We didn't start the Fire.

They did by ignoring the voters to coddle the Rich.

It's hard to describe how much I'm enjoying this. I feel alive again.

Misread this as "apocalyptic." Which, you know, probably that too.

This is revolutionary.
Five years ago the US elected its first black president, revolutionary. Ever since Obama has been in office, my life has been so much more grand, fulfilling.

This is just my opinion, but if anybody is seeking out a blissful happiness in their lives, hands down, put your faith in a politician.

If Sawant wins the seat, and if she treads carefully and wisely until she gains some experience and working relationships with the rest of the council, she could actually be very effective. She could do this without compromising too many of her beliefs. On the other hand, if she starts flinging Molotov cocktails (sorry, couldn't resist) immediately, then her tenure may not be so effective. Best wishes to her.

@5) I think you have it right. I'll just add: If Sawant wins, she'd also benefit from focusing on key issues instead of going McGinn-style scattershot, which, to be fair, is easier for a council member than a mayor.

So. Fucking. Awesome. And so, so overdue.

@5

So, if she wins, which seems highly likely at this point, she should just sit down and not make any waves? Fuck that, we voted for her to make waves.

$5 says at some point in the next year Sawant will thank Bellomio and StandUpAmerica people for their insights into the corrupt council actions. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VC4DR00H…

@12: $10 says she'll sic the cops on them.

Hilarious! They need a bit of a wake up call, and regardless of the results, they're getting it.
This is akin to when non-Mormons and/or Democrats get elected in Utah for an office representing anything outside of Salt Lake City proper.

@8, how do you expect a single council member to be able to "make waves"? By haranguing fellow council members and valiantly being on the losing side of every single vote for two years? If not, then she's going to have to try to win over council members over to her side, and that means some actual patience.

Good. The Council needs a shakeup badly. They thought they could just make McGinn look bad while they continued to pursue regressive policies and Sawant has exposed their game. This reaction is exactly why she needed to run and why she needed to win.

@14

By shifting the dialogue. Which pretty clearly occurred during this campaign. I don't expect massive shake-ups, just a well-needed perspective, and maybe a little less acquiescence on the part of our representatives. For now that's enough, and there might actually be some legitimization to an *actual* Left-wing in this country. And it would seem, in this case, the electorate agrees.

"if she actually disrupts their orderly universe"

Sawant and District Elections have disrupted the unseemly machinations on the second floor.

Council has spent too long listening to money and developers. Its their twilight...

of course it would be disappointing if the The Stranger wasn't in some full gloat mode currently; but there are a helluva lot of unpredictable shifts ahead. here's just one to muse over: if she wins, Sawant will find herself in one of the most moneyed anti-socialist districts, and the powers that be there will be very inclined to dispatch her next time around. so i'd humbly recommend that those who are overtly crushing on Sawant to work out a deal where she moves district, or runs for one of the 'at large' seats. the districted council business will look very different, and in the long (faye garneau/suzie-burke) run will be less inclined toward socialism; so much so, Ms Sawant's influence may be all but negated.

@18 Sawant should move outside of district 3 with Seattle Central Community College, where she works ? Isn't that giving up a lot of people she had regular contact with ?

@5
Yes! Absolutely correct.

While I am not a socialist (of course Sawant isn't either) I all in favor of shaking up the Council.

If shaking it a bit can happen in a effective way, great!

@14
Sawant can be effective by being pleasant, amiable and with a backbone of steel. Work hard; dig into the minutiae; don't grandstand or scare people but ask good questions and make sure that the public knows if/when questions aren't answered. Probably having a sense of humor and not acting triumphal are essential personality traits.

Of course, since Sawant has already said that she will go along with NIMBY policies of allowing "The Neighborhood" to veto multi-family development (I do believe that is what she has said) a huge part of City decision-making is off the table. Getting the single-family capitalist vote (think, for example, North Capital Hill or Maple Leaf) will not help Seattle at large but will position her for re-election.

The world didn't come to an end when Charlie Chong was sworn in either. I know one of his staffers who described getting a rather chilly reception at city hall.

I'm calling this first, her BFF will be Jean Godden.
Super secret friends setting fires under the council on little things, like something about the ladies getting paid,and positions in power.

Hey Dominic, did anybody (Tom, maybe) grasp the big wooden carving of the city emblem and hissss, "my precious"?

OBrien and his crazy phone book thing will seem so tame a year from now.

