If Pramilla loses, she goes back to being a State Senator for two more years.
If Brady loses, he is out of a gig.
I'd like to keep all my Democrats on the job and fighting for good policy.
Ergo, Vote Brady.
(He also endorsed I-732, so that's another reason.)

Thank god someone is finally paying attention to this race. Senator Jayapal was great as an activist, but she has been a failure as a legislator. Walkinshaw and Jayapal have been in Olympia for roughly the same amount of time (3 years / 2 years), and Walkinshaw has passed sweeping pieces of legislation improving life for people with mental illness and for people with criminal records. He got these bills through the Republican-controlled senate, which is a true feat.

Jayapal has passed three bills total:
-- One creates an apprenticeship program for women and people of color
-- One allows dental hygienists to take tooth impressions
-- One allows pharmacy assistants to type prescription labels

That's it. That's her record. She is a great campaigner, but she's achieved next to nothing as a lawmaker.

The biggest disqualifier to me, and I know it is legal, is the fact that Pramila doesn't live in our district! I would have been hesitant to vote for her if she moved to our district just to run, but hell, she won't move here unless she wins!

I was under the impression that everyone in the WA state legislature is a failure (maybe you missed the news about years of inadequate education funding). When the gridlock ends (by voting out republican assholes) Jayapal and others might actually have a chance at doing something. Vote Jayapal because we need women of color in power, not privileged young white men.

@4 - Haven't you been paying attention? He suddenly added Piñero so it would be very clear he was not all white.

It sounds like either way we'll have a decent person in the position. I only wish Brady's accomplishments could either have been mentioned in the endorsements or come up in a post four days ago.

Give me a break on the "gutless opportunism", Dan. Jayapal lives a mile outside of the 7th. Meanwhile Brady stuck his middle name on all his campaign materials in an attempt to appear more ethnic, and is bailing on the 43rd District before serving a single full term in the Legislature. Talk about opportunism.

He's a corporate Democrat, just like his buddies Ed Murray and Jamie Pedersen. Vote Jayapal.

I've had enough of "gutsy" politicians, code for the American Exceptionalism neither candidate makes effort to address despite it killing and starving millions, and helping to destroy the environment. So Jayapal it is.

Actually, @7 - Brady has finished three sessions - and his entire terms appointed/elected for. Pramila is abandoning the 37th mid-term, a district that needs strong leaders in Olympia. She was elected to serve 4 years, and is bailing mid-term after skipping tons of votes to raise money to bail mid-term. She should be ashamed.

Also - fuck this "he's not brown enough" or "the right type of person of color" b.s. He's a young gay person of color. Period. These attacks on him for that are exactly like the ones Pam Banks' supporters made against Kshama Sawant. 100% wrong.

Brady is a nice, safe bourgeois yuppie, and he's a nice, safe bourgeois candidate for all the suits who infest the Democratic Party because the Republicans are so batshit fucking evil and insane. He touts his ability to "work across the aisle," which is the same as saying he should be on the track team because he can walk.

EVERYBODY in EVERY legislative body has to "work across the aisle" if they want to get shit done. It's legislation 101. Bernie Sanders works across TWO aisles and gets shit done. But see, Brady is sending the bourgies a little dog whistle here. He's telling them he'll be safe, and won't rattle any cages. The suits lap that up. They don't want any cages rattled.

Now Pramila, she'll rattle some cages. Because that's what Pramila does. That's why I voted for her, Danny Boy, and it's why I think your advice here is about as good as your advice on the Iraq War was.

@9: Actually...you're wrong. Walkinshaw was appointed in 2013. He was elected in 2014. That term began in 2015. That was also the year he announced his campaign for Congress. How is that finishing three sessions? He's finished one, and not served a full term.

@12 - he's still serving. He announced at the end of 2015, but still was around to actually do his job in Olympia for all of 2016's session (unlike Jayapal). That's finishing three sessions (2014, 2015, and 2016) and the entire term he was elected to serve. If he were called back for a special session, I'm betting he goes. But he most definitely has done the entirety of his part-time legislative job that he was appointed and elected to do, not sought a new job mid-term in a district that does not even encompass much of where he has served. Abandoning a district mid-term - especially one that has such a history of inequity as Southeast Seattle - is 100% opportunistic, and is exactly what Jayapal is doing.

I am disappointed by both Dan Savage and Brady Walkinshaw today.

I was just at this press conference hosted by SEIU 775 (Fight for $15) and it wasn't Pramila up on that mic. It was leaders of the Washington State Senate, the House, members of Seattle City Council, Labor, and One America calling on Brady to end this divisive negative attack and run on this record alone. He lost three endorsements so far today: the Machinists Union, Metropolitan Democratic Club, and Councilwoman Lorena González.

Walkinshaw is misrepresenting the votes cast and legislative opportunities in a Republican controlled Senate with a Democratically controlled House and by doing so is throwing his colleagues (including some in important races) under the bus. One after another elected officials strongly condemned the misleading "facts" and metrics used by the Walkinshaw campaign and the PAC behind the attacks.

As for the charges of living outside the district, Pramila has worked and lived across the 7th CD for over two decades (where she more than doubled Walkinshaw's primary numbers even in his own district). She is only barely outside the boundaries due to the recent redistricting.

Walkinshaw has threatened to quit politics if he loses this race and his campaign has been actively deleting and blocking even the most civil attempts from those trying to reach him on Facebook. He doesn't seem to care that his going negative against a fellow progressive hurts other Democrats and leaves them vulnerable. That's not gutsy leadership, and that's not setting himself up for being effective in DC.

