I wasn't planning to beat up on Darcy Burner any more, but she's both apparently eager to remain in politics and too inviting a target to deserve a free pass.
Her concession speech was as ungracious and divisive as her campaign:
It will be a wonderful thing that for the first time in six years we'll have some integrity and accountability again in the halls of the Congress.Six years? huh? Never mind that the Democrats ruled the Senate from mid-2001 through Jan. 2003. Is she really so partisan and/or juvenile to believe that corruption is more a function of Republican v. Democrat as opposed to say, whichever party happens to be in the majority?
After the speech she explained her loss:
$6 million in Republican expenditures, the President, the vice-President, the Speaker of the House, the First Lady, Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove...Excuse me, but didn't she campaign on her own fundraising success and wasn't her campaign primarily based on attacking Reichert's ties to the same people who she now says are responsible for his victory?
To top it off, Burner is now attributing her loss to the fact that she's a woman. Oh, please. Tell that to Speaker-elect Pelosi, Sen. Cantwell and Senators-elect Klobuchar and McCaskill.
I do wish Darcy Burner well in her next endeavors. But she'd be doing everybody a favor, including herself, if she gave the candidate thing a rest, and did something else for a while.
(And as it turns out, Reichert continued to widen his lead yesterday, to 6,882 votes, or 51.5% - 48.5%). UPDATE: and he widened his lead again today to 7,186 votes, or 51.53% - 48.47%. Reichert's share of the vote is currently slightly larger than it was in 2004.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at November 16, 2006 04:42 PM | Email ThisBy the way, Stefan, do you have any skeletons of your own? Seems like fair game now.
Posted by: Fred on November 16, 2006 05:14 PMI live in the 8th. Surely 12 years of CONGRESSWOMAN Jennifer Dunn should mean something to her.(Although , maybe she missed Dunn's name on the ballot because she didn't vote very often during the time she lived in the district?)
Voters of the 8th District are looking ever smarter for having chosen Reichert to represent them again. Postman gave her no pass on this, either. Looks like 'ol Darcy overestimated the sympathy she'd get from the Left media on this.
Posted by: Michele on November 16, 2006 05:46 PMGuess Stephen needed closure or something so he had to hit the Darcy punching bag one last time.
Posted by: Cato on November 16, 2006 05:58 PM
How about frm.Congresswoman Jennifer Dunn?
Yeah, her swipe at the supposed "political makeup of the State Supreme Court", and her refusal to admit that she squandered millions of dollars on a hopeless waste of time, eliminate all possibility that any sane person could take another of her candidacies seriously.
You demanded her concession speech before the votes had even been counted, and now it's just not good enough for your self-proclaimed high standards. Her near-victory ridicules your months of loud predictions to the contrary. Remember, you constantly predicted a large, easy win for Rep. Reichert, and mocked the very idea that she could beat him. At the end, she had you nervously counting each vote, and you're still doing it. The 8th district now has the most junior Member of the minority, proclaiming his loyalty to the likes of Rep. Boehner, when it could have done much better. Your definition of "victory" has shrunk almost as much as the 8th district's stature in Congress has.
Posted by: Paddy Mac on November 16, 2006 07:14 PMThat was pretty much the problem with her whole campaign. Once you got beyond the puffery, there was nothing there.
Posted by: Janet S on November 16, 2006 07:22 PMStefan - What is your take on Reichert's remarks after being declared the winner? Here's some of that in case you need a refresher:
http://www.kirkdorffer.com/ontheroadto2008/2006/11/reichert-comments-on-wa-08-race.shtml
Posted by: Daniel K on November 16, 2006 07:24 PM3 vote counts until KingCo gave you the outcome that you wanted, perhaps? Were you hoping for something similar in the 8th?
Posted by: Matt on November 16, 2006 07:25 PMThank goodness Bush has a Veto for the next two years...
He will be using it often to stuff your party's BS and tax hikes exactly where they belong.
Gonna be a fun two years I predict.....
Posted by: GS on November 16, 2006 08:03 PMI've burned my Darcy, and I can't get up!
Posted by: bigbyrd on November 16, 2006 08:10 PMBut both senators, gov, ..wow. Of course Maria and Chrissie are competant (though w bad politics) and Patty of course is dumb.
could you imagine Patty and Darcy representing us...YIPES
Posted by: righton on November 16, 2006 08:25 PMBye bye Darcy, don't let the saloon door hit you on the way out.