I can't wait, I'm going to stream Seattlechannel all the freaking time while at work.

@22, yes, Jean and Kshama will be regularly meeting up to hang out in their box at the KeyArena to see Storm games. And they'll prank the Sallys every Friday afternoon.

Right now, I bet the Sallys have the Willies.

They will insist on giving the Stand Up for America dudes extra time to talk just to see if they can get a rise out of Sally C.

It's going to be really hard on Nick, not knowing on what and when to cast a meaningless "no" vote in a committee, only to later vote a get-along-yes vote in Full Committee, not knowing if his protracted and purely symbolic grandstanding will be overshadowed by somebody that actually means "no" when she votes.

(I'll send him an unemotional sympathy card that will read like I support him right up to the very end where I'll tell him that I don't.)

Licata, Sawant, and O'Brien do not a majority make.

Chefjoe-

Here's another Bellomio classic.
He registered with the City running for position 4.
http://www2.seattle.gov/ethics/eldata/fi…
He registered with the State running for position 8.
http://www.pdc.wa.gov/rptimg/default.asp…

Can Kshama unilaterally hire the StandUpAmerica people to be her legislative aides, or does the SCC have to share the resources ?

I would like to invite my assistant here to present a brief summary of how we've handled this issue in the past and where we need to go... the next 30 minutes or so are yours Mr Zimmerman. I've already been briefed so I'll return after I get a latte.

She'll be effective if she spends her time in office like she ran her campaign: championing movements. When she spends time with folks in the city struggling against foreclosures or being paid low wages, she throws a spotlight on those issues that the rest of the council will ignore at their peril. How else did she get both candidates for mayor - and indeed eventually even her opponent - to endorse the $15 minimum wage?

If she grandstands on things that people aren't already working for, she'll merely be grandstanding.

And #27: yeah, Nick's been a disappointment, trading on his reputation for too long, like so many Seattle Democrats.

Council members do not "champion movements." They revise a budget proposal submitted by the Mayor and they suggest that certain buildings owned by White People conform to agreed upon architectural norms.

@31, 32

I disagree with both of you. I think council members champion 'bowel' movements. Have you ever looked in a sewer? You'll see that white people's turds act racist to black people's turds. It's disgusting.

What was Conlin going to do except coast for two more years? Maybe legalize sheep to go with our goats.

If Sawant accomplishes even one thing it will be more than Conlin would have done.

I'd like to see her raise issues that aren't being discussed, but the big thing is to keep the ladder in place that she just climbed: run a full slate of socialist candidates next election and help more outsiders win office. I don't really want a socialist majority (well maybe I do), if that was even possible, and it's not likely. But I do want to see only Democrats who can articulate a clear counterargument to socialism keep their seats. Not red baiting, but a real agenda to help the working class.

A "real agenda" might well be a purely symbolic one: withhold taxes from the State of Washington until said spatial fiction recognizes that said municipal fiction demands the ability to provide basic services to its own inhabitants based upon upon the taxes that they pay.

@35
Does the City of Seattle pay taxes to the State of Washington?

@20 What nonsense are you on about? Kshama IS a Socialist.

No we don't. Funny thing. Our sales tax revenue is collected, accounted for, and artfully coagulated into a slushfund managed by Christian Dairy farmers who Support Our Troops.

What are the odds that each one will vote for Sawant for Council President, assuming that she will be the least popular choice. That could make a good movie...

If Sawant wins/has won, that's a fairly good indication that she hasn't irritated too many people.

This really is an absolute political earthquake: district elections and Conlin out. And the Council thought it was all smooth sailing with their anointed candidate winning the mayoral race.

Kind of cool watching a post-election panel tonight on the Seattle Channel where Sinderman was smarmily talking about Sawant losing.

If we look at the politics of the world, Sawant is about dead center; maybe a bit to the right, somewhere around Angela Merkel. It will be good having an actual middle-of-the-roader in office to scare the extreme-right that most of our office holders represent.

@37

It doesn't make sense to claim that Sawant is a Socialist she wants to give "The Neighborhood" the veto on whether to allow walkable multi-family development, which is what she has said she would do.

Sawant supports NIMBYism. Sawant protects Single Family neighborhoods to protect the interests of Single Family capitalists.

Her election to office doesn't have to be framed as Ideology versus government. It could be: for the fire-breathing revolutionaries out there, taking a socialist stand seems all-important.

