Josh Feit correct divines the flaw in Darcy Burner's campaign strategy: she appears to be running against of a Democratic Congress.
That means she's essentially running to the left of a Congress that already isn't very popular. Coming out of the gate talking about Iraq is peculiar given the degree to which the Democratic Presidential nominee isn't actually going to want to focus on national security issues. It implies Burner's campaign still has a great connection to the netroots (example here) than the swing voters she needs to change their minds about Dave Reichert.
Speaking of which, running to the left of this Congress ought to create a fascinatingly leftist domestic agenda. Her stand on taxes was a grievous wound in the last election cycle, as was her own comparative inexperience. She hasn't done anything to address the former and shows no signs of moderating her netroots extremism in anticipation of the latter.
By all means, Republicans would like to hear more of that agenda. They might even run a commercial or two advertising its content.
UPDATE: if the tone of the MSM coverage, here and here, of Burner's Iraq plan are any indicator, it appears as if she is attempting to re-run last cycle's race - albeit with an actual "plan" for Iraq rather than running commercials decrying "George W. Bush's war." Rematch elections are hard enough for the foe defeated in the first round. Rehashing the same issues usually doesn't help much.
Posted by Eric Earling at March 18, 2008 07:20 AM | Email ThisAnd I didn't think that was possible.
Posted by: hinton on March 18, 2008 07:36 AMDumby GO HOMW!
Posted by: 8th voter on March 18, 2008 08:22 AMDino: Are listening??
All kidding aside, I'd put a lot more money on Darcy's chances than Dino's.
I'm hearing a lot of Republicans are going to sit this one out. Reichert has proven to be the lightweight his opponents called him.
Posted by: Unkl Witz on March 18, 2008 08:22 AMBut that isn't the end of the story of course.
Come 2010 a real Republican will sweep the floor with her.
And Rossi is really, really stupid to run this year when defeat is all but certain. He should save himself for 2012.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 08:42 AMThis year is 1992.
Next year is 1993
The year after is 1994.
And while yeah Republicans lost in 1996 it was because the 1994 Republicans got into power and started acting like Democrats. Also a guaranteed loser of a candidate was forced upon us for President (in that way you could say on the Presidential level this year is kind of a mix of 1992 and 1996).
A Republican didn't have a chance to become governor in 1992. Just like there is no chance for victory for Rossi in 2008. This is a Democratic year. His chance for victory is zero. That is why saving himself for 2012 is the best move. At least there is some chance for victory then. Some is always better than none.
The fact that he choose this year to run, that alone makes me wonder if he has the judgment skills necessary to make a good governor.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 08:54 AMIn the words of 'Puck' (from Shakespear's 'A MidsummerNights Dream') 'what fools these mortals be'. :)
Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 09:44 AMPerhaps someone here can then explain why Reichert is trying to fool people into thinking he is a moderate, if the way to win the district is to be a "real Republican" - whatever that is.
Posted by: Daniel K on March 18, 2008 09:56 AMEric, there is no PLAN there. It is just a bunch of Iraq Study Group recommendations gussied up by Darcy's PR consultants, Wired For Change. The "plan" is to simply pass the buck by directing the President to come up with a plan. The only vaguely concrete things in it are peripheral to the core issue of getting the US troops out of Iraq.
If you carefully read the thing, you'll see that she "endorses" and "presents" the plan, but that she doesn't go so far as to say she wrote it.
If you read the website of the PR firm, you'll see that these "... clever, niche actions..." are right up their alley. This whole thing is simply to insert Darcy's and their other clients' names into a foreign policy discussion to earn them some cred.
Posted by: The Real Mark on March 18, 2008 10:02 AMCG is the worst governor of my lifetime, and it's not even close. This state is looking a huge deficit for the forseeable future, and she has punted on every major transportation issue. There's STILL no solution for the viaduct, years after we were told it was an emergency.
As for Darcy, good luck to her, she's going to need it. I'll never vote for an empty suit like her. She's quite simply, not qualified.
Posted by: Palouse on March 18, 2008 10:23 AMI see a repeat of history coming, only this time in the gov. race.
