Conlin is not from Seattle either. Even though he carries on like it was all his idea.

Is anyone else getting a creepy sense of subtle race-baiting? No? Just me?

@3: it's not just you, I got that same sense, of " she's not from here, she's not one of us"

Is Conlin's polling saying he's going to lose? The guy gets more desperate every week.

3 out of 4 = 75% (2.2) a low “C” (one point away from “C-“)
34 out of 35 = 97% (3.9) a high “A” (one point away from “A+”)
Conlin wins. Sawant loses.

Keep our council jerbs "Merican!

@6) That's not how voter ID works. Three-of-four voters are considered solid voters, particularly when the only election they missed was a winter primary that contains only two school levies and no candidates.

I'm voting for Sawant, but I agree with the criticism in this case. In today's vote-by-mail world, there's simply no reason not to have a 100% voting record.

@6 there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

@8
That may be your opinion. I don't share it.

Quite a "disruptive comment" from Conlin.

Click on You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me's comment history. Read. Feast your eyes.

Then ask yourself: Do I want to vote for his guy, Richard Conlin? Or against?

If you're still not sure, guess which one John Balio likes.

Conlin was born in 1947 and he registered in 1981 according to the article. He was therefore 34 y.o. when he registered for the first time. What happened to his civic engagement for the 13 years between his turning 21 and registering?

This sounds like exactly the sort of thing you bring up in a campaign when you can't touch your opponent on policy - and have the good sense to refrain from the use menacing racist language like internet trolls.

@18

But not being civic is an AMERICAN past time for us REAL AMERICANS!!!!!!

If he didn't feel threatened, he wouldn't have said anything at all. And yes, it was racist, but cravenly racist, which is worse.

Every person I've known to have gone through the citizenship process has promptly registered, and then proudly voted. I would imagine someone with a PhD who had been a member of a teachers union as an economics instructor would be smart enough to know that "major" elections that have significant impact on local economies are local elections. And in 2011, there was one hell of a close race in Seattle, plus the numerous battles for school board seats.

Honestly, I don't think it's a strong attack. I don't have a perfect voting record, either, and would venture a guess I count as having quite a bit of "civic engagement". But it does make me curious if she's ready for, or even fully comprehends, the office she's seeking, and the constraints of that office toward her ideological brand. Her run against Frank Chopp made a lot more sense from an ideological perspective, IMHO.

Hey, Conlin, congratulations. You've proven you have the morals of Michelle Bachman.

Ugh. How do I vote against michaelp too.

I think Conlin is reaching here but, as a public education activist, it is always important to vote for school levies and especially if you are sitting on the City Council.

@24 - Third Tuesday in January, 2015, U-Heights Center, 6:30 p.m.

Someone on that blog said: "What is Sawant's position on tax policy? Does she want to make our worst-in-the-country taxing regime even worse, the way Conlin does? I know females are notoriously undereducated on financing matters . . ."

Yep, a PhD in economics is pretty undereducated.... My Econ 101 course makes me far more informed than her!

Do socialists believe in private property (land/house) ownership? Yes, I could research, but so many of you so well educated and I've already had cocktails.

@16 -- You gotta be kidding me. We are supposed to vote against someone because a commenter supports a particular candidate? Hmmm, who are you voting for?

Seriously, though, that is a really stupid idea. Everyone has particular reasons to support a candidate. I support Conlin because he has been strong on transit and density (the latter being the most important issue in Seattle). You may disagree with that assessment or even whether you support the guy based on those perceived strengths (if you are anti-density then you wouldn't) but saying you should vote against him because I (or any other yahoo commenter) supports him is really silly.

@25 -- Yes. Absolutely correct. This is a weak line of attack (especially for a guy who doesn't have a perfect voting record) but still a reasonable one. Folks who think this is somehow some sort of anti-immigrant or anti-newcomer attack are reaching worse than Conlin.

So Conlin is losing?

@29

Um, a four billion dollar car tunnel is not "transit". A car tunnel is the opposite of transit. Do you know how much transit we could have for four billion dollars?

Suing citizens who collected signatures against the tunnel? That's "strong on transit"? Freezing funding for the Transit Master Plan? That's "strong on transit."

My point is that Conlin really appeals to buffoons who have no grip on reality. Strong on transit my ass. Do-nothing apparatchiks like Conlin are the reason that the people of Seattle have been begging for a real transit system for decades and we still don't have one.

Dude's nothing but a tool of the rich and the developer interests.

Seriously. What else you got? Sixteen years warming that seat on the Seattle City Council. Sixteen goddamn years, and what has he got to show for it? What have we got for kicking this guy around for sixteen long years?

Chickens and goats. That's what he has to show for those 16 years. Although I may be wrong about chickens. So goats.

“It’s an indication of my commitment to civic engagement,” [sayeth King Richard]. “And her lack of civic engagement.”

Isn't Conlin responsible for the changes to the Council rules that public comment can only be related to items on the day's agenda.

