HA doesn’t really do political endorsements because A) I think unsigned endorsements are kinda stupid, and B) it’s generally no secret who we individually support. But since I haven’t been writing much at HA recently, and I don’t have Slog at my disposal anymore to influence elections, I thought I’d take a moment to clarify my thoughts on a handful of city council races.
District 2: I’m voting for Tammy Morales
Nothing personal against Bruce Harrell… but I’ve got nothing personal for him either, and I’m hard pressed to think of anything he’s accomplished during his eight years on the council. He’s way too conventional for my liking, and yeah, okay, I’m a little pissed off at his pissiness towards Kshama Sawant. So I’m voting for Tammy Morales.
Morales is affable, smart, energetic, and not totally full of herself. (Also, she doesn’t live in Bellevue, ever.) Yes, I know Josh Farris speaks more directly to my issues, and I’m glad he’s running, but Morales stands the better chance of forcing Harrell to break a sweat. And I want to see Harrell sweat.
Surpise! I support Kshama Sawant!
District 3: I’ve maxed out to Kshama Sawant
I rarely donate to political campaigns because I figure my blogging is contribution enough. But Kshama is more than just special. Never in my 12 years of closely following state and local politics have I seen a newly elected official achieve so much so quickly, sometimes by the mere threat of her presence. And as much as Sawant has dragged Seattle politics to the left, her defeat would be taken as a mandate to drag it sharply to the right. That’s why the business community is spending so much to defeat her.
So as an indication of how strongly I feel about this race, I’ve contributed the maximum $700 to Sawant’s campaign, and I encourage you to give whatever you can afford. Sure, my generosity is partially a reflection of my improved finances, but it’s mostly a reflection of how important I believe it is to our city, our state, and our nation to keep this particular socialist in office.
District 4: I slipped Michael Maddux a $20
I could think of lots of reasons to deny Jean Godden yet another term, but I only need to give you two: She’s been there too damn long, and she’s simply too damn old. That may not be nice, but it’s true. It’s time for her to move out of the way and give somebody else a chance.
As for Godden’s main opponents, I don’t hate Rob Johnson, but I don’t particularly like a lot of the people and organizations supporting him. And when the Seattle Times endorses Johnson by praising his “willingness to break from Seattle’s insular liberal orthodoxy,” that just gives me the willies. So if I had a vote in this district, I’d be casting my ballot for Michael Maddux, who clearly represents the progressive values of the district and the city. Also, he shows up at Drinking Liberally. So there’s that.
Position 8: I’m voting for Jon Grant, if only to make a statement
This is without a doubt the toughest decision for me. First of all, I weirdly like and respect Tim Burgess (yay universal preschool!), even though he’s consistently the most awful vote on the council, and perhaps the biggest dick on the council when it comes to disrespectful treatment of Sawant. Second, I kinda like all three of Burgess’s serious opponents, if in different ways. Third, Burgess is almost certain to win reelection. So if I’m going to cast what I perceive to be a protest vote, then I’m going to cast it for Jon Grant, who is running almost entirely on tenants rights and affordable housing… issues Burgess kinda sucks on.
Position 9: I’m supporting Bill Bradburd (but secretly voting for Lorena Gonzalez)
The whole thing with Sally Clark’s sudden retirement followed by Lorena Gonzalez’s instant campaign stunk of Ed Murray trying to maneuver a political ally onto the council. But every time I’ve spoken to Gonzalez or have seen her speak, I’ve come away more impressed. I’d really like to vote for Bill Bradburd, what with his focus on affordable housing, but I’m not sure I trust his neighborhoody NIMBYist instincts. So, yeah, I’m voting for Gonzalez (who’s going to win anyway) and hoping she proves a disappointment to Ed.
The Others:
Mike O’Brien and Sally Bagshaw are going to win reelection regardless, and I haven’t paid close enough attention to District’s 1 and 5 (there’s just too damn many candidates!) for me to pick a definitive favorite in either. So if you vote in those districts, I’ve got nothing to offer.
There you have it. It’s not an endorsement, per se, because that would be stupid. I mean, who am I to tell you how to vote? Still, there’s no harm in telling you how I’m going to vote. Take it for what it is.
I’m sure she’s wonderful, but can you offer any evidence that Sawant is anything more than a one-trick pony, with that one trick being to have ridden Sea-Tac’s $15 minimum wage coattails to a Seattle City Council position?
I don’t see what’s not to like about Tim Burgess. He wants to tax gun and ammo sales. And he wants to keep people who got shot from getting shot again.
http://www.thestranger.com/blo.....n-violence
As if the sensation of hot lead in the glutes isn’t enough to send that message.
Ha, ha! Gunshot wounds are funny! I get it!
