Our Sponsors:

Read more »

Trending Stories

Our Members

Many thanks to Monica Elenbaas and Robert Boggess some of our many supporters.


Most Commented


    Well-hidden: The real differences in Seattle mayor's race

    McGinn is busy appealing to his base. Murray just wants to make McGinn the issue.
    Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn meets with the media following a shooting involving a metro bus driver on Aug. 12.

    Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn meets with the media following a shooting involving a metro bus driver on Aug. 12. John Stang

    Ed Murray during an interview

    Ed Murray during an interview Photo: Ashley Walls

    The Seattle mayor’s race grew from four yawns to five recently when a KING-5/Survey USA poll put challenger Ed Murray ahead of Mayor Mike McGinn by 52-30. Can we all go back to watching football now? 

    Another numbing agent is the calculation made by the too-professional team managing Murray’s campaign. Knowing that McGinn thrives on wedge issues, where he beats the liberal drums against even the smallest apostasy, the Murray campaign chose to agree with McGinn on virtually all his issues, to concede the McGinn agenda and vision. That drained the campaign of any substance.

    What remains is an unconvincing effort by McGinn to pin the tail of “establishment tool” on the unlikely backside of the liberal state senator from Capitol Hill. As for Murray, he throws slightly poisoned darts (labeled “ineffective,” friendless” and “impotent”) at a mayor who is seemingly doing better at the job.

    The Murray team recognizes that trying to get to the left of McGinn in this town of changing demographics and angry lefties is not possible. As I argued a few months ago, all the candidates are “like Mike,” agreeing with McGinn about the main issues of the day: transit, density, bikes, more nightlife, “Ballardizing” apartments, climate-change issues. Too, any moves by Murray toward the center would only serve to stir up McGinn’s base. The Murray handlers want to make McGinn the issue, reminding voters of their various gripes over his performance. They dread having Murray’s ideological “impurities” (a natural feature of a log-rolling legislator) turn into the issue.

    In fact, it’s a pivotal election, with two very different visions of what Seattle should be doing in the next four years. McGinn says he aspires to be the most progressive mayor of the most progressive city in America. He’s still a Sierra Club greenie —with coal trains now substituting for the big bad waterfront tunnel of four years ago— but he has now added labor activism, minorities and Occupy Seattle carryovers to his coalition.

    “Leading from the left,” as it is called, is plausible in Seattle, especially with national labor targeting the city. Conveniently for McGinn, just such a coalition and its message of “indignant liberalism” propelled Bill de Blasio from back in the pack to a pull-away winner of the New York mayoral primary.

    To understand this notable new trend away from the centrist concessions of the Clinton/Obama years, read carefully the much-circulated essay by Peter Beinert, “The Rise of the New New Left.” It examines how the Millennials are getting fed up with tiny measures to deal with the bleak economic future they face and are far more willing “to challenge cherished American myths about capitalism and class.” Millennials even favor socialism over capitalism by a slight margin, Beinert notes, stirring the embers of the Occupy movement. They are impatient with what Beinert calls Obama’s “pro-capitalist, anti-bureaucratic, Reaganized liberalism.”

    Mike McGinn is a good pied piper for such a parade. He’s a movement politician, almost a cult figure. He’s a master of confrontive, mediagenic politics such as his attempt to block a West Seattle development because Whole Foods doesn’t pay its workers enough to please the mayor. He set the tone early in his term, refusing to talk to establishment figures, insulting the council with an off-hand speech, showing up late and sweaty for fancy parties. It didn’t hurt with Joe Six-Pack when he flung a basketball arena into the civic mix, not bothering to inform many key actors.

    But it’s hard to think McGinn’s shaky political skills would yield much real change, much less prevail against a far more centrist and cautious city council. Also unlikely: that Seattle would interrupt its mad economic growth beyond enjoying a few tingly-left phrases. Remember how miserably a proposal for a state income tax on the rich did in the fall of 2010, failing by 65-35, and how aggressively the new local economy leaders fought it?  

    Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 9:37 a.m. Inappropriate

    This is not a bad article, David, and I completely agree with your assessment of both campaigns. I can also predict, based on what you've written in the past, your third approach: a more right-wing, corporate, austerity driven agenda that looks like Tim Burgess's wish list.

