Who Do You Want to Run for Mayor?


Lost your hard on for McSchwinn?
Pretty sure Petreaus can win, given name recognition.
ABM - anybody but McGinn. Actually, perhaps Greg Nickels will run again. I'm on board with that!
I'd guess Seattle's calmed down about the snopocolypse enough to vot Greg Nickels back in. Though I'm happy with McGinn.
Ed Murray or Reuven Carlyle. McGinn doesn't make it out of the primaries.
I really feel like McGinn should be ousted over his stonewalling the feds with SPD reform. But I'll wait to see who they put up against him.

I'd love Ed Murray to run but somehow I don't think that's going to happen, and to me it would seem like a huge loss in the state senate not to have him there.

I just want a Dem mayor that doesn't turn out to be a disappointment. Nickels was only slightly worse than McGinn in my opinion. And I detested Nickels.
What about Dow?
I'd give McGinn a 50/50 shot at re-election at this point. Ed Murray could probably win, but would be a terrible mayor. Tim Burgess is a dick.
I second the Goldy nomination.
Goldy would be totally insufferable. I third the nomination.
@9 Curious. Why do you think Murray would be a bad mayor? Not sure how I feel about Burgess, but "dickish" approximates my feelings pretty well.
@11 good point. Goldy for the nom, so we miss McGinn and re-elect him.
I agree with Doug on the 50/50 part only.

McGinn's chances revolve around how many people jump in, and who gets out of the primary. The unfortunate reality appears to be that folks who want new leadership, and more or less agree what that should look like, will put their personal egos over the greater good, and split this vote to hell.

A lot will depend on what 2013 is about. McGinn has managed to do a good job during snow storms, and has been a pretty solid proponent of economically positive ideas and development.

But the goddamn SPD mess, combined with about 18 months of being so narrowly focused on issues he couldn't win (which helped to usher in our current SPD Chief) and potholes may very well be enough to sink the man. If a credible alternative makes it through the primary.
Doug @ 9 thinks everybody is a dick because HE's a dick.
Cienna works for me, too long since Seattle has had a woman as mayor. She totally wins on the non-dickishness front.
@12: I don't think Murray would be a very good manager. He's good at motivating people around an issue, but I don't think he's very wonkish when it comes to policy.

That, to me, is McGinn's strength. People may hate his positions or his style, but the man is very smart and very informed on a myriad of issues.
Yeah, has it really been 80 years since Seattle had its only female mayor? That is insane.
Burgess could be good, he has been a good councilman.

Dow won't run it would be a step down from King County Exec
So, basically, it's all down to how McGinn does during this oncoming Snowmaggedon, right?
Just for my own personal education, would people please supply some reasons (preferably real ones) why McGinn should not be reelected? No snark here, just feel like I don't have a clue.
Carlyle is a loose cannon. After a mean dick and a likeable but disorganized wonk, we don't need a third type of failure.

Seattle must be the only city that includes behavior during snow storms as a relevant election issue.
I'll vote for McGinn. He was right about the Tunnel, he is right on transit and bike lanes and he has delivered balanced budgets. My biggest problem with him is the Police Dept, but even there I trust him more than Burgess, Clark, Conlin or any other councilmember. I will not vote for any current member of the City Council if McGinn fails to make it out of the primary. They have all been obstructionists, no different than the GOP in Congress.
@22 I agree about the snow storm, although Nickels performance during the now infamous storm during which he majorly fucked up would even make Marie Antoinette blush.

I might consider voting for Burgess. He scares me a little, but McGinn is a failure in my opinion. I can't in good conscience vote for him after the way he behaved with SPD reform.

But we'll see. If it's anything like the last mayoral election, I'll just hold my nose and vote for the least stinky person.
Pete Holmes for mayor!!
Whomever is planning to run, you best start growing your beard now—a rule I can only assume was instated by Seattle's second ever mayor.
@17 Good point on Murray. I tend to agree with that.
I'm rooting for McGinn. He's learned a lot about how to run the city since he took office. He's been winning federal money for transit, finally got the seawall repair on the ballot (something Nickels didn't accomplish), and he was the prime mover behind the deal for a new Sonics arena.

If McGinn can't make it out of the primary (and I don't think that is a given- don't underestimate him), I'll go for Murray, or whoever is running against the DSA's authoritarian candidate: Burgess.
Electing Nickels again? Seattle, I know there is little to be nostalgic about here, but you'd have to grow in Lagos to be nostalgic about shit like Nickels, 520, the viaduct, buses only, Key Arena and War Memorial. Move forward for fuck's sake.
Cienna or Dan. Whichever Stranger staffer wins office, I will expect some Slog events in city-owned facilities.
Who will the Stranger endorse? Are you waiting for Murray to declare?

