Vets, Education, etc. I am too, but I ain't voting for her or any of the others.

Me, yes, it seemed she wished she were in the military and was trying to get some gravitas. However, with her constant resume shifting and 'rolling moss' background, she probably thinks she is stable.

Posted by: swatter on August 11, 2006 07:08 AM
13. Watch for this "the american dream is slipping away" theme to be played out over and over between now and 2008. This is the Dems new version of "it's the economy, stupid" from Clinton's first run at the White House.

Yeah the "american dream" is slipping away. That surely explains all the 6th graders running around with cell phones glued to their ears and the high school kids that overflow school parking lots and clog neighborhood streets with their cars.

What a wonderful bunch the Dems are. They spare no effort creating doom and gloom and more categories of victims they can pander to.

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on August 11, 2006 08:35 AM
14. Thanks to Sokala for illustrating the point I made in my blog last night.

Watching the ad and not closely paying attention you will quickly think she is a veteran because you see that caption. She is not, she was a daughter of a veteran, but the pop up caption does not say that.

Maybe I am not so crazy after all...

Posted by: Karl on August 11, 2006 08:38 AM
15. A few of the things that I am sure future ads will feature.

A picture of Darcy gaveling in a rousing session at the Ames Lake homeowners community center to highlight her local government experience.

A picture of Darcy stopped at a crosswalk for an elderly person crossing the road to show her commitment to Seniors and Social Security.

A picture of Darcy dropping the change from her Big Mac into the Ronald MacDonald house bucket to show her charitiable giving.

Yep,it's going to be fun. Hey how come she's not highlighting that fundraiser with the California Mafia and McDermott? Don't forget her mugging with Dwight CAO Pelz in Westlake? They must have footage of that too.

Posted by: Smokie on August 11, 2006 09:16 AM
16. This is ad 1. Wait a while and we will begin to see where this leading. I suspect the one after the next one will outline how this all-american daughter is now anti-war and therefore the only choice against the evil republicans.

Posted by: deadwood on August 11, 2006 09:25 AM
17. The points y'all are repeating are

1. She is self-interested and doesn't care about affecting real change, as she claims

2. She cares too much about other people to talk about herself.

I would have difficulty reconciling these.

Posted by: Ben Diamond on August 11, 2006 10:01 AM
18. Ben Diamond,

As usual, you're spot-off.

Here are the two points:

1. She is self-interested and doesn't care about affecting real change; and

2. She attempts to gain gravitas and street cred from other people, like family members in the military.

See, when you actually understand it, it's very easy to reconcile.

Posted by: Larry on August 11, 2006 10:17 AM
19. All these months of blather and babble, now this ad and STILL DARCY SAYS NOTHING.

Posted by: Cheryl on August 11, 2006 10:28 AM
20. For me, the ad seemed to be heavily focused on immunizing Darcy with gross mentions of the military history of her family. Frankly, that seems a bit disingenuous given that Darcy's stance is against Iraq. The worst thing we can do for our soldiers is to lose our resolve as a nation. Even if one disagrees with Iraq, we can't fight wars in a casual and undetermined manner. And if we bow to every Democrat demand to turn tail and withdraw, the ultimate message we send to our enemies is that our resolve is easily manipulated and our attention span is non-existent.

But back to Darcy. As always, the ad ends by playing to the have nots. By any measure, the economy is doing quite well right now. And an increasing majority of the population is young enough to realize that bankrupting social security will not help the country, nor provide them with any future benefits.

I think there are many selfish Americans, and possibly many poor Americans and Seniors that would back Darcy's altruist values that put into place policies of redistribution. However, I doubt that there are really a significant number of such people in the 8th CD. And there are also a lot of principled people in the 8th that realize that propping up Social Security might provide them with some short term benefit, but would be to the detriment of the country in the future.

It's these honest people that won't be falling for Darcy's message.

Posted by: Jeff B. on August 11, 2006 10:37 AM
21. Say, my dad is an engineer. Maybe mayor 5cent would like me to design the new viaduct. Oops, I mean tunnel aka submerged roadway.

Darcy Burner...puh-lease. The add reminds me of our highly esteemed senator in tennis shoes for some reason.

Posted by: dan on August 11, 2006 01:09 PM
22. I'd rather a person with a dad for an engineer and a military family, then a "I couldn't find the worst mass murderer in the history of the US despite him being identified 7 times over 20 years, whose lived on gov money his whole career" Rechiert's ineptness is exactly what we don't need. Of course she can't say this in an ad because there are too many "nice voters" who vote based on smile and demeanor.

Reichert's colleague when it was pointed out that no one pulled Ridgway's arrest record after he was DNA identified --- "It was no one's (no one is another name for Reichert) fault"

Posted by: John McDonald on August 12, 2006 07:44 AM
23. Of course you would liberal~john. Being a liberal, we have come to expect nonsensicalities masquerading as reason coming from you (I would be amazed if we ever got anything but!)

Thanks for enunciating the liberal POV for us liberal~john. Now, isn't it time for your medication?

Posted by: alphabet soup on August 12, 2006 09:31 AM
24. Alphabet,

Feel free to post a thought, you've been in a dry spell lately.

Posted by: John McDonald on August 12, 2006 08:47 PM
25. Why would any rational person try to deal directly with Liberal John? He has demonstrated an inability to reason, process rational thoughts and arguements. Apparently he is quite insane and perfectly happy to stay in that condition. No wonder he supports Darcy.

Posted by: Smokie on August 12, 2006 10:38 PM
26. Point taken Smokie.

Call it an irresistible impulse, or a hobby (or simply an irrationality if you prefer ;'} but I actually like to see loons like liberal~john blather on. He/she/it typifies the departure from reality that the leftists have become. Like it or not, these lunatics scurry around the fringes of our society, and, since I can't smack it with a shovel, I'm content to goad it from time to time.

liberal~john claims to be a conservative, but its words belie any notion of that. Its deliberate attempts to derail the only true political mechanism of conservatives - the Republican party- prove that its true allegiance is, if not Dhimmicrat, then Anarchy. As such it is a repugnant little troll who is richly deserving of every bit of wrath it gets.

liberal~john it too dim to recognize that not a person here GAS about anything he says, so it presents a target rich environment for me!

Posted by: alphabet soup on August 13, 2006 11:38 AM
27. Feel free to post a thought or something Alphie, because it's boring reading the same thing over and over again how everyone who disagrees with you is mental. I'll just accept that I and other non-Republican Party loyalists are mental if that will you get out of the repeative post syndrome (RPS).

Posted by: John McDonald on August 13, 2006 03:00 PM
28. You don't rate more than I've given, liberal~john...besides the rest of the forum is starting to get really annoyed - with you.

Posted by: alphabet soup on August 13, 2006 04:43 PM
29. "You don't rate more than I've given, liberal~john...besides the rest of the forum is starting to get really annoyed - with you".

Ditto. Like after 8 gazillion posts no one knows that you hate Reichert. Give us all a break, please. Or maybe you could better spend your energy building a companion site to your anti-Reichert site. "Why Nancy Pelosi will make an excellent Speaker of the House."

Posted by: Bill Cruchon on August 13, 2006 05:40 PM
30. Reichert's a big Pelosi fan. I'm sure Pelosi won't forget Reichert when she is speaker as Reichert's Cinderella moment is probably the first flirting she's got since high school.

Posted by: John McDonald on August 14, 2006 02:14 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?