    Before you press "publish" on that next article, you need to think more carefully about the implications of what you've written here and especially about Beinart's article. Seattle is full of Millennial lefties. Kshama Sawant's huge showing in the primary reflects that. Many other older Seattleites share those left populist values on economic issues. They may like Whole Foods but they also want to see a different way to make them pay higher wages than a mayor telling them "no" to a West Seattle store. They may be NIMBY when it comes to development but are willing to raise their own property taxes to pay for schools and new housing.

    There is no base for your moderate conservatism in Seattle. This has been pointed out to you before but it looks like you keep insisting on that agenda. Burgess discovered this and it's why he dropped out of the mayor's race. Seattle will not follow the path of Chicago or Philadelphia, destroying its progressive institutions and abandoning its progressive values just because the wealthy and the corporate elite think we should. There are many issues that divide progressive Seattle. But rejection of austerity and policies originally cooked up in right-wing think tanks, from charter schools to basing budgets on performance measures, unite them.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 11:21 a.m. Inappropriate

    Someone in my neighborhood who knows how much I despise McGinn asked me why I didn't have a Murray sign up. This article shows why. I'll vote for Murray ENTIRELY as an anti-McGinn vote, but I don't imagine that the substance will be different. Seattle is a city hell-bent on wrecking itself. Thank God I live in one of the last neighborhoods they'll ruin.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 11:08 a.m. Inappropriate



    Posted Fri, Sep 27, 4:04 p.m. Inappropriate

    I wish! Actually, not, but I wouldn't mind being able to afford Broadmoor.


    Posted Sat, Oct 5, 1:49 p.m. Inappropriate

    Doesnt Broadmoor still have covenents against Jews, Asians, and Blacks? It did when I was a kid.


    Posted Mon, Oct 7, 10:32 p.m. Inappropriate

    Actually, lots of areas had those covenants - including those exclusive enclaves like White Center.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 11:35 a.m. Inappropriate

    Its like a choice between Coke and Coke or Pepsi and Pepsi


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 12:16 p.m. Inappropriate

    I too worried about Murray regarding, who is he really, and what is his message. Both candidates are very progressive. I do not think Mcginn is a bad person, he is likeable in public and in the handful of times I have been able to speak to him one on one. I do not agree with his agenda of fighting with cars, road dieting and 'traffic calming' that he has infused SDOT with. We need more bike paths and greenways, I support that, however Mcginn also wants to take a third of the road and all the parking away for cycle tracks that cater to a bike minority while asking everyone else to give up vastly more than their share.

    The bottom line is relationships with people are what get things done, in life and in politics. It doesn't cost anything for someone like the mayor to communicate more with the city council or even the governor, mcginn could care less, and it works against him. (and ultimately it works against the causes he supports). There is a reason 5 out of 4 city council members are publicly supporting Murray. They have had four years of hell with this mayor and have had enough. Mcginn lied about his support for the tunnel to get elected last time. look for more fireworks and false promises again from him as the election nears. He is a fighter and will not go away easily. It could be different for him, but he cannot compromise, and he made his legacy and now will have to live with it.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 12:51 p.m. Inappropriate

    "Both candidates are very progressive." Only if you mean "progressive" in the close to meaningless pejorative sense that NotFan constantly uses. Please read David Brewster's linked April 30 article, and John Fox's evaluation of primary candidates (http://www.zipcon.net/~jvf4119/story%20on%20mfteJune2013.htm) before you call them progressive.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 11:51 p.m. Inappropriate

    There are no progressives in Seattle's government. There are only corrupt, blatant phonies. The voters here are sleepwalkers, and what passes for a news media is tepid, timid, and toothless. So we get a steady stream of "progressives" who waddle in and out of office, grab what they can under the table, and waddle away.

    In the end, the blame rests with Seattle's resident voters, who are carnival marks straight out of a Barnum & Bailey show. If you're an aspiring politician, all you need do is kiss the right dozen rings, get certified as "progressive," and you're in.