Idiots like Bellomio and his sidekick not withstanding, isn't this just the kind of thing that limits civic engagement?

If one wants to bring up an issue NOT being addressed by Council, there is no way to do that publicly.

And isn't Conlin moving legislation that removes the language from the Comp Plan that states that the plan is the "vision of the citizens of Seattle", and has instead turned over the plan to the developer-centric Planning Commission (who's liaison just was hired by Vulcan).

Conlin is all for civic engagement, as long as the citizens aren't involved.

Some love her, but some students found her... difficult.

http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRati…
Kshama Sawant
9/26/12
ECON410
Poor Quality
Not only is she incredibly shrill and annoying, she lacks the ability to teach. The worst professor I have had at SU yet.

@36- Yeah, from a site that is Yelp for college students. Great, reliable source. I'm guessing that review is yours. What's wrong, did she give you a "D"?

"The worst professor I have had at SU yet" basically translates to "She's even worse than any of the other terrible professors I have had here," which, assuming it's from an actual student, says a lot about the writer's attitude toward the school itself.

Anyway, it's a pathetic post even for ChefJoe, but I suppose we can be thankful that it's short and that most of it apparently is someone else's words.

@18 - If that's true, he has no grounds to criticize her for failing to register and vote immediately, and all that's left of his statement is "she immigrated".

@22: why are you convinced she lacks comprehension, Michael? And why did you quickly paint her as unlike other immigrants?

Please, do tell. As an engaged citizen who hopes to shape our city, what's shaping you and your own opinions on how this city should be run?

Colin is a total prat. 3/4 voters like Sawant are high engagement, regular voters by any campaign's standards - even more so when you're counting the last 4 elections, including off-year spring elections, not just the last 4 "major" ones. I can guarantee that his own outreach is targeting 3/4+ primary/general voters. Does Conlin believe the people he's begging votes from aren't "civically engaged" enough? Will his phone bankers and direct mailers berate his fellow Seattleites for being too busy with trying to make rent to make sure he has another 4 years of six figure income with nothing to show for it but a warm chair?

@43 - AJ - I mean just that. If she hasn't really participated in local policy making, does she understand the constraints that are placed on the City by the State, and how that would effect her ideology.

She seems to understand that Seattle cannot "nationalize" businesses. There is also a revenue stream cap, revenue mechanism limitations, total levy cap, bonding cap, etc.

Now, I'm not a Socialist. I don't believe that corporations should be taken over by government entities, for instance. But I do believe that the state could do a lot better at its revenue mechanism structure, ant that is a Legislature issue, not a city council issue. Her stumbling, for instance, on transit reeks of misunderstanding of what it is the city actually does.

Had she been involved, or at least voted, in the 2011 city council races, I would imagine, being a PhD, she would have taken the time to educate herself on the issues and differences between candidates. How the priorities differed, and the "how" to get to the end goals.

I mean, let's look at her website -

"Raise to minimum wage to $15/hr." I don't see the "how" associated with that. Empirical evidence shows this hurts lower-mid wage workers, so how does her plan address those folks.

"A Millionaire's Tax" - wait...can't do it.

"End corporate welfare. Tax freeloading corporations. Reduce the unfair tax burden on small businesses, homeowners & workers." What does that even mean? How would she achieve these goals as a city council member?

"Unionize Amazon, Starbucks & low-paid service workers." How, as a city council member, does she propose the city force employees of a private company to join/form a union? Is that even legal?

"No layoffs or attacks on public sector unions!" - Who's attacking public sector unions? And what happens when there isn't enough money to make payroll? Does the City just reduce everyone's pay, including those in public sector unions? Does the city treat its workforce so bad?

"We need rent control!" - not legal. Legislative.

"End homelessness in Seattle; Fully fund services for the disable, veterans, seniors, & families in crisis" - Again, how? Currently, the City has $55 million in levy capacity available. And this represents the only remaining revenue mechanism. The universal Pre-K plan will take a big chunk of this. But the concern for folks being priced out of their homes because of tax increases (or rent increases due to tax increases) that must be considered. Has she taken the time to think this through?

The point is that a lot of what she says may sound great, but she hasn't offered any concrete plans to enact her ideas, and many of them can't even be done at the City level, rather are Legislative in nature.

This shows either a very poorly informed (on reality) candidate, or someone running just to spout off their ideology, not actually with a plan to enact positive change. Or any change, really.

@2 @3 @4 @8 @44 all correct

What a piece of work Conlin is. I can't believe that he would be so opposed to mass transit that he would endorse a Tim Eyman initiative and publicly advocate that light rail should be killed. Nobody who claims to be progressive would ever do such a thing.

Oh, wait. That was the Stranger. My bad! I guess it's no big deal when you guys do that, but a much bigger deal when Conlin does things nowhere near as destructive.

I find it odd that Sawant had the opportunity to vote in the 2011 City Council election and chose not to vote. Shouldn't we expect more from somebody running for a seat in the City Council? That was just 2 years ago.

The Tea Party wasn't around then either.