If the Stranger wants to get behind McGinn, it needs to throw him a fundraiser or three. The guy needs campaign money badly.
#1 - laugh outloud funny.

Ed Murray by far. Reuven Carlyle is a smile but not someone to truly trust.

McGinn may have some problems but he listens. His staff listens. He's willing to talk.

Burgess - a disaster waiting to happen unless you like his "my way or the highway" style.
Do we have to do this so soon? My nerves are still bleeding from the last election, which I will remind you was only a week ago.

That being said, I've met Tim Burgess a number of times, and I think he's a total dick. Whoever I decide to support, it sure won't be him.
By the way, as @23 points out, we still don't have funding for both 520 and the 99 Deeply Bolshevik Tunnel.

No amount of revenue from gay marriages is going to fix that deep hole of budgetary insanity.
@32 um, Ed Murray is now State Senate Majority Leader.

Why would he want a lower position as Mayor of Seattle?
Murray is a great guy - nowhere near the city CEO type, though... he'd have a mighty tough term and I can't imagine he'd actually want the job if he thought about it's endless, endless minutiae and high quantity of close-in backstabbing. Better to revel in being an awesome legislative leader. Different skill set.

Steinbrueck is one of the classic city council people who might aspire to be Mayor - but he doesn't have the voice, literally people cannot listen to him for long as his voice is mega-whiney. And he caters to specialty groups - the car drivers and business people, and maybe moms too - will trounce him. Running for Mayor - COMPLETELY different than running for council.

This town is full of path-of-least-resistance incrementalist politicians... the bane of Seattle politics.

Someone with NEW ideas, practical but ambitious vision for the future, who a) understands Seattle's chance to lead the world in effective, efficient, cutting edge progressive government... that would be damn welcome, IMHO.
Like most of Seattle, this time around we'll vote against who ever The Stranger decides to give blow jobs too.
I think McGinn has been a relatively poor leader of the city, and he seems to govern solely by town hall and public forum. That's not my idea of executive leadership.

I'd be for Ed Murray. I think he's shown his ability to dive into complex policy issues in chairing legislative committees on transportation and ways and means.

Who are we missing? I find it hard to believe that there isn't a great candidate somewhere in Seattle. I"m not very inspired by any of the names tossed out there so far.

The Seattle Times and their Chamber of Commerce cronies have invested deeply in the myth of Mayor McGinn as a failure, but it isn't a reality-based assessment of his performance. Of course, put enough money behind it and apparently you can convince voters of any lie - even one about their own reality.

The Times and the Chamber want Mr. Burgess because they share a 1% world view. If all you don't like about Mayor McGinn's administration was how he handled the police, then you would not like a shift to Tim Burgess, a former cop. He was not exactly leading the reform effort.

The truth is that Mayor McGinn has done a pretty good job by just about any measure. We should retain him.

I don't see anyone on the horizon who I think would represent a step up.
I'd vote for McGinn again. I didn't like how he handled the police thing, and I'm not crazy about the stadium, but the rest of the city seems to want it. Everything else he's done, I'm fine with.
McGinn stumbled into office without a clue how city government (or any government) works--and proud of it. Remember his promise to "fire" 200 city employees with a certain job title, without knowing a thing about what they do, and his ham-fisted announcement that he would put a seawall bond on the next ballot before bothering to mention it to Council? He spent a lot of time back pedaling on both of those, and many other manifestations of cluelessness for his first 2-1/2 years in office.
(I also think Diaz was a bad choice for police chief, but I'm not sure the folks in blue would have been at all cooperative if he'd chosen the other guy, and I think he knew it. I had high hopes for the candidate who dropped out.)
Please, we don't need 4 more years of that dumassedness, but someone who's politically savvy and actually knows, and has staff who know, how to run a government. I'm not seeing a shining star of a potential successor yet, but hopefully one will turn up in the next few months (and no, I don't mean Peter Steinbrueck. Meh.).
And @23--If he was so "right" about the tunnel, why is it being build despite him? Also, he delivered a balanced budget because he's required by law to deliver a balanced budget.

