This whole report is a big fat nothingburger.

"National news outlets are reporting that Democratic challenger Lisa Brown is posing a credible threat to incumbent Cathy McMorris Rodgers in the state’s deep-red 5th Congressional District."

Yes - becasue she's running one-on-one against CMR instead of competing with a bunch of other Democrats piling out of a clown-car.

If the state Democratic Party was really interested in meddling in this race they would have recruited a candidate who actually had a resume of elected office to speak of. These candidates are all well-meaning people without any political experience or skills. This is an improvement over the 2016 when they recruited a candidate who couldn't decide whether he wanted to run or not, but the lack of an experienced candidate this year could still translate to the impossible - Dino Fucking Rossi finally winning an election for once in his life.

sour grapes indeed. How is a DC insider like Hader, who has fewer than 12 in-state donors, considered grassroots?

Oh look, the Dems trying to rig another primary. What a surprise.

Not only does it make them look crooked, but stupid. Who on Earth would anoint Kim Schrier and risk alienating the grassroots?

Omgawwwwd!! are you saying the Democratic party wants to actually beat Dino Rossi and flip the 8th?!?!...I'm SHOOK.

You know you could always vote on how they align with your beliefs. If that turns out not to be true, then you could vote them out later. New blood can be as dumb/dogmatic as old guard. And vice versa.

When did frontrunners who have never run for elected office before and have substantial in-district support like Schrier suddenly become "establishment" candidates?

As an actual voter in the 8th district I am horrified that Dr. Kim's success has been attributed to the Democratic Party's behind the scene dealings. Kim has been a member of our community for 17 years and has treated families like my own and many others. Kim has been there for us unlike the other two candidates that recently moved to the district. I completely understand now how The Stranger has consistently endorsed losing candidates

(Almost) anybody can file to run for the 8th in the primary, and put a 'D' next to their name. That does not mean that the state Democratic Party must treat them all equally. This is going to be an expensive race. Whoever wins the primary is doubtless going to want the support and $$$ of the state party apparatus to help them in the general election against Rossi. And since this is a potentially flippable district, the state party definitely has an interest in seeing that happen.

If I were a state party official, I would definitely be looking at the field of primary candidates, and evaluating them, seeing their potential to win in the general, seeing their potential to raise money (again, this is going to be a very expensive race), seeing their ability to organize and manage a grass-roots campaign. I would definitely be encouraging those I thought had real potential, and ignoring those I thought unlikely to have a real chance.

The voters should absolutely vote for whoever they want. But the state party has a right to support who they feel has the best chance. They should not be required to just sit passively until after the primary.

Well, if anything this should prove that whomever democrats vote for they will be Tina’s puppet. Don’t count on any flipping when this article hits the light of day in the district.

We saw in 2016 how letting the Democratic Party pick the candidate who they thought would win doesn’t work. Seattle should let the voters in the 8th decide. The Democrats have an opportunity to finally flip this district, and they’re going to trip over their own feet and let Rossi win by choosing the candidate they want in Seattle, not the one that’s best for the 8th.

Why do liberals habitually lose elections? Because they'd much rather fight among themselves then unify to support a party candidate. My prediction - because of this dysfunctional behavior that liberals can't sober up from, Reichert's seat will remain Republican.

Read this again. And a few questions.

1) If the metric for choosing candidates is fundraising and Tina is telling everyone not to donate to other candidates, how are they supposed to compete? Catch-22 situation.

2) And Rich, how long ago did this start? Is this a recent thing that they now want to clear the decks after seeing the mediocre field or has Kim been their chosen candidate from the beginning?

3) If this story is true, is the Democratic Party stupid enough to push out a minority woman in a district heavily populated with minorities? I would like to hear from Mona Das about this. Inexcusable.

4) Why is labor already endorsing Kim when she has no connection to labor and we are so far from the actual primary? I saw her at a forum and she could barely answer questions about labor much less be a champion for them. What is Karen Deal's role in this considering she left the Washington State Labor Council to take the State Democrat job? Why lie to the guy's union?

