On TV as of yesterday:
Note that the ad is generally positive, with only a soft contrast with Darcy Burner at the end.
Furthermore, the US Chamber of Commerce ad that's on the airwaves now too - though not on YouTube I believe - is also an upbeat spot, praising Dave Reichert's work on health care. Thus, not the "ads that will smear Burner as a tax raiser" as predicted by Joel Connelly.
Which leads me to a gut feeling. Reichert's first ad, coming only ten days before mail-in ballots are sent to voters, is mostly about him. If he was behind it would be about Darcy Burner. Couple that with the US Chamber choosing to go positive rather than negative and this has the feeling of a campaign where there is some private polling data - perhaps from multiple sources - that shows Reichert with a modest lead in a close race. Not huge, still in the vulnerable range thanks to the demographics of the district, but not inconsequential either.
But again, that's just my gut.
And if you need more hints Reichert is ahead, Darcy Burner just released a new ad too, finally discovering that the economy is an issue...
Her ad is much more negative than Reichert's. Let's not discuss the irony of the candidate in a trade-dependent state who doesn't support trade deals.
Exit question: how does Darcy Burner, a potential rookie in Congress, propose to create "new jobs that can never be outsourced." Does the government create jobs or do companies that actually hire people?
Follow-up: once Darcy Burner actually figures out who creates jobs, how then does she propose that government dictate to private companies that those businesses can't control the location of their own employees?
Her rhetoric is pure piffle.
Originally posted at Sound Politics.