    We get exactly what we deserve.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 11:17 a.m. Inappropriate

    Name those (approx.) twelve individuals. I double-dog dare you.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 12:56 p.m. Inappropriate

    Mike McGinn is not even close to Bill de Blasio, the likely next mayor of New York City. Unlike McGinn, de Blasio has real social democratic ("progressive") values, and knows how to be diplomatic and work with people. Check out http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/nyregion/a-mayoral-hopeful-now-de-blasio-was-once-a-young-leftist.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:34 p.m. Inappropriate

    Given that you're a New Yorker, why are you on Seattle websites?


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 11:06 p.m. Inappropriate

    I'm not a New Yorker.

    Do you pay attention to anything other than the bilious cloud that clings to you like dirt on "Pig-Pen"?


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 1:02 p.m. Inappropriate

    The city's changing under all our noses. All our old nostrums, conventional wisdoms, and reasons to label people and institutions are fragile and failing. 630,000 live in Seattle, and about 50 percent of them arrived in the past 20-25 years. The city is growing up. In those 20 years, we've endured two brutal recessions - 1990-93 and 2008-2010 - and the dot-com collapse in 2001-2003. Globalization roared into our city...our long relationship with all things Pacific Rim drew students, entrepreneurs, and families to us. Through it all, big decisions had to get made. We don't want mayors who want to build Amsterdam in Seattle. We don't want mayors who want to be Michael Bloomberg. We don't want mayors who thrive on friction. We don't even want a mayor who's exciting or thrilling. We just want a mayor to care about the people in this city, to put people first, to actually want to make the city work better. McGinn's crusade is a scorched-earth strategy. Murray has spent 18 years crusading to allow people to live their lives in peace, with equality for all and malice toward none. That's the kind of mayor this city needs - no more crusades, just running the city and letting people live their lives.

    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:42 p.m. Inappropriate

    It's kinda quaint that you actually believe that, or appear to, when the very likely reality is that Murray will sell out to exactly the same crowd that owned McGinn.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 1:27 p.m. Inappropriate

    Perhaps they disagree about Chris Hansen's Arena?

    McGinn negotiated it. The Council improved it slightly, but it's the McGinn Arena deal.

    Murray expresses some doubts and reservations but he hasn't committed to moving it to a more appropriate location not to finding a partner who can be trusted.

    I am waiting for a clear answer from Murray, otherwise I'll write in.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 6:11 p.m. Inappropriate

    There is zero political benefit to Murray taking on Steinbrueck's failed campaign item.
    I explain it here:

    Mr Baker

    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 3:36 p.m. Inappropriate

    Whether you have estimated that Murray has no cynical reason to present a clear position on this issue is irrelevant to most of us. Roughly 1 in 6 voters supported Steinbrueck, and this is one of the few ISSUES in the campaign, ISSUE defined as "point of disagreement between candidates". In a contest between ideological clones, this could tip the scales for some of us who otherwise will cast a write-in vote.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:44 p.m. Inappropriate

    Write in Bozo the Clown. I've done it. Has no impact, but who says your vote counts anyway?


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 10:55 p.m. Inappropriate

    He can wait you out and give you nothing positive to vote for and leave you with your negative of McGinn's promotion of the arena.
    He's ahead in the polls, and you have nowhere to go, and he doesn't need to flip flop to get your vote in order to win this election.
    This isn't 2009, this isn't McGinn hedging his obvious opposition to the tunnel by lying to enough voters to swing a handful of voters to win the election.
    This is somebody who has already voiced support to the most rabid anti-arena trolls in Seattle, the Seattle Times Editirial Board, and still got the endorsement over their personal distaste for McGinn.
    Arena haters are arena haters with nowhere to go but Murray, or sit on your hands.

    Mr Baker

    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 6:03 p.m. Inappropriate

    A couple observations of the observer.
    "He [McGinn] set the tone early in his term, refusing to talk to establishment figures …"
    Oh yes, he really suck it to the man right off the bat with this:
    Published Nov 30, 2009, 12:00pm
    By Erica C. Barnett
    Reporting from Mayor-Elect Mike McGinn's town hall meeting in Northgate:

    Former Windermere real estate agent and Columbia City community activist Darryl Smith is Deputy Mayor—an interesting contrast to "The Shark" Tim Ceis . Former Vulcan community relations director Phil Fujii is Deputy Mayor of operations. (More on Fujii and Vulcan's ties to McGinn here). And former Clinton advisor Julie McCoy of the Mercury Group, which ran McGinn's campaign, is chief of staff.

