WA-05: Peter's New Ad
Peter Goldmark's website has a new ad available for viewing. Presumably this ad is on TV, too, but I live on the other side of the Cascades so I'm unlikely to see it for myself on the tube.
Anyway, give it a look.
Taking a bit of a page out of Darcy Burner's playbook, the ad does hit an important issue: what it means to really support the troops, versus being a self-serving public servant. Darcy has been raising this issue for a while now, and of course it's good to see a unified message from two adjacent Democratic candidates.
However, I have to say that the ad leaves me a little flat. Unless Peter's internal pulse of the district indicates that this is a hard-hitting issue with WA-05 voters, this seems like a fairly soft issue to hit McMorris with. I mean, surely he can find something worse in her voting record than this?
Doing a whole ad with this as the focus reminds me of the anti-Burner mailers that have been showing up in my mailbox of late: Reichert's henchmen attacking Darcy on really small, fringe issues that honestly nobody cares about. I mean, when I get a mailer against Darcy that says "don't vote for her! She didn't vote in a bunch of local elections!", my reaction is to say "wow, if that's the worst they can dig up on her, then damn, she really must be a good candidate!" It's not exactly a resounding condemnation of her candidacy.
That's what this ad reminds me of. I know there's all sorts of rubber-stamp votes in McMorris' record that Goldmark could be making use of. To hit her on this particular issue leaves a "that's the best you can do?" taste in my mouth.
Don't get me wrong, though: I'm not saying that troop support is a fringe issue that nobody cares about. Of course we care about the troops. It's just that "Oh, Congress gave themselves a pay raise" is such an utterly to-be-expected occurance that again, it's not exactly a resounding condemnation.
Now, go chip in whatever you can so Peter can come back with an even better ad!
Anyway, give it a look.
Taking a bit of a page out of Darcy Burner's playbook, the ad does hit an important issue: what it means to really support the troops, versus being a self-serving public servant. Darcy has been raising this issue for a while now, and of course it's good to see a unified message from two adjacent Democratic candidates.
However, I have to say that the ad leaves me a little flat. Unless Peter's internal pulse of the district indicates that this is a hard-hitting issue with WA-05 voters, this seems like a fairly soft issue to hit McMorris with. I mean, surely he can find something worse in her voting record than this?
Doing a whole ad with this as the focus reminds me of the anti-Burner mailers that have been showing up in my mailbox of late: Reichert's henchmen attacking Darcy on really small, fringe issues that honestly nobody cares about. I mean, when I get a mailer against Darcy that says "don't vote for her! She didn't vote in a bunch of local elections!", my reaction is to say "wow, if that's the worst they can dig up on her, then damn, she really must be a good candidate!" It's not exactly a resounding condemnation of her candidacy.
That's what this ad reminds me of. I know there's all sorts of rubber-stamp votes in McMorris' record that Goldmark could be making use of. To hit her on this particular issue leaves a "that's the best you can do?" taste in my mouth.
Don't get me wrong, though: I'm not saying that troop support is a fringe issue that nobody cares about. Of course we care about the troops. It's just that "Oh, Congress gave themselves a pay raise" is such an utterly to-be-expected occurance that again, it's not exactly a resounding condemnation.
Now, go chip in whatever you can so Peter can come back with an even better ad!
