Mailbag
Jul 17, 2017 at 3:05 pm
Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Editors' Picks
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
No one gives a shit that your baby centrist feelings were hurt.
Sincerely,
Go Fuck Yourself and Don't Vote.
And you can't take a Stranger endorsement too seriously in any case. If you look back in their archives, they have for example endorsed a republican vomiting frat boy for the 7th District. Stranger endorsements are to be taken with a grain of salt and a sense of humor.
I liked the dissenting endorsement, though. It lets you separate the reactionaries from the revolutionaries, which is nice since a fair amount of the Stranger's "alternative" image is due to branding, rather than holding contemporary alternative political beliefs. I'll bet both camps appreciate that in the long run. Thanks for running both, Stranger editors.
Spoken like someone who, well, doesn't remember The Rocket.
And hasn't heard of Crosscut yet, either.
Why was it published?
Stranger compounding poor judgment with bad judgment.
Just vote for whoever the fuck you want!
Do people actually NEED TO BE TOLD WHO THEY SHOULD VOTE FOR????
Why can't they figure it the fuck out by themselves???
Horace Walpole Letter to Anne, Countess of Ossory, (16 August 1776)
I *don't hate* pansack's poetry. They should come to Rain City sometime.
1. Devise a decision process for endorsements.
2. Stick with the results of (1)
3. Let individuals dissent to their heart's content--but as individuals, elsewhere.
The "minority report" approach just undermines the whole process. Once you go there, why not just have each journalist/board member write their own endorsements? Either you're a corporate, collective entity or you're not.
As to the content: if the Stranger does a two-fer endorsement all the time, then the endorsements carry little information. But if they do it occasionally, then it succeeds in signaling, hey, there are multiple candidates we might vote for, for different reasons.
Remember the presidential endorsement? Bet you thought that was the ultimate in saying nothing -- endorsing every one of the Dem candidates? And yet it said something that turned out to be important: they're both fine, and destructive bickering is pro-Putin.