Posted by: A Bainbridge critic on November 16, 2006 08:34 PMI get the distinct feeling that poor little Marcy/Darcy was under the impression things weren't supposed to end quite like they did.
boo hoo
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 16, 2006 08:38 PMSome of you guys just aren't comfortable with a woman at the helm unless she reminds you of your mom or grandma, e.g. Jennifer Dunn. Your minds just shut off otherwise.
Somehow the boys club in the Senate on the D side just voted Patty Murray to the 4th most powerful job. She gained their confidence and they got to know her. You'd never bother to try.
Posted by: Johnny D. on November 16, 2006 09:31 PMI mean it would be absurd to call her "big tough Marcy" or smart Darcy or well informed about Pierce County Darcy...
Posted by: righton on November 16, 2006 09:37 PMAs for Paddy's statement that Burner had a "near-victory" I wouldn't call a 3-4% difference a near victory... in the current political climate I'd call that a clear loss. 129 votes is a near victory... Burner was a terrible candidate IMO. I still find it hard to believe so many people voted for her.
Posted by: Tucker on November 16, 2006 09:43 PM
Jennifer Dunn was 50 when she was first elected, jackass. Hardly someone who would remind anybody who would read this cite as their grandmother.
You'd better ask a Republican judge in a Republican county about that vote total-- I think he'd disagree.
Please find me a post at SP, prior to 7 November 2006, that had Darcy Burner as a favorite to win the 8th district. Even Goldy claimed merely a statistical tie on the eve of election. Darcy Burner reduced SP to counting every vote in King County, while demanding that she concede. Because they well remembered what happened to their favorite, Mr. Rossi, when his female opponent refused to concede. Having a Republican judge in a Republican county recertify his loss seems to have unhinged permanently some of his supporters. Meanwhile, the first-ever female Speaker of our House will take office, a stunning rebuke to centuries of male domination in that chamber. (It's as if Speakers Gingrich, Livingstone, and Hastert never even existed!)
Welcome to our world, folks-- you're just paying taxes to support it.
Posted by: Paddy Mac on November 16, 2006 10:48 PMmy last contribution to her campaign will be about 4" of duct tape. too bad, too sad. now--go away, grow up & come back later.
Aesop's fable: Never hire a school hall monitor for the Halls of Congress. ;}
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on November 16, 2006 10:51 PMShe is not doing a possible future candidate Marcy/Darcy any good by dragging her own attitude through a tantrum. Surely she has had the opportunity to learn a lesson from Kerry and Gore: sometimes the best game plan is to sit down and shut up.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 16, 2006 10:52 PMMore stuck on stupid sexism. Thank you for making my point. All of Dubya's team like Condi are called secretaries as well.
NYT: Pelosi Rebuffed Over Her Choice for House Post
TIME: Dems Tell Pelosi She Needs to Follow, Not Just Lead
CNN: You win some and you lose some in Congress, and quickly. Just ask Nancy Pelosi
Not quite as self-destructive for the Democratic Party as Murtha would have been, but Pelosi is severely weakened by this.
What a dumb move on her part.
The vote was 149-86. Ouch.
There's some leadership from their new Speaker. Yikes!So much for the electoral honeymoon. They've been off their message for four days, and Murtha's serious ethical problems splashed muck all over their "reform" party image. And now, Pelosi and Hoyer are going to have to work together.
It's gonna be fun!
Excuse me, you may not like it, but "little" Marcy/Darcy is ACTING like a poor little 2 year old who has not gotten her way. We had her pegged as a childish lightweight and she has superbly lived down to our expectations with her post-loss 'you didn't pick me because I'm a girl' whine.
Her snottiness always made her an unattractive candidate. Her whining doesn't help that image.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 16, 2006 11:13 PMStephan is a private citizen expressing his opinion, not a politician ("public servant"). If you disagree, just say so and move on you jerk.
PaddyMac @ 30: I've been reading this blog every day and don't believe I saw that "Darcy Burner reduced SP to counting every vote in King County, while demanding that she concede." Keeping track of a vote tally in a race that was interesting: yes. Every vote in King County: I hope not. And "demanding" that Marcy concede? No such thing occured on this blog. That is just more liberal hyperbole. I saw it as a suggestion to save us all some time since the outcome was not in doubt.