I think long-term success in making socialist change is (probably) more important to her. It is to me. I don't want a flash in the pan.

If she learns the ropes and becomes effective, she can change the entire country. And every indication is she will do both. Much to the chagrin of the dominant paradigm. Good luck Kshama!

Check your giddiness SLOG. From what I've read over in STB, she seems like she is focused more on the needs of the newcomers and immigrant-citizens who are getting a raw deal from the ridiculous densifiers and entrenched liberals who soak the middle class for maximum coin for minimum return. She may not be the "urbist" of your dreams, but a person who is working for the South Seattlite being squashed by the Downtown Syndicate.

@47 How is that not something to be giddy about?

@45
"... she can change the entire country."

I think that such folks are going to face a lot of disappointment.

@50: by simply demonstrating that American Socialists are not Fire-breathing Bolsheviks that the populist Know-nothing imagination makes them out to be (see any Seattle Times comments section in any Sawant article), her council membership could shift the national debate, ever so slightly, towards rationalism in discussing what, exactly, Promoting the General Welfare means.

I'm not expecting that much. So I'm not going to be disappointed, even if she's thrown out at the end of this term.

Funny how people are criticizing her for how she performs as City Councilmember when she hasn't actually been elected yet, and for ignoring what the people really want when it appears that many people have voted for her. I hate these kind of claims but will make one anyway: if she were a white American-born guy, none of this clamor would be happening.

@51
Point well taken.

@51 - Well stated Max.

Charlie Chong redux.

@51: Two words: Bernie Sanders. He's actually in the United States Senate. I expect the rest of the country doesn't particularly give a crap about the upper left hand corner.

@48: You realize that district elections were funded by a reactionary kook so that she could get some right-wingers on the Council, right?

In the UK, and Ireland, we have had Socialist MP's, Euro-MP's and City Councillors. Usually just in 1s and 2s. They are revolutionary, not by making unprincipled alliances or secret deals, but by standing up for workers living standards. That means being on picket lines and demonstrations; using the position as a platform from which to expose the corruption and pro-capitalist policies of our enemies.

In these matters I salute Kshama Sawant and am exultant that s Socialist has made this breakthrough.

Conlin losing his seat on the land-use committee, as well as McGinn losing his job is why I hate the results of this election so much (and Proposition 19 could prove to be worse than either of those). Zoning is arcane, but right now it is the most important thing the city does. I know that might confuse people, but consider this:

Want to reduce the number of people living in their cars, shelters or on the street? Build more apartments. Want to lower the cost of rent? Build more apartments. Want to make public transportation cheaper, and more effective? Build more apartments.

Want to preserve the look of your neighborhood? Don't build apartments. Want to preserve parking in your neighborhood? Require new apartments to have parking. Want to reduce traffic, or other undesirable side effects of too many people (especially undesirables) moving into your neighborhood? Limit the number of apartments a building can have.

Conlin knew this. The mayor knew this. Most of the council knows this. They know that the fastest, cheapest way to get rents down (or at the very minimum, reduce the rate at which they increase) is to change the zoning to make it cheaper and easier to build more apartments. But, as my last paragraph points out, lots of people don't like those changes. Conlin and the mayor worked hard to push the council to the left as much as possible on this issue. Like a lot of what Conlin did, The Stranger barely noticed. But his opponents noticed, which is why they are absolutely giddy over the fact that he is gone.

Just to be clear, there are other ways to reduce the cost of rent. Some of them are illegal while others are impractical or have had bad side effects. For example, rent control is illegal, and generally speaking, has not been that successful (unlike raising the minimum wage, the general consensus on rent control is that it has not helped the situation). Having the government build a bunch of low income housing would be extremely expensive, and impractical (and run across the same zoning opposition as simply changing the rules and allowing developers to build). It also tends to concentrate poor people in one area, which causes other problems.

Letting developers (yes, evil developers) build apartments without ridiculous requirements (such as parking or limiting the number of units) would make it possible for them to build more units, and charge less for them. Hell, they could just liberalize the mother-in-law apartment rules (to at the very least catch up with Vancouver B. C. or Portland). This would be of great benefit to the folks that need a place to stay, as well as the folks who are trying to make ends meet while living in their house (and even the folks that want to see houses not replaced by apartments). Of course, if you did that, then parking might be harder -- so, yeah, it will probably never happen.