Political Buzz

Talking WA politics.

NOTICE: Political Buzz has moved.

With the launch of our new website, we've moved Political Buzz.
Visit the new section.

What’s in a name? Maybe everything in Reichert-DelBene contest

Post by Lewis Kamb / The News Tribune on Oct. 20, 2010 at 2:40 pm with 2 Comments »
October 21, 2010 2:43 pm

Earlier this week, we (along with many, many others) reported about an exchange at a candidates’ forum in Newcastle last weekend during which an audience member stumped Republican incumbent Congressman Dave Reichert with a question about the Glass-Steagall Act.

Reichert, trying to win his fourth term to Congress for Washington’s 8th District, replied he was “not familiar” with Glass-Steagall — drawing laughter (and seemingly some gasps) from the audience.

(Parts of the nearly eight-decades old banking reform law, which originally required commercial banks to separate activities from Wall Street investment firms, were repealed in 1999. In the aftermath of the nation’s recent economic meltdown, some lawmakers and candidates — including Reichert’s challenger, Democrat Suzan DelBene — have, in part, blamed the erosion of Glass-Steagall for the crisis.)

Is that Del Bean?

Seattle public radio station KUOW recently caught up with the woman — Judy Schwarz — who posed the question to Reichert.

In a news report that aired on the station Tuesday, Schwarz said she’ll probably vote for DelBene, a former Microsoft executive turned first-time candidate.

Only trouble is, when Schwarz revealed on air whom she’ll likely cast her ballot for, her answer tapped into what may be DelBene’s Achilles Heel: Name recognition.

Asked by KUOW’s Amy Radil who she was going to vote for, Schwarz responded:

I’m probably going to vote for Delbane, Del bean? I can’t pronounce her name. Delbene. Because I think we need someone with business acumen in Congress. Going forward I think it’s important.

Arguably one of the area’s most recognizable political figures, Reichert — the silver-haired former King County sheriff portrayed in at least one made-for TV mini-series — still holds a large advantage in the Congressional race, according to a recent analysis by ace political statistician Nate Silver.

"Reichert" on film
Is that Dave Reichert?

While other recent polls have suggested DelBene has closed the gap on Reichert considerably, cross tabs of a recent poll conducted by Democrat-leaning Public Policy Polling indicate voters are still unfamiliar with DelBene.

At least 31 percent of the 1,036 likely voters polled for that Oct. 9-10 survey responded “not sure” when asked if they had a favorable or unfavorable opinion of DelBene, compared to just 10 percent for Reichert.

(The upside for the DelBene camp? Once people actually do figure out if they like her or not, she’ll need just nine of the 31 percent of “not sures” to tilt her way to surpass Reichert’s 48 percent “favorable” numbers, the PPP survey suggests.)

Meanwhile, Reichert’s campaign has tried to “help” people become more familiar with DelBene, launching the attack site, www.WhoIsSuzan.com.

And just today, the state’ Republican Party launched its own website to help define DelBene: www.HelpingSuzanVote.com illustrates DelBene’s spotty record of voting in recent elections.

Leave a comment Comments → 2
  1. UnbiasedReporter says:

    Well, since we want to keep talking about Glass-Steagall (and Ms. Schwarz this should help decide another vote since it seems to be your primary criteria for choosing)

    Provisions that prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act. Sen. Murray voted FOR this….she voted to do away with Glass-Steagall.

    And just this year……Sen. Cantwell coauthored two amendments that were not allowed to come up for debate and a vote in the Senate. One of these – an amendment coauthored with Sen. John McCain, R-AZ would have re-established the Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banking. Sen. Murray helped block this amendment.

    So, if Glass-Steagall is important to you – No on Murray.

  2. Apparently, UnbiasedReporter is one of those annoying ‘facts-have-value’ gadflies. Next thing we know, UnbiasedReporter is going to start prattling and screeching about integrity in our political officeseekers.

    And that will be the end of Hopium and Chains. Then where will we be?

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0