    Windermere and Vulcan, David, Windermere Vulcan.

    Next, "Joe Six-pack"?
    Not sure I would call Maklemore Joe Six-pack, and that might result in laughter from Sherman Alexie (I'll tweet it to him, just for the laughs).

    Lastly, this column is just the conundrum Steinbrueck supporters must be wrestling with. If it weren't for McGinn supporting "Joe Six-pack" with arena, then all three of those people would run to him.

    So, we have the divider vs the uniter, with undecideds backing their way into voting for somebody.

    Mr Baker

    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 6:48 p.m. Inappropriate

    Disclaimer: I work in McGinn's office for two of his policy staff members and I wholeheartedly support the work they are doing for the City of Seattle. I also cannot vote in Seattle.

    I was really hoping that this would be the article that told me why Seattle voters should vote for Murray. We know he's not McGinn; no new news there. But what is Murray going to do for the citizens of Seattle other than provide them with 100 more police officers.

    Some people like to vote for someone (I do) rather than vote against someone. It seems that Murray doesn't think this matters.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 8:56 p.m. Inappropriate

    You might not like the answer and may have heard it before but this article does tell Seattle voters why they should vote for Murray - the reason is that he is not McGinn whose public persona is divisive and egotistical. McGinn could have done the electoral process a lot of good by accepting that with such a high-level of unpopularity he was destined to be a one-term mayor. This would have enabled a real discussion about the direction of Seattle rather than an easy ride for a fortunate "anybody but McGinn" candidate.


    Posted Wed, Sep 25, 11:44 p.m. Inappropriate

    I have given up on Seattle's city government, to the extent that since halfway through McGinn's term I decided I'd vote against every tax levy from now until the end of time. This reprsents a 180-degree turn for me. Until I took a closer look, I thought our taxes were too low.

    I don't think any of these people are telling us what they actually want to do. I think most if not all of them are on the take. I think that, like all one-party systems, our city government is a refuge for the lazy, the arrogant, the disconnected, and the corrupt. I think voting is basically pointless, and I doubt I'd even bother to do it if I had to physically go to a polling place and cast a vote. I don't have even a shred of confidence in Murray.

    All that said, I also think McGinn is such a turd that I'll be voting in this election. My vote will be 100% against the smarmy, lying bastard. It will have no practical value, because McGinn will be replaced by someone who will kowtow to the very same people. But at least it won't be McGinn, and I'll have to satisfy myself with that. You take what you can get.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 6:23 a.m. Inappropriate


    In Seattle, if you put to a vote a bill to add taxes simply to add taxes, it would pass by a rsounding majority.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 3:47 p.m. Inappropriate

    It sure seems that way, doesn't it? Every now and then there'll be an exception like the 2011 effort to raise car tabs, but I'm afraid such failures are the exceptions that prove the rule here.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:09 a.m. Inappropriate

    Amazing how much ignorance pervades Seattle. A media that rarely asks the 5 w's and h and an establishment that is more appearance than reality. Appearance of doing "good" things, like eliminating poverty and homelessness while providing rewards for huge numbers of those who largely contribute to it--illegal immigrants. Who decry congested highways and temporary transportation fixes, who decry growing gaps between rich and poor, and continued educational discrepancy but have conditioned reflex need to increase politically-empowering illegal and legal immigration that is fueling our unsustainable population growth. Who decry water-way pollution, ecological degradation, and yet find every way possible to maximize an assumed unlimited growth plus growing access to cheap labor. If that isn't ignorance, it has lost its meaning.

    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 1:33 p.m. Inappropriate

    I don't know much about Mr. Murray beyond the facts that he's served in the legislature quite a while and seems to have generally voted for things I support. I say this with the caveat that I haven't done my homework at all, so I could be badly mistaken. However, the fact that the city council supports him gives me pause. There are few or none of the council members I trust or like, and even fewer who respond to emailed questions I've sent, which I think is part of their job. However, we do have Jean Godden, whom we can thank for the latest Comcast (aka "Satan") monopoly contract, and who has grown increasingly regal in her dotage. We have have a council full of folks who would stick us with a bad deal for an arena we don't need in an area that would negatively impact family wage jobs. We have council members who accede to bike mania and reducing road space and parking at the same time that they hide themselves safely away in sky palaces downtown. We have council members who have supported the desecration of our neighborhoods with the ugly 6- and 8- packs while whining that growth is inevitable, which implies that not only we voters, but also our representatives are helpless to reject, or at least shape it in a way that doesn't destroy our quality of life, a premise I reject. We have council members at least some of whom are driven to and from work and so never have the joy of being stuck in gridlock or on a bus with the drunks, gangsters, and mentally challenged for seatmates. So if they're supporting Murray, I have to wonder what's in it for them, but more critically, how bad will he be if they like him so much?

