So, state Sen. Rodney Tom is now officially unofficially in the race for the 8th Congressional District Republican Democratic nomination, telling the Seattle P-I that he will officially make his official announcement next Tuesday. Whatever.
There are two minds on this within the Burner camp. On the one hand there are those who welcome Tom’s challenge, as a primary fight will focus media attention on Burner, while a decisive victory over a sitting state senator can only add to her credibility and confidence. On the other hand, Tom’s announcement will definitely freeze some of the early money, shaving maybe a couple hundred thousand dollars off Burner’s 2007 totals.
I’m similarly ambivalent, having come to the conclusion that the positive or negative impact of Tom’s campaign depends on how he eventually runs it. If it is a positive campaign, focused on the issues, everybody wins. If it is a negative campaign, adopting Reichert’s dismissively sexist “oh, she’s just a little girl” meme, well, Tom still loses, but he’ll piss off a lot of people in the process. People with long memories. People who hold grudges.
But my overwhelming concern is whether Tom is willing to make the personal sacrifices necessary for the good of his recently adopted party. Last cycle, Randy Gordon, the first Reichert challenger out of the gate, pledged early on that he would drop out of the race if money and support coalesced around another candidate. It did, and he did.
I would like to see Tom take a similar pledge. By April of 2008 it will become abundantly clear whether Tom has a snowball’s chance of running a competitive primary challenge. If he doesn’t, and he stubbornly stays in a race he has no chance of winning, he will needlessly cost Burner a substantial amount of contributions and independent expenditures that will be committed elsewhere long before ballots are counted in our August primary, one of the latest in the nation.
If Tom is a real Democrat, then his primary focus should be on defeating Reichert. Whatever his personal ambitions, Tom should understand that should he contribute to a Reichert victory next November, he will earn the lasting animosity of those whose support he will need in the future.
I’m just sayin’.
There’s a lot more to being a real Democrat than agreeing to this Goldy. A real Democrat is someone who doesn’t accept the bullshit lie that we need to be bi-partisan which is weak ass code for “let’s give in to the traitors that run the Publican party.”
A real Democrat hits back (harder) when hit first. A real Democrat stands up to the liars, con men, baby rapers, cowards and traitors on the right by calling a spade a spade.
A real Democrat realizes that ANY Publican is worse for America than ANY so-called terrorist and acts accordingly.
We need REAL Democrats, not wishy washy wannabe Dems running for office in EVERY district, including the 8th.
I’d like to see how Tom distinguishes himself from Darcy. Even as someone with an independent streak, I’m fairly impressed with Darcy’s understanding of the complexity of the issues we face. She really is as smart as people say she is. It’s not going to be easy for Tom to do this.
Not about this topic, but Goldy should write a huge story about how FORBES now rates Washington the 5th best state for business!
Quoting directly from Forbes (see http://www.forbes.com/home/bus.....tates.html) : “Virginia may be the top-ranked state for the second straight year, but Washington is the big story. The biggest mover (tied with Tennessee), rising from 12th to fifth place, Washington is also the only state to finish in the top five in three main categories (labor, regulatory environment and growth). And Washington’s numbers are up across the board when you look both backward and at projections into the future.”
Figure Rossi will have a hard time spinning this to his favor.
I whole heartedly support Sen. Rodney Tom over Darcy Burner. I have met and spoken with him, as he is my State Senator. I am very proud to have him as my Senator. My concern with him challenging Darcy Burner is that the 48th District would have to elect a replacement senator, and I would worry that we would not be able to have as strong as a senator as we do in Sen. Tom. Many rejoiced as Luke Esser was fired, we don’t want another Esser.
I mean absolutely not disrespect to Darcy Burner, but I frankly have little confidence in her being my representative. Her 2004 campaign was lousy. She failed to genuinely present herself as someone who could truly represent the district, and as a result Rep. Reichert was permitted to remain in office.
If Senator Tom is truly in this race to win it, I will back him with all my support. But if he is just dipping his toes in the water, I would hope that he would continue to serve as our distinguished State Senator.
Goldy
Would Darcy be willing to make the same pledge? She should, it is for the “party”.
The qualifications to become a US Represenative are in the Constitution, Article I, section 2. Both Darcy and Rodney Tom are qualified.
That said, I prefer one of the new grassroots Democrats to many of the established ones. And I would not consider Rodney Tom to belong to either of those categories. He is a former Republican. Not gonna get my vote. Darcy will whip Bulgy McWhitehair this time around.
Seems to me ….
This is an opportunity for Darcy to prove herself. If she is as bright as Goldy says (and he is usually right) then she and RT would both nefit us all by an amicable debate on the issues.
Goldy … why not start with inviting both of them to KIRO?
Democrats should tread carefully before signing up to support a newly converted Democrat (former Republican)to represent them in the 8th C.D. Who did Rodney Tom vote for and support in the last Governor’s race? Did he support Rossi? How many Democrats, if any, did he support before his recent conversion?
