There’s been a lot of online sadness in the blogosphere over Darcy Burner’s concession in the race in Washington’s Eighth District, as well there should be. In any other district, I don’t think I’d feel compelled to write add one more post-mortem, but my two cents might actually be worth three or four cents, seeing as how I spend a big part of my time in this district (I live in Seattle, but I spend eight hours a day slaving over a hot computer in Bellevue).
One of the main contentions that I’ve seen elsewhere is that the Seattle Times threw the election with its last minute hit piece on Burner’s academic credentials. While it was pretty lazy, poorly researched journalism and it certainly didn’t help Burner’s cause (although their subsequent follow-up article about Reichert’s own rather underwhelming academic background may actually have helped her), I can’t see this having turned the election. In my gut, it seems more like something that turned quickly into the usual ‘he said, she said’ noise that dominates horse-race coverage and riles up the partisans but whooshes right past low-information voters. It may have been the decisive moment for a few undecideds, but I can’t see it making 8,000 votes worth of difference.
Beyond my gut, there’s also the matter that the numbers for this race right now are almost identical to those from two years ago (51.5-48.5) despite the injection of a lot more voters in a presidential year. It doesn’t seem like the needle moved much over two years… which to me suggests that the ‘lack of [elective] experience’ meme, which did Burner in last time, continued to be top-of-mind. There’s also the matter of polls: the one poll that had trendlines representing both before and after the Seattle Times story, the Daily Kos-sponsored Research 2000 poll, gave Reichert an 8-pt lead before the story and found the race a tie after. (Granted, there was an economic crisis somewhere in there too, so there may have been competing currents at work.) Finally, in my own experience phonebanking in the days before the election, I never ran into anyone who said the degree flap was an issue (although in comments mcjoan claims to have experienced it a lot, so your mileage may vary).
More over the flip…
One other sentiment I saw a lot in comments on this race is that it’s just a hard district for Democrats. Again, I’d have to disagree with that; it’s a D+2.3 district, and as we saw a few days ago, this is the fourth most Democratic-leaning district in the country that still has a Republican representative. What we have here is an opponent who is unusually well-tailored for the district instead. My sense is that there are at least three different mini-districts competing in this district: Bellevue, which is increasingly diverse and full of younger tech professionals (and becoming more liberal, like many other 50s-era inner-ring suburbs); further out suburbs like Sammamish and Issaquah which are more dominated by older, more economically conservative voters (many of whom are probably voted for Obama, but are ticket-splitters who remember the once-dominant northwestern moderate Republicanism and will opt for someone who promises to restore that); and the rural/exurban reaches of the district, which tend to be more right-wing, albeit in a backwoodsy libertarian/leave-me-alone way.
Reichert’s unusual skill is that he manages to appeal to two of those camps: he’s macho and law-and-order enough to appeal to the rural areas (and more blue-collar suburbs built around Boeing machinists, like Auburn, where Reichert is originally from)… but he also has the moderate, bipartisan Dan Evans-Republican schtick (in part from his many years as King County Sheriff, a nonpartisan position where he seemed to get along well enough with the county’s Democratic leadership) that appeals to the older suburbanites. Burner obviously plays well to the other younger, techy part of the district, but that’s about it.
For 2010, there are several state legislators in the district who might be better at taking the fight onto Reichert’s turf. State senators Rodney Tom (who started to explore running in the primary this year, but quickly jumped out when overwhelmed by Burner’s national fundraising capacity) and Fred Jarrett both seem to have more appeal to the economically conservative but socially tolerant and pro-environment ticket-splitting types who used to dominate this district. In fact, they both started out in the State House as moderate Republicans, and have been pretty solidly progressive since switching parties once the magnitude of how insane Republican leadership has become in the Bush years became apparent to them. I think many residents of this district would identify with that evolution and would tend to view that as sensible rather than opportunism or flip-flopping. State representative Chris Hurst, on the other hand, is a veteran and a resident of the district’s rural southern end; he would play stronger in Reichert’s strongest turf and counteract Reichert’s own tough-guy image.
Which isn’t to say that Burner should disappear; far from it. If she’s really serious about elective office, she needs to start a little down the totem pole and build the legislative resume and local connections there… and there are still a few Republicans representing the Eastside in the state legislature who need to be eradicated. Unfortunately, her old house was located in the 45th LD, which currently elects all Democrats. However, I assume she’s in the market for a new house, and she might move a mile down the road to the 5th LD, which is further out in the sticks and still elects all Republicans, but rapidly filling in with suburban development. Unfortunately, she’d need to wait another 4 years to take on state senator Cheryl Pflug, but in two years she can take on representative Glenn Anderson, who just squeaked by (51-49) against some guy I’ve never heard of (David Spring). Or alternately, she’s in King County Council District 3, which is represented by moderate Republican Kathy Lambert, up for re-election in 2009. Either way, with her name rec and fundraising abilities, it would be an easier way to get her foot in the electoral door, and I think many voters for whom the ‘experience’ meme worked against her would actually be happy to see her reaffirm her commitment to public service, if at a lower pay grade.