    This is not to say that I am happy with McGinn. He has turned out to be a liar and a turncoat on important issues. His governance as relates to SDOT speaks for itself--it's governance only cyclists could like. If he has poor relations with the council I count that a plus for the reasons outlined above and others.

    Generally speaking I can't see that it matters who we elect. There isn't a candidate that represents my opinions and beliefs available. Hasn't been for a long time, and I am pessimistic that there ever will be again. These folks have been completely taken over and bought out by interests inimical to much of what I value in life. So it matters little which one's elected; they'll all do the same things more or less. I have voted all the years I've been eligible and hold that right sacred, but when it comes to what's going on in Seattle and King County, I'm beginning to feel like "why bother?" I can't even find someone to vote for in hopes of dethroning someone I'd like to see ousted. Very sad.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 1:45 p.m. Inappropriate

    McGinn's such a douchebag that, no matter how cynical or disaffected you might be, it's pretty much mandatory to oppose him. But the real problems in Seattle politics are not with the mayor, whoever it might be, but with the City Council, the media, and ultimately the sleepwalking voters.

    I've been to a bunch of City Council meetings in the past couple years, and can honestly say that not a single one of them ought to be there. The organization should be completely turned over. They are superannuated and arrogant, and I am convinced most of them are on the take from developers.

    The media here have never been any good, even when they were financially healthy. Now, the one remaining newspaper is on life support, and doesn't have the resources to even minimally cover what they need to. The Stranger is bizarre and in the tank for whatever hipster is craziest. Seattle Weekly has shrunk, and the TV stations are bad as always. Crosscut is basically an Op-Ed forum without any news impact.

    So we're getting less and less real information. The city-wreckers downtown are having an absolute field day, and I am pessimistic about the future.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:12 p.m. Inappropriate

    Do you realize how juvenile you sound?

    You are really the laughing stock of crosscut.

    Thank you for the entertainment.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:38 p.m. Inappropriate

    You're welcome! Hey, did you see that the state's largest labor union just endorsed your soon to be former mayor's opponent? No need to call him a douchebag; he's cooked. Not that it'll matter.


    Posted Fri, Sep 27, 12:50 p.m. Inappropriate

    By laughingstock, do you mean someone who doesn't completely toe the one party line in a one party city? I know, for Progs you have to agree 100% or you are mean/dumb or both.


    Posted Fri, Sep 27, 4:02 p.m. Inappropriate

    It's fun to entice the "progressives" into revealing their true, Stalinist selves. It doesn't take much!


    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 7:57 p.m. Inappropriate

    And you, jeffro, must be the one who monitors the laugh track?

    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 8 p.m. Inappropriate

    The bottom line is that voters need to become more familiar with the issues, and the people. Know your poison does help.

    Supporting better candidates both financially and with kudos for enduring the morons they must interact with is also important.

    Voters have never needed to become smarter than right now.

    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 7:20 p.m. Inappropriate

    Murray has the only thing going for him that he needs to win the election: Murray is NOT Mike Mcginn.

    McGinn will lose this election -- Murray doesn't have to win it.

    Murray doesn't have to lay out any vision for what he would do as mayor. All Murray has to do is keep reminding Seattle voters that he is NOT Mcginn.

    I am voting against McGinn. I would have voted against McGinn no matter who his challenger was. McGinn is an arrogant, incompetent jackass who has no business being Mayor of Seattle.

    Doesn't make any difference who Murray is or what he would do as mayor. The only thing that matters is McGinn has to go.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:11 p.m. Inappropriate

    Don't worry-- I will vote for McGinn to negate your vote.

    He is a good mayor, perhaps you car-mongers can't see it, but in 20 years he will be viewed with the progressive culture he has brought forth.