Posted by: Michele on March 18, 2008 10:33 AMHe can beat a democrat in 2012. But not in 2008.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 10:48 AMIn another year Rossi could defeat Queen Christine. But not in 2008.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 10:53 AMWere they 1992 and 1994?
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 10:59 AMWow, Eric, someone as smart as you should not be saying things this dumb. Poll after poll after poll shows that Americans trust Democrats more on national security. And the unpopularity of Congress comes not from the fact that they're too antagonistic to Bush over the Iraq War. It comes from the fact that they're not antagonistic enough.
Posted by: thehim on March 18, 2008 11:17 AMDave Reichert has a credibility problem when it comes to national security. And if he doesn't figure out how to address that and to overcome the liability that the R next to his name has become, he will be looking for a new job this fall.
Posted by: thehim on March 18, 2008 11:21 AMWhat is driving Burner appears to be that she is hypnotized by the Nutroots message. Goldy constantly trumpets her as the the best hope for the Nutroots. But that's not a reason on which to base a campaign in a relatively suburban district. And she completely forgot about suburban Pierce County last cycle, and she'll probably do so again and lose again.
Burner does not have that much of her own campaign resource, so rather than build that, she's simply hitched he wagon to the Nutroots. It fits her modus operandi. She's in a hurry to get career experience, she's a Microsoft, VP, oops, nope just a manager. She's in a hurry to finish law school, oh skip that, she got the gist. She's in a hurry to file for her campaign, oops car crash. She's in a hurry to get elected, hitch on to the Nutroots. Unlike Reichert who has a long public career, Burner is taking the flighty lefty path to elected office.
I'm amazed at how much nutty emotional zeal that people like Kos and Goldy have poured in to candidates like Lamont and Burner. They might have some success at some point. But they are remarkably impractical. Why not simply find a Nutroots district and run a candidate there so they might have a chance of winning. They've really convinced themselves that mainstream, more politically centered America is ready to jump off of the Progressive cliff. I don't think so.
however the 8th only went for Reichert by a few thousand votes over Ditzy Darcy. So she's not dumb running in this district.
Posted by: FreedomLover on March 18, 2008 12:02 PM2004 isn't 2008.
And by the way, campaigns don't happen in the "real world" but in the world of perception.
The national climate will make CG's victory a certainty. It doesn't matter how badly she has performed in office.
If you really believe in Rossi tell him to run in 2012.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 12:42 PMSomeone should ask Darcy if she feels like the voters of the 8th CD have had some sort of epiphany during the last two years that would allow them to now elect a woman.
Nevermind the fact that we in the 8th elected Jennifer Dunn to the position 7 times.
I'm betting it would have been 7 though, had she not retired.
Posted by: Smoley on March 18, 2008 12:58 PMThe Dems thrive on the politics of hatred. They hate GWB more than any political figure, well...ever?
All that hatred in 2004 led to record turnouts, and a record number of votes won in any Presidential election, by GWB. And that record turn-out also resulted in two election wins by Rossi.
Second - Who will they hate this time? McCain? Do we really think that the Left can drum up the hatred of McCain that they had for Bush in both 2000 and 2004? I seriously doubt it. They've painted themselves into a corner with their hatred. All those people who can't hate any more, who can't hate McCain like they did Bush - will they stay home?
Third - Notice that Eric wrote "Rematch elections are hard enough for the foe defeated in the first round. Rehashing the same issues usually doesn't help much." And then notice that Unkl Witless responded per Rossi.
What Unkl Witless doesn't seem to realize is that Dino Rossi will have a whole new cadre of issues to bring forth to the table this time around - including the incompentency of the current Governor. It's Gregoire who is forced to rehash the same old issues, because she never did anything about those issues.
I'm not afraid of record turnout nor Democratic-Leftist hatred. They haven't worked in the past, and the Left hasn't gotten any smarter.
No that is who WE will hate.
You know there is not much point arguing this. What will happen will happen and I will be proven right just like I most always am regarding these types of things.
And I guess that the fact that Rossi choose this year instead of 2012 shows he doesn't have the good judgment to be governor anyhow so perhaps it is best that he loses as I guess he isn't as qualified as we thought him to be.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 01:12 PMI never stated that. But you erroneously assume that HRC/BHO is going to ride a 'tidal wave' into office. Nothing is further from the truth. Even if you look at national polling right now, McCain is very close to both of them, so much that you cannot make a case for any kind of 'tidal wave' either way.