5) I feel like there is more here about Indivisible being used by the Dems. My Indivisible group has been visited by Shannon a number of times (and Jason a couple times) and she has eluded to party interference for months. And I know our chapter leader has hinted at the party has been pressuring her to endorse Kim since last October.

Thanks.

Also, if none of the candidates in this underwhelming field had the courage to stand up to the State Party, when their own interests were involved, how can we expect them to stand up to their party Whip or Trump if elected.

They are not making a great case for themselves.

This article wasn't written with a mind for facts. Who the fuck quotes an Anonymous Source to basically say "they said to write a check, or not".

The gratuitous use of scare quotes to make the banal appear to be sinister is a hack move, Smith.

So a candidate didn't vote in midterms. Maybe he'll get turnout from people who don't vote in midterms. That'll win.

You know, I really don't get why parties think they should narrow the field before the primary. The advantage of spending some months anointed, okay. Versus the risk of guessing wrong and anointing not the best candidate. Seems a lot of downside risk compared to limited upside.

The leadership of the Democratic Party in Washington State (especially in western WA) is far more conservative than the voters and often work against progressive candidates. Take the 43rd: Chopp and Pedersen represent about the bluest district in the state and are at best middle of the road mainstreamers. And are at worst fucking roadblocks. Chopp has long undermined the campaigns of more progressive candidates (those advocating for drug policy and criminal justice reform in particular). It's time for the rank and file to get rid of rotten wood and work for electing real progressives. We're electing folks who do no actual reform.

Tim, Dan, Eli, don't you have some nice book reports or something for Rich to work on?

Rich, stop trying to make politics happen. It's not going to happen.

@19,

And people who live on planet earth will keep electing them because they hold the line.

Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line - guess which strategy wins elections?

@18

WA's top two primary system makes it dangerous to field a large number of candidates in the primary. You risk a situation where votes get split across too many candidates, and the other party ends up with both of the top two spots.

@22 - BINGO!

Look at the 2016 race for WA State Treasurer:

51.57% of the Primary vote was Democratic - but it was split between three Dems, the leader of which got 20.36%.

Meanwhile, only 48.42% of the vote was Republican - but it was pretty evenly split between just to Rs, who got 25.09% and 23.33% - making them the top two vote getters, and giving WA voters a choice between two Republicans in November.

In our political landscape, the Democratic Party has a RESPONSIBILITY to winnow the field prior to the primary.

Oh, yeah, there's collusion. Starting with the Emily's list endorsement in November. Yes, Mona was very much the better candidate. Dr shrier is NOT the best candidate, especially against Rossi. She'll be eaten alive in any debate with him. She is a very nice "mom" but doesn't have any passion in her campaign stops, of which I've attended 3 in Chelan co. She has NO grasp of the issues and answers in very general broad statements. Good men candidates are being brushed away.

Oh no, I hope this white guy & chick from DC with 12 donors gets a fair shot.

This is pathetic reporting. I don't know if you've noticed but the nation is in crisis and we have a shot of flipping an important seat. Stop listening to complaints from consultants and butthurt rich, donors. Start focusing on the people who are being harmed by this messed up administration and how the 8th will solve it.

@19 gnossos: Agreed. Spot on target.

WTH PC is even in this gerrymandered WA8 district remains a mystery. Except I do have to say Old "Do-Nothing" Dave knew enough to be a good Triple Dipper by saying Fire, Police and Kids enough times to keep his bona fides as a Repub. Just not much else other than a place holder.
But Timothy Grass? Are you serious? someone has to be smoking some kinda grass for that comment to fly.
If the 8th is going to turn Blue, someone need to get busy with some real policy and quit asking for money right after the handshake intro. Stop being Gimme Pigs .
I want to hear views, opinions, facts, not trite campaign slogans.
Without having to go to all the troll traps , where is this information???