    Posted Thu, Sep 26, 9:39 p.m. Inappropriate

    He's got to get SOMEONE's vote, even if it's the under-the-bridge crowd.


    Posted Fri, Sep 27, 5:46 p.m. Inappropriate

    once Murray supported $15 minimum wage he lost my attention. To pay a snot nose kid to flip burgers for $15 an hour is insane, that screws the entire food chain in Seattle.


    Posted Sat, Sep 28, 10:46 a.m. Inappropriate

    It appears to me that the bulk of McGinn supporters are the 20-30 somethings that vote (good for them) and ride bicycles and want low rent so they can live in what they consider hip Seattle neighborhoods. I was once as idealistic as they are but time has shown me that this city is ruled by developers. Oh I have heard their cries -- more development means lower rents. Right! The only development that provides lower rent is low income housing which is taxpayer subsidized -- and kids -- low income housing does not have the high end finishes you want. aPodments are a sure example of that -- 150 square feet for $1,000 a month. I want someone that appeals to neighborhood home owners -- people that have bought homes in neighborhoods, have pride in their neighborhoods and do support reasonable development (which includes parking). The city has been run for way too many years by people with real estate/development backgrounds that trash a neighborhood and move on. None of them live in these neighborhoods. As one woman I know said to me -- these government created Hub Urban Villages are the next slums. At first I didn't believe her, but now ...


    Posted Sat, Sep 28, 4:40 p.m. Inappropriate

    I'm over 70, havent' ridden a bike for 50 years, and live in very unhip neighborhood. I'm voting for McGinn. Figure out how to write without stereotyping, Norge.


    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 7:56 p.m. Inappropriate

    Yep. Especially to the including parking in reasonable development.

    Go around and look at all the cheap ass new construction built in the last ten years in Seattle. Small, tight, ugly and nonsensical parking.
    Blights in just ten years.

    Walk into the Safeway parking lot at 15th NW in Ballard. Used to be a really nice new development there. Filthy, decrepit. The public areas are a mess around it too (City areas).

    Ballard used to be immaculate. No more.

    Posted Sat, Sep 28, 2:39 p.m. Inappropriate

    McGinn received the same type of treatment from the City Council that Obama received from a Republican controlled Congress. I am voting for McGinn because of accomplishments despite the bad-faith treatment of the Council.

    Turnover on the Council will be more effective than turnover in the Mayor’s office. Replace Conlin with Sawant.

    Posted Sat, Sep 28, 2:39 p.m. Inappropriate

    McGinn received the same type of treatment from the City Council that Obama received from a Republican controlled Congress. I am voting for McGinn because of accomplishments despite the bad-faith treatment of the Council.

    Turnover on the Council will be more effective than turnover in the Mayor’s office. Replace Conlin with Sawant.

    Posted Sun, Sep 29, 4:19 p.m. Inappropriate

    As the rain and leaves fall, storm drains clog, potholes enlarge, red light cameras flash, downtown crime continues, general fund exceeds $1,000,000,000, and deferred maintenance mounts, McGinn and Murray highlight minimum wage hikes, soda taxes, and century old trolley technology. Former out of state mayors such as Rudy Giuliani, Sonny Bono, Clint Eastwood, and even Sarah Palin would be an improvement.


    Posted Tue, Oct 1, 2:37 p.m. Inappropriate

    Murray has done nothing to explain why I should vote for him. Mayor Mike has been a bit cozy with developers for my taste. I hated what he and the Council did to undermine the efforts of residents in the Roosevelt District. I was also sad that he did not follow through on enhancing City influence over the demolition derby that has become our School District.

    That said, I feel no incentive to toss da Mayor out in exchange for an unknown. This historically does not work out well. With four years experience, and perhaps a little humility learned, voting for the current Mayor will save us from city government pinballing to some other pol's new "vision" (whatever that is) for the city.

    Oh, and whatever candidate works to return the influence of the Dept of Neighborhoods to pre-Nickels levels would go a long way to garnering my vote. Seattle used to be special because it valued the uniqueness of its neighborhoods. Unfortunately, that special quality has been slathered over in recent years by developers using a one-vision-fits-all approach, apparently with the blessing of the City Council and Mayor's office.