Not one person who voted for Rossi last time has forgotten that stolen election and what a failure CG has been, and there absolutely no reason to believe they won't cast a vote for him again.
Posted by: Palouse on March 18, 2008 01:15 PMWho is WE, exactly?
You will be proven right? Did you predict that GWB would be re-elected in 2004 on a tidal-wave of support? I know I did. Did you predict that Rossi would win the election? I know I did.
You should be less concerned about being proven right and more concerned about doing right.
And if you're Right, doing right would be voting for McCain. Voting for Hillary or Obama or sitting home is not anything a real Conservative nor a real Republican would do, even if sometimes a real Republican isn't a real Conservative.
Posted by: Larry on March 18, 2008 01:21 PMAnd Bush didn't win in a tidal wave of support. It was a close election although not as close as 2000 where he didn't win the popular vote.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 01:24 PMHillary is best for America in the long term. You just can look at things election by election but need to take a wider perspective.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 01:28 PM
LOL
GWB won by - what - over 3 million votes (in the popular election)? He only won by the number of votes cast in our entire state!! Yeah, that's close. (eyes rolling)
He also garnered more votes than any candidate ever in an open election in world history, right? Did someone like Putin ever get 61 million votes? Has anyone in world history?
GWB won more votes than the entire population of France.
It may not have been a 'tsunami', but it was damn sure a butt-kicking, especially given that the Left was just oh sooooo certain that he'd go down in flames - even half-way through election day!!
Posted by: Larry on March 18, 2008 01:28 PMI believe that Ronald Reagan would've eventually been elected and seen his vision of the post-Cold War world through, regardless of how long it took him.
I'm not willing to vote for a Jimmah Carter this year in the hopes of finding another Reagan in the future.
Our beliefs and philosophies will ultimately triumph, and we must take any incremental movement we can make.
You're welcome to cut off your nose to spite your face. You've probably done it before, which is why you can't smell your own B.S.
Posted by: Larry on March 18, 2008 01:33 PM3 Million is hardly a landslide when you consider the size of our country.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 01:35 PMI meant can't look at things election by election but need to take a wider perspective.
I actually voted for Bush (well more accurately against Kerry) and I remember how nervous I was and how while not a 2000 still was close.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 01:40 PMTruth doesn't always win out. It didn't win out in 1930s Germany and so far as this whole campaign season goes it hasn't won out.
To think otherwise is highly naive. Time ISN'T on our side here.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 01:45 PMTo think otherwise is highly naive. Time ISN'T on our side here."
Wow.
If you're comparing the USA in the 21st century to Germany in the 1930s, then you've got bigger problems with your logic and historical perspective than can be tackled here.
Needless to say - I'd classify that whole analogy as 'naive'.
You can certainly make your point that the media isn't our our side, without such pointless comparisons.
Posted by: Larry on March 18, 2008 03:11 PM
Now in a few years from now, I don't know.
I love America, it deeply hurts me what is going in with the Presidential election.
Posted by: Max on March 18, 2008 03:24 PMIf This same gang comes back next year under Gregoire, the gloves will be off, and those 200 Billion in new taxes will come to law, plus plus plus.
Sitting this one out is not an option!
Posted by: GS on March 18, 2008 04:14 PMWe NEED to do something different than vote in the standard democrap mob.
Posted by: RagnarDanneskjold on March 18, 2008 06:23 PMNor would I, it's more like Regan's 80's when we had the S&L crisis.
One good bailout due to overzealous deregulation deserves another 20 years later, only this time the oil barons are making out like bandits while the rest of us suffer.
If this state is collectively stupid enough to elect her, well I don't see that happening, even though the electorate has been pretty stupid lately. The wild card would be the degree of corruption will voting be in King County this time ? (Time to be on the lookout and round up the ACORN-heads and presecute the bas**rds !)
Posted by: KS on March 18, 2008 09:16 PMOh yah? Prove it.
Hint: I'll save you time - You can't.
Posted by: cliff on March 19, 2008 07:50 AM