You know what people are voting for, but it's unclear who is going to take on Big Rent.

Exactly, Dan.

This was NIMBYs high water mark, and they lost.

In the general, Seattle will say: HALA! HALA! (woot woot)

although it's a tempting comparison, 50% in District 3 and 50% citywide are probably not really the same thing.

Uh, Heidi wrote this story @2. She got it right.

I'm trying to reconcile my dislike of high rents that make the city unaffordable with my dislike of developers whose ugly high rises are fucking up the city.

I guess I want attractive density. Not sure that is possible. Every dense city in the world is also damn expensive. That leaves building out a good enough mass transit system so people can live outside the city but easily enough commute here. Shoreline and Everett would be great bedroom communities if there was a better train system.

Survival of the fittest -- #SupportUrbanRenewal

I agree with most of the analysis of this article, however I take issue with the spin on Sawant. 50% isn't particularly impressive for a sitting councilmember. Moreover, it's bogus to claim her vote share as an improvement over her 35% primary showing against Conlin two years ago. In 2013, she was the challenger; this year, she's the incumbent. The bar is higher for her.

Sawant has a competitive race on her hands, although I still rate her as a solid favorite.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

People who are opposed to runaway density and who are in favor of community involvement are banned from the city machinery and publications that support it. That means no gratuitous access to voters. The fact that so many stayed away is a huge clue. In no way are these spreads proof that voters are on board with the Urbanist agenda. But what are facts to someone whose paycheck relies on supporting these relationships and which relies on excluding other voices? It's journalism that will never be written.

@5 while Shoreline and Everett may be less expensive than Seattle they're not necessarily bargains. One needs to go further north to say Marysville and environs beyond to find cheap rent.

The NIMBYs and the socialists don't differ much on policy, do they? Rent control will slow new apartment construction, and linkage fees will slow down development generally, leaving NIMBY house prices surging nicely in protected SF neighborhoods.

Why have they been so slow releasing more results? The UK just had a general election with 30 million or so hand-counted ballots, involving 650 parliamentary constituencies, and they had 97% of those votes tabulated in a single night. Why has it taken almost two days to count maybe 150,000 ballots in seven districts in one relatively compact city?