    Posted Tue, Oct 1, 5:16 p.m. Inappropriate

    To some extent I agree, in the sense that I have low expectations from Murray. I think he'll keep kowtowing to the usual mixture of developers and phony "progressives" who run the town. That much said, McGinn is such an egregious douchebag that, no matter how cynical you might get about city government, you pretty much have to toss him out.

    If there's one slight positive about Murray, it's that he hasn't even tried to articulate some "vision." Who knows, maybe he actually wants to do the little things, although I won't hold my breath. My guess is that he's ultimately angling to replace McDermott when he retires from Congress.


    Posted Thu, Oct 3, 3:49 p.m. Inappropriate

    Well one thing we know for sure - no GOP candidate is in sight. It's amazing how folks who don't live in Seattle seem obsessed with everything in the city. Some kinda p**** envy thing I suppose.


    Posted Thu, Oct 3, 9:59 p.m. Inappropriate

    It seems like you are the one who is obsessed... with NotFan's residency. Not sure it necessarily matters where he or she exactly lives as life as we know it or opinions don't end at political boundaries. Why don't you go first and identify yourself and where you live if so important.

    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 10:40 p.m. Inappropriate

    For what it's worth, I live in Seattle. This is the Internet where no one knows you're a dog, so I can't imagine a way to prove it to Treker's "progressive" satisfaction, but it's true.


    Posted Mon, Oct 7, 9:28 p.m. Inappropriate

    This is your typical progressive idea of diversity - everybody gotta agree with me or you don't belong here. I live in Seattle now, unfortunately. For the same price even on the Eastside I could have double the house and 10x the land, but commute and family renders that impractical.

    Oh, additionally this is Seattle showing its provincialism. A West-Coast version of Babbitry.


    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 8:31 a.m. Inappropriate

    Qutie evident from past remarks tha "it" is not a Seattle resident - pay attention. Not asking for any verification. Now go skedaddle.


    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 9:35 a.m. Inappropriate

    Yeah, I need to Pay attention and inhabit this blog 24/7 like you do & obsess about others & comment incessantly . But really, if it is so evident that NotFan is not from Seattle, why are you constantly pointing it out.

    Get over yourself you self important queef. Last time I checked the constitution, it is ok to express an opinion about a Seattle issue without living here.

    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 10:30 a.m. Inappropriate

    Wow. Are you two sleeping with each other or something?


    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 1:58 p.m. Inappropriate

    Wow! Good comeback...for a juvenile. Keep it up & pretty soon you can take your training wheels of your bike.

    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 2:29 p.m. Inappropriate

    In contrast to this intelligent name calling remark?
    Get over yourself you self important queef.

    But I'll bow out of this circle jerk and let you to have some privacy.


    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 3:12 p.m. Inappropriate

    Yeah, you must be tired of being the pivot man-go clean the goo off

    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 7:51 p.m. Inappropriate

    Not everyone reading or commenting here votes in Seattle. Many own property in Seattle, own companies that do business in Seattle, or perhaps work in Seattle.

    Everyone has an opinion, and whether one lives in Seattle hardly matters.

    Wait. I take that back. I'd say that those who have moved away from Seattle have the most important opinions, for they chose to get out.

    The reasons for the getting out vary, but none were good news for Seattle.

    -- 3rd Generation, Seattle born native. Proud to no longer live in Seattle, yet willing to return if common sense returns.

    Posted Fri, Oct 4, 10:42 p.m. Inappropriate

    I live in Seattle. Treker the "progressive" will stop at nothing to de-legitimize anyone who's not part of his hivemind, but I do live here.


    Posted Sun, Oct 6, 10:33 p.m. Inappropriate

    The article is a fair depiction. --- I don't think there's much excitement on either side. But that doesn't mean the city will fall apart either. The city council holds a fair amount of the cards anyway. I would like to see an increased emphasis on the neighborhoods.

    Because the current big projects --- Mercer rebuild and the tunnel. -- we're started way back, the next mayor is just the caretaker of these items. With a slooooowly improving economy it's not likely there is much money around for any new "visionary" projects. Could be worse unless the tea party relents in D.C. I guess. But either one of these candidates will do fine - just not great.


    Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

    Join Crosscut now!
    Subscribe to our Newsletter

    Follow Us »