Frizzelle really nailed it with the title of this article and descriptions of the mayoral candidates. We need a real debate about where we are as a city and what our priorities should be moving forward.

We aren't going to get that debate from any of the other challengers - we'll just get more of the same.

What a great article. I totally agree - McGinn is so much more qualified than his opponents, it's not even funny. Drago is the only one who can compete on policy, but, as Christopher says, she has that slurring issue and usually makes no sense. She also has few groundbreaking ideas. Mallahan? Zero policy chops, and the whole "community organizer" thing based on being an Obama delegate is a complete farce. It'd be a real shame to come out of the primary with a Nickels vs. Drago/Mallahan scenario. Go McGinn!

McGinn is willing to both listen to the ideas of others and fight for what he believes in when it comes time to push things forward. That would be a breath of fresh air for stagnant Seattle politics

Go McGinn!!!!

Great article about local politics at it's finest. Grassroots, fun and real. Go McGinn!

How incredibly true. Micheal Mcginn for Mayor.

Yay for a man whose proposal to replace the viaduct (expanding I-5, ha!) would cost 10x the stupid tunnel. And he doesn't even answer direct questions so what makes you you think he can stimulate real debate?

He's a great guy.

Nickels has raised 10 times the money as McGinn. You can't have a debate if one voice isn't heard, so "chances" are pretty slim we'll hear much from McGinn. Why is McGinn having such a hard time raising money?

Go McGinn!! Great guy with great ideas!

Greg Nickels is going to eat your children! Then he's going to die and rot and stink up the entire tri-county area with his putrid fumes poisoning the air and water, killing all the land and sea creatures. Then, his vapors will rise and coagulate over the sky and block out the sun forever leaving nothing in the Seattle area left alive. Somebody stop him! Take away his power! Will the ugliness never end!

McGinn is the only candidate that has the vision to lead Seattle towards a truely sustainable future. Vote for Mike McGinn!

He already had my vote, but due to the quote “He's mayor-shaped.” My support has increased 10 times, Why would we vote for a candidate that wasn’t mayor Shaped!

Oh my oh my, why do I read comments? Ok, here we go:

@8: First of all, where the hell are you getting your information re: 10x the cost? The last unofficial cost estimate I saw was about $1.6 billion. Oh, and here's yer goddamn straight answers http://www.friendsofseattle.org/2009-vot…

@15: 20 years? The Nisqually Earthquake was in 2001. Still, I take your point that we've been stupidly letting the Viaduct stand for 8 years while it's been structurally unsound. That said, we shouldn't let ourselves be so desperate for a solution that we take any old one, even one that will hurt us more in the long run.

@15, 17: Um. You do realize that endorsing *any* candidate is a biased action, right? You're just pissed their bias doesn't line up with yours.

I would vote for McGinn if he wasn't running a retarded campaign that is so fucking Seattle, I am currently puking. An entire campaign based on arguing against the tunnel? Holy crap. I couldn't agree more with #15, this town is driving me fucking batty.

@21 word. Not to worry though, given McGinn's poll numbers, 9 out of 10 of his supporters have posted on this blog--nothing to see here.

gee, just what we need, another esoteric nut ball with no common sense,,,

Wait, @20, please compare the viaduct to the middle east again. That was pretty awesome.

Having lived most of my life in Boston, I understand the frustration of Seattlites when it comes to decision-making. It frustrates me, too. But there are two related problems that are even worse and more frustrating:

1) You people get so angry about the lack of a decision, that any decision will do. It doesn't matter if it's the right one, it just matters that there's a decision. That's a piss-poor way to manage anything.

2) You people are so goddamn afraid of change that you don't have the moral courage to fire the leaders *responsible* for the lack of decision in the first place. In doing so, you reward failure. Both Nickels and Drago have pushed for the tunnel despite what WSDOT and SDOT came up with, and despite what the voters inherently supported when we summarily rejected both another raised viaduct and - wait for it - a tunnel: surface/transit with I-5 improvements. That solution is the greenest, cheapest, and most sustainable for the region. Every single transit/environmental authority in the region is in complete and total agreement on this issue (with the exception of the bullshit Livable Seattle Movement).

So go ahead. Vote for Nickels or Drago, and get 4 more years of our leaders not listening to us (there was that poll that came out in January that said something like 78% of Seattlites don't think their elected officials care about what they think - forgive me, I can't find it at the moment). Or you could vote for Donaldson or Mallahan who, while clearly passionate about the office, have no policy chops whatsoever.

And if you do . . . well, nothing will change. Maybe you're alright with that. I'm not. Sure, McGinn is a bit of a gamble, but he's got plenty of common sense, and I'm gonna put my chips down with him.

nice

McGinn does have a perspective against the tunnel. I don't agree with it. But it's different from Nickels. A plus.

But after that I don't think he has a plan. If he wants to stir debate, have him release some other issue statements above and beyond the tunnel to make me think he has ideas.

McGinn's priorities include having the mayor engage in repairing our failing school system--as the Obama administration advocates--as has worked in NYC and many other cities around the country--he is not just about the tunnel.

what is the purpose of debate, anyway...

more personal endorsements?

possibly less of the hyperbole.

I agree with that!
Todd DiRoberto
http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/c…