David Postman quotes Rep. Christopher Hurst (D-Enumclaw), who is thinking about challenging Darcy Burner for the Democratic nomination for the 8th district:
“The reality is there’s no ownership [of the 8th district nomination]. The bottom line is what’s best for the citizens of the district. You can’t say that because someone ran before that’s owed to them. Maybe some of the real hardcore party faithful say that. But I’m sorry, I don’t buy that.
“The bottom line is if you couldn’t win in 2006 you really got to sit down and do some soul searching and do a very careful, realistic analysis. That’s what it’s all about. Nobody owns this.”
Does Darcy “own” the 8th District nomination? Of course not. If Rep. Hurst wants it, he had better go and get it, because Darcy Burner is doing all of the hard work winning candidates do. The ’06 cycle saw all sorts of party annointed candidates run hard and lose, while no-name types scored big upsets. Darcy came very, very close in a district that has never elected a Democrat, a district that heavily favors the GOP in PCOs.
What I’ve heard about Hurst makes me like him (retired cop with lots of family members in the military), but he’s going to have to earn the nomination, just like Darcy did. How? By doing the work. So, yeah, we can all talk about how Darcy hasn’t sewn it up, but talking is the least helpful thing a candidate can be doing right now.
talking is the least helpful thing a candidate can be doing right now
Unless, of course, that talking is to the voters of the 8th district, getting to know them and what they want and need. You know, like Burner did and is doing.
Hopefully, any challengers that “party leadership” is recruiting to run against Darcy Burner will at least remember the filing deadlines in 2008. Filing week is Monday, June 2, 2008 to Friday, June 6, 2008. This must be done in Olympia at the Secretary of State’s office for U.S. Congress positions. I believe that office is open until 5:00 p.m. and there may be an opportunity to file by internet.
Actually, a little primary challenge might be a good thing. The initial challenges to Cantwell helped to focus public (and Cantwell’s) attention on the coming race. Darcy doesn’t need to have her attention focused, but the race will generate a lot more notice if there is a little heat in the primary.
The Reicherthole can’t really win, but can coast (or sneak) back into office. Two Democratic candidates talking about his Rove-serving loving incompetence must be seen as a good thing.
And who knows, maybe Hurst is the best candidate. Let’s hear what he has to say.
Brenda
Is darcy planning on hiring (paying off) her competition in the primary like cantwell did???
“The ‘06 cycle saw all sorts of party annointed candidates run hard and lose, while no-name types scored big upsets”
Yes, and the 8th saw a no-name run hard and lose.
You critize Hurst for “just talking”…what has Burner actually DONE in that time except talk?
Hurst won his seat easily in the 31st last year (the Roach’s district) against the Republican incumbent. Hurst brings experience as a police officer & legislator and a proven Democrat winning in a Republican district. Burner can’t say the same.
Given the very blue trend in the 8th & Reichert, the Democrats should have cleaned his clock in the 2006 election. Instead they ran somebody with zero public experience, and the voters responded accordingly.
If Burner really wants to run, run against Pam Roach and get some experience in the state Senate…
Doing all the work winning candidates do?!
HAHAHA!
She has never won anything.
Precisely because she isn’t doing much.
Hurst on the other hand, has actually won at least 3 elections.
Darcy won’t have the money to buy anything, cuz once Tom and/or Hurst announce the meaningful money will go to them, not her.
Nobody owns the nomination. I think Will is merely saying that trying to talk Darcy into dropping out isn’t a good way to get the nomination.
Me @ 5: sorry for the typo, it should be “You criticize Hurst for “just talking”…”
Yeh, a bunch of Democrats sat down and did some soul searching BEFORE the last election and decided Reichert was unbeatable! I’ll bet Hurst did the same thing.
Darcy said “I’m going for it” and did the heavy lifting for the cautious Nellys now coming out of the wood work to say how easy it should have been. I won’t support anyone who can’t first come out and thank Darcy for moving the party forward. If they can’t, well, we know we have a courageous thoughtful energetic candidate ready to go.
Carol Shea-Porter won as a no-name n 2006. Who else?
I worked hard for Burner canvassing in the 31st District last cycle and I will tell you that you should not underestimate Christopher Hurst. His word of mouth in Enumclaw is absolutely fantastic and he handily beat Shabro in what is supposed to be the Republican side of the 8th.
I like Darcy but I have to say that I think Hurst is incredibly well positioned for a race against Reichert and Burner in the primary. If Darcy could have taken more than 42.5% in Pierce she would be Rep. Burner right now. Hurst will do better than that.
Hurst’s biography is a great foil against Reichert because guess what, Hurst was a cop too. Captain Helmet-Hair might have to actually run on his influence (little) and legislative skill (none). Who knows, maybe some of the Republican voters who yearn so deeply for a strong daddy to tell them what to do will vote for Hurst instead of Reichert.
Now can Christopher do as well as Burner fundraising, tirelessly campaigning, and match her performance in the King County half of the 8th? We will have to see. But if I were Burner and Reichert I would be really concerned.
WOW@4:
Well that would be interesting. Darcy is married so a sex favor is out and eventhough she “worked” at Microsoft, I doubt her husband would be keen on payola!
Puddybud
I don’t know of any churches that approve of making thinly veiled sexual innuendoes about married women. Yes, I’ve known a few C & E folks that might be willing to make a statement like that, but not where another church member might hear it.
Considering that neither you nor I even live in that district (and I doubt that Rep. Dicks cares too much about what you’ve got to say about his sex life) I’m unsure about what you’re trying to accomplish with that cheap shot.
Of course, you could always just make the comment that the other posters here take cheap shots, so it’s ok if you respond in kind. That has been your argument in the past, but you might want to talk to your Pastor about that whole concept.
WOW – I sure hope so.
Tell me, WOW, how does Dino Rossi taste?
John Barelli: The Maria Cantwell “references” are well documented here on WIPES. If you don’t know/remember history you can be classified as a Moonbat! Since John Barelli doesn’t remember ‘Wipes history, I guess he’s a Moonbat!
Since you being a Moonbat! forgets these things let Puddybud help you.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....er04m.html
Maria Cantwell and Ron Dotzauer – She was the other woman in the court papers when Ron and his wife got divorced John Barelli. Then she goes to work for him John Barelli. Later Cantwell loaned Dotzauer the $15,000-$50,000 in 1999 John Barelli. Looks like he only paid the interest John Barelli. He then works on Maria’s senate reelection campaign John Barelli.
Golly are you really this senile or you are naturally dumb like Pelletman, Stupidman and Cluelessman?
Interesting bit of somewhat distorted and disputed “history”, Puddybud, but what exactly does it have to do with your making thinly veiled sexual innuendoes about Ms. Burner?
Or are Christian values something that you hold other people to, but do not apply to you? If that is your position, then I think you misread large parts of the Bible.
Cut the crap John Barelli. My reference was how Ms Cantwell paid for “services” she also invited her opponent last year to join her campaign effectly killing her Moonbat! senate opposition and said Darcy can’t follow Maria’s lead.
You can’t obfuscates Donkcraptic facts.
Besides we all know Voice of ASSes Wiping uses the Seattle Times to his benefit for this blog. So I used them as reference for our non-mom not in tennis shoes!