The most common refrain in Seattle politics last week: "Man, it would be great if Tim Burgess/Peter Steinbrueck/Michael McGinn would run against Greg Nickels."

The second most common refrain? "I mean, I couldn't support him—I'm a Nickels guy—but it sure would be great if someone would run."

That paradox—everybody wants someone to run against Mayor Nickels, but no one wants to support a challenger—was evident at Nickels's campaign barbecue last Saturday, a usual-suspects crowd long on Nickels acolytes and employees but short on new faces. Everywhere, the crowd was buzzing (with disappointment or relief, depending on whom you talked to) at the news that Burgess—a freshman city council member who had formed an exploratory committee for a possible mayoral bid—had decided to sit this year out. Privately, Burgess told supporters that he just couldn't take on the mayor's machine, which has a lock on just about every donor in town.

Who could? Maybe Peter Steinbrueck, the former city council member who stepped down in 2007 after being reelected twice in 1999 and 2003 with 78 and 82 percent of the vote, respectively. Although Steinbrueck usually demurs when asked if he's planning to run (and didn't return a call by press time), a recent poll (provided by a top-secret, but reliable, source) showed him even with or ahead of Nickels in virtually every conceivable lineup.

Among likely primary-election voters, in a two-way matchup with Nickels, Steinbrueck wallops Nickels 46.6 percent to 24.1 percent, with 29.4 percent undecided. Among likely primary-election voters 55 and up (the subgroup that's most likely to vote in an off-year primary election like this year's), Steinbrueck gets an outright majority of 53.2 percent to Nickels's 22.4 percent, with 24.4 percent undecided.

Those are good numbers. Really good. Potentially good enough to overcome the (perhaps irrational) fear that Nickels has all the money in town locked up. And of all races, this may be one in which a credible candidate could run without a ton of money—campaign operatives are complaining that the economy has led people to scale back their donations, and those who can afford to max out to Nickels (giving the $700 maximum contribution) already have. As of last month, Nickels had about $162,000 on hand—around the same amount he had at the same time in 2005, when he ran with no serious challenger.

The upshot: Even the mayor may have trouble mustering the kind of massive war chest he's had in the past, and challenging him may be less expensive than ever. (The only downside: Steinbrueck is famously averse to asking for money.) Although another candidate could step forward (Seattle Great City Initiative founder Michael McGinn is one name you hear frequently), Steinbrueck currently looks like the best shot Nickels opponents have for a credible mayoral challenger. recommended