John Keister


Bob Newman
@42 nails it. I'm absolutely not voting for McGinn in the primary. If he makes it out of the primary, I'll probably vote for him and curse his name the whole time.
Take a clue from the national election. Aging white males are not the future. Plus McGinn has managed to piss off half the city. Burgess would piss off the other half. Both of them do indeed have the tendency to be dickish, Burgess even more than McGinn. And the egos of the two - well - too bad we can't offshore them.
No carpetbaggers like last election. No retired politicians in the Peter Steinbrueck Ron Sims vein.
I vote Levinson or Harrell.
Both strong on civil rights. Both with business and law backgrounds, so fiscally savvy. Both know their way around Seattle city politics.
I think Ron Sims is considering running for Mayor.

If so, I think that would push a lot of potential candidates off the table who wouldn't want to challenge him.
i've been thinking about this more than i usually do in the past week or so, and one name that i'm not ready to throw out yet is ron sims. i think he's a more likely candidate than carlyle. but yeah, otherwise i suspect the usual suspects of burgess, murray, etc. i'd take mcginn over burgess, maybe murray over both and not sure where i'd put sims.
Burgess all the way. If you want police reform, you have to go with Burgess. No one else has any credibility with all the stakeholders.

McGinn doesn't stand a chance. When the labor parties from every city department campaign against him, he's done.
@46 so Sawant?
The Stranger has endorsed Burgess. He's lived up to all the promises he made when he ran the first time around.

If I had to guess, I'd guess that the only strong anti-Burgess holdout in the Stranger news department is Dom, and we all know he's almost as much moron as reporter.
42, i sure remember that promise. then he backpedaled and sent layoff notices to the low hanging fruit (salary speaking that is, as i refer to myself).

I hope Sawant runs. I wouldn't be surprised to see Sims or Steinbrueck show up. And even though I think McGinn's done more good than harm overall, I doubt he'll make it past the primary.
Well Sims would snatch up the knee-jerk, guilty-white liberal vote.

What's the idiot Sawant gonna run on, nationalizing amazon and Starbucks and having the DMV run them?
Never believe anything you read in the Times.
@54 Sawant got about 20 times more votes than the Libertarians did statewide, in terms of percentage. About 10 times more than the R who ran.

Look, this is Seattle. You outsiders don't get to choose who we want.
@56 She got 20% of the vote in the People's Republic of Fremont. She's a tall midget. Whoopdee fucking do. Good luck selling nationalization in the rest of Seattle.
Why would Ron Sims want such a chickenshit job as mayor after being KC Exec and undersecretary of whateveritwas in DC ? Maybe he's looking for a place to lean back, put his feet up and get a paycheck until he's old enough to collect Social Security*. I mean, I've always like the guy but MAYOR???
*Kidding, of course. I'm sure his colletive pensions will way surpass SS.
I have been around since Royer, and I have never been impressed with any of the mayors we have elected. With that said, Nickels and McGinn have been better than the rest of them.

But yes - we are long overdue for a Lady Mayor.
I'm pretty sure the Idiot Sawant is too angry for Seattle Nice voters..,

what is it about former mayors and other politicians about going east for a year or so, then missing Seattle so much (or bombing out back east) that they want to run for something here? Or at least get some paying gig until they are too old to think anymore. Royer, Nickels, Steinbrueck, Sims -- are we a city that thinks we must give retreads a sinecure?
Oh Catalina dear, I too have been around since Royer, and why ever would you say Nickels and McGinn were better? Royer was good-- put through the 123 Bond projects (then purchased the Alaska, Arctic and DHorton buildings after his stupid city hall project failed); Rice did the Neighborhood Plan, which still works pretty well, and purchased Key Tower (just had to throw that in). Schell didn't do much except piss off City Council and commission a bijou City Hall that he never got to live in. I didn't mind Nickels once I got used to him he was kind of a Bluto--all that crap about how no one can talk to Council without going through the mayor's office--but he did tend to get stuff done.
But McGinn...McGinn????? Please explain!
I would absolutely vote for Sawant. Hell, I'd campaign for her.
@63 I reckon a loser in our free market system like you would. And pleas, do it! Better you play politics than actually succeed at anything.
What a depressing thread.
How about someone not boring?
Wow, does Seattle eat its own or what? McGinn has done a good job imho.
Republicans take note: Seattle's 2013 mayoral election will be how you should run a campaign. First, find a candidate who appears to be in line with the core values of his constituents (the media will probably label him a 'liberal democrat") yet firmly allied with the monied interests of the city (who may or may not actually be Republicans, but they are definitely the 1% and want to stay that way). Meanwhile, the Incumbent will be eaten by his own: the left will say he's too sell-out, the middle will say he's too liberal. It's a strategy known as "Divide and Conquer", ever heard of that? Next thing you know, business will be back in charge, which in a city governments means more money for big highways, more downtown development, worsening schools and depleted social services. Big money will win again.
Seriously, Romney should come over here and take notes!
Crone dear, You know that you and I do not see eye to eye on most things about Seattle Government , but here's my "POV", as the kids say. (And Thank You for making me realize I've actually been around since Uhlman, who was also a houseplant)