(Unfortunately, there’s a possibility that by the time she cut her teeth some more, WA-08 would already be filled by another Democrat. One other possibility is that Washington may gain a 10th House seat after the 2010 census, in which case a new seat would probably include part of WA-08, which is one of the state’s fastest growing areas, so she might keep that in mind.)
That’s a new one to me. I certainly agree that Darcy should run for something else and it seems like Lambert would be a great target, though Darcy would need to develop some fluency in county issues such as land use (lots of people in that district are extremely unhappy about King County land use rules) and transportation. State legislature would be a good target as well, but of course, only if she moves into the 5th LD, which is entirely within the 9th CD.
aren’t presently projecting a seat pick-up for WA.
States Gaining/Losing Seats based upon 2010 Projections
Though I think WA might be right on the bubble.
But probably would have to strike that as an option for Darcy Burner.
maybe she can move to a morderate section of Mcmorris Rodgers district and gain experience there and run for her seat in the future.
Hey, I’m a long-time fan, happy lurker over here, but I just wanted to thank you for this thoughtful, carefully-argued post. It really helped me understand the lay of the land in WA-08, and I’m appreciative that you actually did the hard work of researching possible candidates for 2010 and possible options for Burner. The blogosphere has regrettably seemed too much like an echo chamber in the autopsy of Burner’s loss — it’s refreshing to see some new points. Thanks for your great work!
There is no reason to say “what went wrong”. Sometimes the residents of a district just prefer the other guy.
Reichert is a good match for the district and a strong candidate. It’s hard to get some people to accept a relatively inexperienced unknown when you have a guy who doesn’t suck. This is a race that really calls out for a state office holder or at minimum a state senator to go after.
While I may get flack from some quarters for saying it, I agree that Burner isn’t a very good fit for the district. It doesn’t help her from the beginning that her best credential is her Microsoft background and appeal to techies, but most of the Microsoft-heavy areas (including Redmond and Kirkland) are actually in WA-01. Reichert is also the sort of “moderate” law-and-order kind of guy that low-info voters in the rural part of the district (and plenty of moderate suburbanites) go for in droves. I agree that what did Darcy in is her lack of appeal to two of the three major district demographics.
I also agree about the Seattle Times. When I lived in Seattle (WA-07, but same region), everyone I talked to about it absolutely hated the Times and thought it was an unprofessional shitrag. Even more telling, I actually had a temp job updating subscription information for the Seattle Times for a week in 2005. (Which is how the subject usually came up – “you work for who? Ecch!”) The Times and the P-I have a linked subscription database despite being separate papers, and there was on average one Times subscription renewal for every ten to twelve renewals of the P-I. The Times is taken seriously by a very small percentage of the electorate in Greater Seattle; most people who read newspapers know it sucks and read the P-I instead. Anyone in WA-08 who was low-info enough to be influenced by the Times hit piece probably a.) doesn’t read newspapers and b.) were going to vote for Reichert anyway. The majority of people would’ve just ignored it.
All in all, a solid analysis. Darcy’s a solid progressive, and I hope she runs for an office where she’ll be a better fit/more appreciated by her constituents.
My gut feeling is that WA-08 is a lot like NM-01. Heather Wilson, like Reichert, continually beat back challenges from top-tier Democrats in a D+ district. Upon her retirement, the seat was easily won by a relatively unknown Dem. I suspect the same will happen in WA-08 unless someone steps up in the meantime.
Does anybody have a gauge on Reichert’s availability to constituents? Is he generally responsive to his voters’ needs? That’s where Wilson got her swing votes.
And simply because I’m too lazy to look myself, does anybody have an idea what the Presidential race looked like in WA-08? I’m curious as to whether it can still be considered D+2.3 after last Tuesday.
There was no polling taken after the hit piece broke. The final four polls showed Burner ahead or tied. SurveyUSA released a poll showing her up 50-46 the day before the hit piece. Internal campaign polling taken the following week clearly showed the matter was doing major damage, and the vote counting also showed that Burner beat Reichert among early voters (about 30% of votes would have been sent in by the time the hit piece broke), and did worse than 2 years ago the day of the election and with later absentees that would have been cast after the hit piece.
Sure, there are many factors that go into a race’s outcome, but the evidence is there that despite no other external factors, Burner lost a race she was by all accounts leading until that hit piece.
While I do think the hit piece was damaging, I agree that Burner just wasn’t the best candidate for this district.
One thing that seemed lkely from thousands of miles away is that Reichert looked blue collar, acted blue collar an had a blue collar background (high level cop who worked his way up the ladder). The T shirts and muscles were an in your face response to Darcy’s Harvard/Microsoft pedigree.
The education issue should have been Harvard degree vs. Associates not “economics. But I got the idea from the “real job” and school board comments that Darcy haters really didn’t like her or at least her type. She had a real job and was good at it, thank you. Funny thing is that computer work is the white collar job that often appeals to some blue collar types.
I am late to the party but I wanted to add my own two cents here as well on Chris Hurst.
I have volunteered for the Ross/Burner campaigns the past three cycles out in the rural parts of the 8th and Chris Hurst’s favorables in that part of the district are just incredible. I have never seen another candidate have so many people spontaneously volunteer how much they like a politician.
If Hurst could carry anything like a generic Democratic margin in the other areas I think he would be tough to beat.