I don’t live in Seattle. I live on the east side — with all the other rich people. Don’t you think Donald Trump is kind of brilliant in a retro sort of way? Whenever I see those Trump lips pucker in that fat orange face, I know there’s going to be grist for the humor mill for weeks to come.
Where’s the rodent? I’m sure he wants to pontificate about this shit.
Went to a meeting with some business owners and 5 current council members, also in attendance were some primary challengers including Pamela Banks. It was comical that when given their chance to speak each of the current council members rather than stump for themselves they all supported Banks, and talked more about the need to change the tone of the council, about it shouldn’t be “the loudest, shrillest voice in the room drowning out the others” wonder who they were talking about? How long can Sawant last after alienating the rest of the council that she will need to work with? Sawant needs to learn how to be less disagreeable while disagreeing.
@1 off the top of my head:
– Holding Murray accountable by including the money he promised to raise all city workers to $`15 in thecity budget he refused to include.
-Stopping the 400% Seattle Housing Authory rent hike
-Increased thousands of dollars of extra funding for lgbt youth shelters , homeless shelters, and women’s shelters
-Getting Columbus day renamed Indigenous People’s day
-Getting the fire department to come up with a oil train derailment plan
– Leading the charge against Jorge Carrasco, the CEO of Seattle City Light, who used city money to advertise how great he was, asked for a $100k bump to $250k, let some thieves steal $120k of copper, and ran a department riff with sexual/gender/racial/all around horseshit behavior. The rest of the council+mayor was totally cool though with giving him that raise, until Kshama
Now you tell me what a council member usually gets done in <2 years.
@1 Calling Sawant a 1 trick pony is being such a 1 trick pony.
@6 Banks and her supporters need to move aside for change. Thanks for the report, though. Sounds like a room full of passive aggressive assholes you describe. (We all know who you are talking about, nudge, nudge.)
“Calling Sawant a 1 trick pony is being such a 1 trick pony.”
No, it isn’t, but your inability to come up with just one more trick does, in fact, still leave Sawant as a one-trick pony.
Way to support your candidate, dude. Hell, you couldn’t even rebut the fucking Sea-Tac coattails jibe.
@7 A better try than @8 by a mile, although you offered no supporting evidence whatsoever.
And it looks like you have no rebuttal to Sawant riding Sea-Tac’s coattails on the $15/Hour minimum wage to fame and glory. Sad how Sawant and her supporters won’t give credit where credit is due. Probably a sign of things to come, huh? Speaking of which, is there some reason why I shouldn’t suspect that you’re doing the same @7 with Sawant’s other, um, achievements?
@10 Steve,
People (myself included) aren’t going to bother to offer a rebuttal because
A) Clearly your mind is made up
B) You don’t really care about evidence
C) You’re a jackass
D) We’re all sick of dealing with you
Peace
“jackass”
I’m a hard-core commie-fascist-socialist-Jihadist, you bitch, and if you can’t sell me on Sawat, then you can’t sell shit. So please, people, do try come off as something more than Sawat fan-boys.
I’ve seen no evidence that Jon Grant would be any better on housing issues than John Roderick. You don’t need to be a housing policy wonk to be strong on that issue. You just need to be committed to making change there. Roderick has shown that commitment.
Yes, Roderick comes from the musician/artist community and is not a housing activist. But affordable housing is one of the central issues facing the artistic community in 2015.
Wouldn’t we be better served having somebody in office who can energize a group of people who aren’t always politically engaged on anything (the artistic community) and help connect these people to the rest of the folks in Seattle who desperately need action on stuff like affordable housing?
Electing Roderick also means gaining most of the major benefits a Grant victory would bring while also adding a bunch of benefits that Grant wouldn’t bring. We already have a bunch of policy wonks on the council. We don’t have a voice for the creative community.
It’s a long shot for Roderick to win too, but he seems like the only person in the D8 race with even a snowball’s chance in hell of challenging Burgess on fundraising and name recognition.
Roderick might have a 1 in 6 or 1 in 7 chance of winning. No other Burgess challenger, imho, has even a 1 in 20 chance of winning.
If Grant weren’t a white male, he would be a perfect candidate in D2. His strengths are better suited to a district campaign, because he doesn’t have the money or name recognition to win at-large. But I think he’d be a great grass-roots district candidate.
Grant’s certainly a stronger candidate overall than Tammy Morales, who I will likely vote for, but who has at best a 1 in 15 chance of defeating Harrell.
To me, defeating Burgess ought to be the central goal of the 2015 campaign. The entire complexion of the council would be very different without Burgess on it. That would be a great thing.
Roderick may well be an underdog. But if some stuff breaks right, I can see a scenario where he wins. I can’t say the same about any of the challengers. Burgess has a certain understated gravitas. Roderick is the only candidate in the D8 who can match (or exceed) Burgess in that regard.
So rather than throw my vote down the toilet in protest, I’m going to give it to Roderick.