Uhlman: Gordon Vickery. I will not dispute that City Light needed a radical change, but a former Fire Chief to clean up that particular mess? Really? Plus, he stabbed aspiring female lineworkers in the back - both by hiring Clara Fraser to begin with, then by firing her. And he was against both conservation and us getting the hell out of WPPS

Royer: Too stupid to realize he actually couldn't fire Gordon Vickery (and let's ding Schell for that too) plus, he was just such a dorky Seattle Good Taste Police tool.

Rice: the SMT. I know - you love it, I hate it. Let's just say it is a building uniquely suited to government work. And he was another goofball. The only good thing about Norm was Connie

Schell: PacMed and the WTO. I was a secretary at the Sheraton when they announced that the Convention Bureau had "won" that stupid, stupid, dog of an event, and everyone laughed at me when I predicted it would turn out as bad as it did (and believe me, I am no brainiac) Schell made it extra stupid.

Nickels? Meh. We had a snowstorm. People got the Sadz.

McGinn? Despite his weird hatred of the SA's (who are the real wage slaves of City Government) and his ineptitude at handling the SPOG (which no mayor has ever done successfully in my recollection), he's another Meh. At least he hasn't done anything actively stupid. Plus, he's kind of cute, in a bearish sort of way. Certainly the best looking Mayor we've had in my memory ( and I wish that we're a higher compliment)
You all have made terrible suggestions, and I second that this thread is depressing.

It would be great to see Pete Holmes, Joe McDermott or Sally Clark run. They at least seem to have a point of view and would make a good faith effort for this city. Judging by our last mayoral election, the bench for this position is pretty weak, but these three are smart and understand government.

People suggest Burgess, but what would he possibly do as mayor? Other than the police thing, what's his deal?
Sally has already announced she's not running. I don't know why Holmes would want to be Mayor since he has a good job now as City Attorney for which he is quite suited as he is, you know, an attorney. "People" haven't suggested Burgess; Burgess has suggested Burgess, and it has been a fairly vehement suggestion, since his deal is power.
Anne Levinson
McGinn is nothing to get excited about, but there's nobody on the horizon who looks better than him. Seriously zero good political talent around, unless there's some council aide or somebody. But somehow I don't think the next Hubert Humphrey (youngest-ever mayor of Minneapolis) is hiding in the back rooms of City Hall.

@72, I'd vote for her. Award-winning civic record, solid professional cred too. We need some new blood, the old stuff is stale around here.
Levinson would indeed be good.
Ooo! Anne Levinson. Great idea. I'd totally vote for her. If she were to run, she'd immediately move to the front of my list against almost anyone I can think of.
@74: Anne Levinson is "new blood?"

Well, at least the thread has turned away from Sawant. This race would turn her into a one-percenter.
@71: I don't know why Holmes would want to be Mayor

Because Seattle needs Pete Holmes as mayor.
Oh Catalina, dear, I seem to have rubbed you the wrong way. So sorry.
I started at the city toward the end of Royer's second regime, so know nothing about Uhlman and the evil Gordon Vickery's CL empire, though heard plenty about it.
I never paid too much attention to CL until, after a national search for women, Norm hired Roberta _____? (forget name) who was expected to come in and clean house (so to speak, i.e. fire people & such). She lasted less than 2 years (like the other nationally recruited high-powered women he hired at the same time--see Pam Hyde, Betsy Reveal-- because they were never allowed into the club). Then he was able to hire club member Gary Zarker because he had "tried" to get a woman/minority, and she "just didn't work out". So how did you like Mr. Zarker?
Anyway, I still think the previous mayors have done some good, per my post above.
Note: I had forgotten about WTO, it was a complete fuckup and rightfully cost Schell his job.
Note 2: I never said I love the SMT (I mentioned it just to tweak you a bit), I just think it was the best option of the many that were floating around at the time.
Note 3: McGinn, good looking??? We definitely have different taste in men!
@76, well, OK, she's been in city government, a zillion years ago, but she hasn't been on the council and she hasn't been constantly running for mayor for years.
Crone dear, you could never rub me the wrong way! (I'd flutter my eyes at you if I weren't a 70's mannequin who cannot blink)

Roberta Palm Bradley is the lady you are thinking of, and I am in total agreement with you on that one.