It’s great that he now sees the light and is a Democrat but one has to wonder just how blue he really is? It leaves one wondering – just like one wonders about the convicted prisoner who discovers Jesus. Is it opportunism or real conviction? That’s something Democrats need to ask themselves and it’s a legitimate question to ask Tom.
Try this link ..
http://www.rodneytom.org/pages.....ubmitted=1
It offers a check list of RT’s stands on this issues. He reads like a Democrat.
The trick here would be to use RT vs. DB to build public support for a Democrat. That means the sort of positive competition and unity on issue we see when Barack and Hillary campaign.
That approach would lead to some useful efforts for DB and RT to focus on issues that really differentiate themselves. Obviously RT has a better CV, that ain’t chopped meat. OTOH, DB has a big lead in her relationship to the Bloggerdomain. That ain’t chopped meat either since it suggests she
willmay do a better job of keeping in touch with her constituents than the classic congressfolks can do. Being in touch ain’t chopped meat either.Bloggerdom could REALLY help here.
Goldy … why not start with inviting both of them to KIRO?
I would definitely like to see that.
Burner does not own the nomination. That’s why we have elections. It doesn’t help the Democrats, or democracy, to talk about Burner like she’s already been elected.
The real tragedy here is the waste of resources. The luddites have decided that mj is evil. iT is not. There is no scientific evidence that makes MJ any worse than coffee.
There is lots of stuff worse than MJ availbale at Bartell’s (try Nyquell).
I would notn blame the cops. Their job is to enforce the law as long as it does not violate human rights.
The real issue … on BOTH right and left is the abuse of science. A law like this should be based on data not panic. There are many other examples:
1. late term abortion L
2. creationism C
3. breast implants C
4. agent orange L
5. vaccination both
6. global warming. C
7. racial differences L
8. marijuana C
9. gender identity both
I have tried to identify each issue with whether … in my opinion .. one side or the other is doing home by a nut stand. In some case both sides are .. IMHO ,, over the deep end. For example, liberals resist research into “racial traits” and in doing so really hurt genetic research. Conservatives create murk by refusing to understand the distinction between genetic descent and racist ideas of how we are affected by our ancestors. If I may be unoriginal:
A POx on Both Your Houses
The preponderance of these are the fault of the wingnuts but liberals can make the same arrogant error. E.g. liberal stands on asbestos have little to do with the actual data. Same for agent orange.
One answer may be a need for a scientific court as part of the judiciary. Laws should be subject to the requirement that they deal with reality. How can such a court be created that is (more or less) immune to politics.
Goldy, if you’re just sayin’ what I think you’re just sayin’, you’ve got a mighty peculiar way of sayin’ it.
For Tom, it’s about people who have long memories and hold grudges, but if he’s a real Democrat, “his primary focus should be on defeating Reichert”.
Shouldn’t that be all our primary focus? Don’t threats of long memories and grudges detract from that focus?
Darcy has a lot to prove. Among other things, she has to prove she can break out of the bubble of admirers who think she darn near walks on water, and who pop up to verbally abuse anyone who doesn’t see it their way.
Competing analyses notwithstanding, this clique — and Darcy’s relationship to it — energized but ultimately limited her 2006 campaign.
Darcy — make a break for it, while you still can!
Ah, well, Will Rogers was right. . . .
Democratic Primaries have almost always been some form of cat wrangling event in the Rodeo of Life.
This exchange between me and Proud Leftist is so good, I am going to post it in every thread on HA from now on. It destroys the Publicans’ stupid talking points – period.
“I’m working really hard to understand how President Bill Clinton’s actions act as justifcation for the righties. Read this fuckwads.
If your lame ass argument is that Bill Clinton was a bad President – which is what you say – and if your argument now is that the AWOL coward GW Bush is in someway comparable to Bill Clinton, what you are actually saying is that GW Bush is NO BETTER THAN CLINTON.
Does it hurt to be that stupid? I really want to know.
proud leftist says:
RES @ 18
You’ve hit it on the nose. The rightwing fringefucks consider Clinton to be the personification of evil–indeed, he is the devil incarnate in their twisted little minds. Nonetheless, their justification for all of the Bushites’ sins is, always, “well, Clinton did it, too.” Methinks they never studied logic.”
And what’s better, is that the rightie traitor keeps pointing out that this is true. Thanks MTR. Please keep proving my point for me.
C’mon, Tom’s your leftist man. Don’t hurt his feelings.
When Rodney Tom first ran for the house, he ran on issues that many of us care about and felt the GOP should care as well. Once there, he was questioned by the right-wingnuts as to his GOP pedigree as he supports Gay rights, public education etc. Now that he has switchd parties, the left wingnuts are doing the same thing. What he is, is what a great many of us are on the eastside….moderate and issues based. Darcy Burner was an unappealing candididate to me and she was at her worst on the night of the elections reutnrs when she sulked up to the podium and showed no class whatsoever. She is a light weight who is trying to enter politics at too high an entry point. Rodney will serve the district and the party better.