Both of you: Grow up.
Posted by: Michael on November 16, 2006 11:28 PMYeah, you tell it to "Stephen" and then head back over to "Dan" Goldstein's blog.
Posted by: Jeff B. on November 16, 2006 11:34 PMHer concession speech was politics as usual and this thread is just one last chance to take potshots at her before she fades into obscurity. I should not be surprised, I just expected more from Stefan in terms of quality posts.
I leave it to Stefan, et al., along with the readers to come up with creative award titles.
Posted by: John425 on November 17, 2006 07:42 AMAs are Dubya and his crew?
Posted by: Johnny D. on November 17, 2006 07:46 AMBurner was the chair of Microsoft's Hoppers organization which spends its time trying to promote one class of employees over another based simply on gender. It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that she would raise the issue of gender when talking about her defeat.
Darcy, show some class, will ya? You haven't lost at life - you've just lost a political battle in a district that has never elected someone for Congress with your political ideals. If you're planning for another run in two years, please spend time becoming more familiar with the people in your district (including Pierce Co.) instead of the people running the NARAL offices over in Seattle.
Sure, she can hang out with Jimmy Mac or other high profile Dems, but they are not the ones casting votes in her district on election day.
Posted by: Gary on November 17, 2006 09:24 AMIt's not what's in your pants that made you lose. It is what 's in your brain.
Which is NOTHING!!!
And will you PLEASE remove the campaign sign in front of your house.
Nobody is more sick of you and your failed campaign than your neighbors.
Shut up and just go away, already.
Why don't you replace the sign with a "For Sale" sign and move back to Nebraska or wherever you are from.
To the rest of you:
You are now witnessing the true nature of Darcy Burner. The one I attempted to warn you about in my posts. She is one of those rare humans who can annoy you and tick you off, just by saying hello to you.
I'm sure we haven't heard the last of this woman (god help us), so please remember her childish hissy-fit and blame game concerning her loss the next time you see her name on a ballot.
I have a vision of her in Mickey Mouse ears as I write. I hope she doesn't bore the pants off of Pluto. Then again, maybe he hates Bush too.
Posted by: ameslaker on November 17, 2006 11:32 AMIn the 48th, which overlaps with the 8th, Deb Eddy handily beat a man. And Cantwell won the 8th (against a man). And the two women judge candidates beat men in the district. So the same voters that supposedly were too sexist to vote for her because she is a woman elected all the other women they had a chance to vote for - except going for Ross Hunter (Democrat) over Nancy Potts (the Republican candidate who openly announced she would not even campaign). Darcy, really, was the only woman not to get elected.
some (libs) reading here would think people have perpetual axes to grind. maybe so. however, it's great to hear background info (like yours) that's not covered in the media, debates, the slick campaign flyers. The other impressions of those "closer to the action" are invaluable. the voting guide "endorsements" do little. just self-serving pap. luckily, she's not your rep. hopefully, she (& we all) learned a lesson.
but all's not lost--she'd be excellent for the EEOC. shreiking at businesses with threats of diversity & tolerance sanctions & quotas. or accompanying Jesse Jackson on a shakedown (excuse me--fight for justice) of some small business. she's a perfect victim-industry advocate.
Posted by: jimmie-howya-doin on November 17, 2006 12:02 PM
Put it this way, if Mao was reincarnated and put on the ballot with a (D) next to his name, he would get more than 45% of the vote in the 8th. Over 50% in Seattle.
Posted by: Palouse on November 17, 2006 12:38 PMThere is nothing Burner could have said, short of "Dave Reichert is God" that would have satisified you.
How do I know? By the total lack of issue with Reichert's condascending, immature and ignoble acceptance speech (finally, somethinng we agree on -- oh my..he's really in touch with his constiuents).
Posted by: Jack Tremaine on November 17, 2006 12:38 PMNot a graceful concession speech giving credit to her opponent. Not a 'we'll get them next time' rally-type speech. And certainly not a I-lost-because-the-voters-made-their-choice speech.
Nope. We get a whiny child complaining the voters are sexist and you interpret that as us demanding she call Reichert God. Could you be a bigger tool? I doubt it.
Posted by: jimg on November 17, 2006 12:49 PMEveryone elses signs - winners and losers - have been cleaned up.