As for McGinn and attractiveness, it's a rather limited bunch, isn't it? If you had to choose between Uhlman, Royer, Rice, Schell, Nickels or McGinn, who would you choose?
@Catalina Vel-Duray: Certainly the best looking Mayor we've had in my memory

Another reason to vote for handsome and suave Pete Holmes.
#1 choice: The incumbent. Although he had a slow start and some missteps in the first couple years, I think McGinn has proven a fast learner and a strong organizational leader. To me, for the first time in my adult memory, it feels like City government has been proactively getting things done.

#2 choice: Mayor Nickels. Bring him back. He knew what he was doing and I trust him to care about working-class residents more than any of the upwardly-mobile councilmembers. He's not perfect but at least he thinks big.
Uh, if you're looking for "new blood", let me suggest a guy named Mike McGinn.
Good point @83 - he sounds like a wise choice for Seattle.
I hear that Dennis Kucinich is available.
Catalina, sweetie, don't worry about not blinking. I know you would if you could. I do enjoy jousting with you from time to time about city matters. We seem to be the only ones on this blog who are ensconsed there, which is surprising.
Roberta Palm Bradley. Thank you. She was a fine woman who was done wrong.
Mayoral attractiveness? OMG, they're now all podgy and grey (as am I), so if I had to choose I would say Royer and Rice, but in the old days, not now! As for now? Nobody.
You just go ahead and lust after McGinn.
Nickels caring about the working class? Good god. He handed the City over to developers, mainly the one who owns all of SLU. Remember the Shark? Perhaps he's now too big to be No. 2 to Nickels, but there's that danger also.

Holmes is indeed goodlooking, but he does not need to be Mayor. Only someone who needs to be Mayor (like Burgess) or just needs a job (like Nickels, Steinbrueck, Sims, and all the other retreads) is likely to run.

I wouldn't be surprised if McGinn is re-elected. He's corrupt enough, and Seattle is stupid enough.
Well the couch potatoes like McGinn now because he likes stadiums which politically does help McGinn next year. If there is one thing liberals and conservatives agree on and that is putting public funds and bonding capacity up to support overgrown children playing sports. Keep in mind most of those supporters can't get off their fat asses to walk three blocks to the store but oh well.

Burgess will run and probably make it through the primary and run against McGinn. Stienbreuck will run but will be defeated in the primary coming in a little behind McGinn. That's my prediction.

NO ONE will want or ask for the Seattle Times endorsement though

he's got a song and a minority endorsement
i like mike!
Sawant Sawant Sawant!

@76 this race wouldn't turn her into a one percenter because Socialist Alternative candidates only accept the wage of the average worker if elected. A mayor at a worker's wage, imagine that.
No one should vote for Burgess in the hopes that he will somehow change the police department. SPD is completely intractable.

If it weren't for his handling of the SPD, McGinn would have my vote. Sure he made some mistakes in the beginning, but it seems like things are getting done now. But he screwed the pooch with the police thing. He should have invited the Feds in instead of siding with the police. He'd be a hero to much of the city if he had done that.

While I've only been paying attention since the Rice Administration, he and all of his successors have made screwing the working class over a full time job.

Anne Levinson- She's smart, she's competent, and a Jewish Lesbian, all things one wants in a Mayor.
McGinn- A year ago I would have said he had no chance in hell. Things have changed, and now he has a slight chance.
Ron Sims- God no. Can you say incompetent hack? But he might just win if he ran, and be prepared for him fucking up the city as badly as he did the county.
Burgess-Don't think he's likely to win, and looks like a younger Slade Gorton
#95 is typical of the idiots in Seattle.
Sawant for Mayor!
With regards to SPD accountability being an issue, no mayor is going to have the stones or the political pull to do what it takes to change SPD or call in the Feds to straighten them out. What's happened with SPD would have happened no matter who the mayor is.

That all said, McGinn has grown on me in the last three years despite any shortcomings. He at least has been receptive to citizen and civic feedback and has altered his approach over time. He's been supportive of the local arts and most of his policies have been useful and more good intentioned than those of the bicycle. (Also, somewhat unrelated, but he lost weight and got in better shape, and anyone demonstrating a commitment to self-improvement wins my respect.)

Now, if Ed Murray ran, I'd face a hard decision. But otherwise I'd probably vote for McGinn this time around... amazing given four years ago I loathed the man.
But again, Ed is Majority Senate Leader - and that's a pretty good job.
The time has come to re-elect Gigeon A. Weed:


So sullen. So Beard-y. So WEEDy.