I guess it shows how little Burner really cared about us anyway.
Posted by: Johnny (not Johnny D - I have a brain) on November 17, 2006 12:57 PMIf you change "concession" to "acceptance" in your comment, it fits Reichert's speech to a tee!
Please, direct your comments equally ... or don't stand on a mountain blaming one side while ignoring the other (just because you like one better).
BOTH are bad speeches. Please acknowledge that. Reichert's was totally inappropriate for a winning candidate much less a sitting state representative. Actually, it was reprehensible.
Be fair, or just admit you're 100% partisan.
Posted by: Jack Tremaine on November 17, 2006 12:58 PMMaybe Dave Reichert recalled what a politically correct, vitreolic empty skirt that he ran against and that is why his victory speech wasn't so shining. Hopefully, Dave will show himself as grateful for the win and get down to working more for the 8th District this time around.
Posted by: KS on November 17, 2006 01:05 PMMaybe Dave Reichert recalled what a politically correct, vitreolic empty skirt that he ran against and that is why his victory speech wasn't so shining. Hopefully, Dave will show himself as grateful for the win and get down to working more for the 8th District this time around.
Posted by: KS on November 17, 2006 01:06 PMInstead, I'm called a sore loser and you call Burner every nasty name in the book.
Your case has been made for all to see...only the totally partisan will see that you are extreme and spiteful. Your opinions are worth as much as any extremist.
Posted by: Jack Tremaine on November 17, 2006 01:09 PMTime for me to move on...there's no reasonable listening going on here...sorry...that is a disappointment.
Posted by: Jack Tremaine on November 17, 2006 01:12 PMWho said he had to be reincarnated? These people would vote for a corpse as long as it had a D. . . .
Posted by: Frank Black on November 17, 2006 02:09 PMWhat a whiner! It was bad enough that she was a weak candidate, but I have NEVER been treated so badly by any politician's campaign volunteers as I was by hers. They would argue with you on the phone, hang up on people after screaming at them. I wish now I had taped those conversations. The people door-belling in Pierce county were rude. One older woman said, "we need more women in Congress," then got pissed off when told that I don't vote by gender.
With a huge anti-Bush sentiment going on, she couldn't win. There were a number of people that could have beat Reichert in this election season, but Darcy wasn't one of them..
Burner showed what a class act she is. She couldn't have been more childish and bitter acting if she had tried.
It isn't worth categorizing the errors of this neophyte, yet nasty woman. I don't believe that she deserves the deference that most losers of political races get. She has stepped in and danced in the slime all by herself. She has now shown what a loser she is. Bitter, condescending, petulant *itch should be on her name tags from now on.
Posted by: Skeptic on November 17, 2006 03:06 PMDarcy acts like a spoiled brat. Period.
And her 'I hate Bush' just got a little sickening. She brought it up and whenever you point a finger at someone there is four back at you.
Posted by: swatter on November 17, 2006 03:16 PMThe outcome was very much in doubt; Rep. Reichert had to beg for money during the last week of the campaign. If ANY of Sound Delusional's predictions had been anywhere close to reality, Rep. Reichert would have coasted to an easy victory. Again, find me a single pre-election post where they even admit that she could win.
This blog did indeed count every vote-- even after months of insisting that they wouldn't need to do so-- and they used their tired rhetoric, of the mythical stolen election of 2004, to imply that she simply couldn't win legitimately. (Now that she's conceded, any doubts about the validity of the election go down the memory hole.)
At one point, SD rejoices that Rep. Reichert-- their former shoo-in-- lead King County's incomplete vote count by 9 votes. NINE! If that's not counting every vote in King County, I don't know what is.
An incumbent with plenty of name recoginition, supported by a local media fully invested in his questionable claim to have caught the Green River Killer, and with Presidential fundraising assistance, barely squeaked by a political novice-- all to become the least senior member of a dwindling minority. And we "nutroots" must now admit defeat because our underdog lost? The standards for victory here have sunk as low as the standards for morality.
Posted by: Paddy Mac on November 17, 2006 07:46 PMOne might say she BURNED her own bridges.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskold on November 17, 2006 08:56 PM
That's not true. Jennifer Dunn got 60% of the vote in her last run.
Over 50% in Seattle.
This, on the other hand, is completely true. If anything, I'd say you lowball it. I think Mao would get over 60% in Seattle.