If any of Walkinshaw's negative arguments held water Pramila wouldn't have the endorsements of Bernie Sanders and twenty other current sitting senators in Congress, Gloria Steinem, Wendy Davis, Bill McKibben, Nick Hanauer, almost fifty unions, Emily's List, Planned Parenthood, NARAL...

He should stop more before he does any further damage to his party and the progressive movement.

@14 Could you explain what part of this advertisement is 'misrepresenting' anything?

Did Senator Jayapal miss the vote on the 2016 state budget (and many other votes)? Yes, she did - this is public.

Was Senator Jayapal ranked the least effective senator in Olympia by a nonpartisan source? Yes, she was - this is also public.

That press conference was a ridiculous attempt at martyrdom. Senator Jayapal didn't refute the facts in this ad, because they can't be refuted.

https://www.fiscalnote.com/2016/03/10/ho…

So, our state is not very effective at passing laws. 14.5% of all proposed legislation in the state was passed into law. So yea, I'll buy that Walkinshaw has written more legislation than Jayapal, but it's all for looks and nothing else when those laws aren't passed.

Also, this thing about Jayapal missing a vote that didn't matter because it passed. Who gives a fuck. If you're going to tell me to vote against a woman of color, you're gonna have to do better than "She skipped a vote that didn't matter." Seems like she's pretty savvy if she's getting shit done elsewhere instead of sitting in Olympia where they aren't doing shit.

So, @16 - she should get paid, buy taxpayers, to fly to New York for a fundraiser instead of dong her job representing SE Seattle? That's not getting shit done elsewhere, that's self promoting on the dime of taxpayers, and we deserve better than that.

It's not clear if Savage is part of the shadowy Super PAC who chose the low road in attacking Jayapal so late in this election season as ballots arrive (so as not to provide time for rebuttal) since he copy/pasted nonsense straight off the "Facts" site. (Plus, they chose a horrible color scheme...GAWD.) There's no policy criticism in this hit piece. But plenty of jealousy - she's received an incredible amount of donations from regular folks from within the district and across the country ready for a real leader - a smaller average donation than even Bernie, who endorsed her! - proving she can represent the district and make our local progressive wins national!

Where was Walkinshaw with these "facts" for the last year? Sounds like neither his campaign nor his policy proposals have caught on like Jayapal's have so he's going negative in the last minute. Then Savage criticizes Jayapal for defending herself (ie "she'll go negative on him for going negative on her"). Maybe women should stay silent when attacked, Dan? Meanwhile, Jayapal counts more than 1,000 volunteers, a juggernaut of a campaign (especially when you see hundreds of future leaders of color jumping in), plus a vast array of endorsements - more evidence of her ability to work inside and outside of the system to get things done and inspire.

The Stranger endorsements were right on this election, except for (a winning minority?) supporting the short sighted I-732 - which didn't bother to get input from communities of color most impacted by climate change. So my votes will align with most of the SECB choices but against Savage on Walkinshaw and I-732. Vote for a bold, progressive, visionary, proven leader. Vote Jayapal.

@15 Only four senators (4!) were able to make that vote. That's the downside of being the minority, you can't schedule the votes. Also, they didn't have the numbers to do anything anyways on the Republican controlled package. Her fellow senators called out the dangerous assumptions and lack of understanding of the legislative process pushed by the Walkinshaw campaign.

As far as the effective metrics, those are some shady numbers. It doesn't weigh anyone by time served or if minority/majority at the time. When in the minority party sometimes you need to get creative to get things done, and ask any of her fellow senators and representatives that stood by her today and they'll have several stories of things she's done in spite of not having enough votes in the Senate to pass it.

...four [Democratic] senators...

@19 I don't know if Senator Jayapal made that assertion, but it's false.

44 of 49 senators were present to vote on the 2016 budget. Four democrats (Jayapal, Ranker, Hargrove, and Chase) and one republican (Benton) missed the vote.

As for 'shady numbers,' Walkinshaw has been in the state house for roughly the same amount of time as Senator Jayapal - he has three legislative sessions under his bent, and she has two. Walkinshaw is in the top 20% of legislators for effectiveness, despite being a relatively new member. Jayapal is in the bottom 2%.

@14 "He should stop more before he does any further damage to his party and the progressive movement. "

LOL

Glad you Bernouts found a new way to be the only True Scotsmen.

Yeah, this is pretty scummy. Brady is getting and, unfortunately, following bad advice.
He's a good guy who deserves to lose some endorsement over this.

That its concerted, including this, is pretty transparent: my social media feeds have been blowing up for three days with pretty nasty anti-Pramila stuff from a steady parade of Capitol Hill gay white boys. (full disclosure: that describes me too).

This is scummy and unworthy of the 7th. I agree with Jessa. This is disappointing.

The difference between Walkinshaw, Jayapal, McDermott or just about anyone who had a chance of winning in this district is very small. I will vote Walkinshaw, but frankly, I know either one will do pretty much the same thing. Unless we flip the house, it won't make a bit of difference.

Which is why it was a very poor decision on Jayapal's part to run in this district. If she is going to run somewhere besides her home district, then she should have run against Reichert, in the 8th. That would mean she would get the support of the Democratic establishment (something she would lack if going against Adam Smith -- another decent Democrat) but it would also open the possibility of actually flipping the House. Instead we have a guy with no political experience who has tried to drop out and is no longer actively campaigning trying to beat the food stamp defunding former sheriff.

So you are right, Dan -- she has maken a cowardly choice in running in the seventh. But the right choice was the eighth, not the ninth.

The people that are characterizing this shameful negative attacks need to stop. It's comparative and voter's have the right to know the facts surrounding their candidates. The only thing that should be upsetting is that media outlets did not cover Pramila's fibs and and ineffectiveness earlier. I cannot express how many people, including people of color, have been steam rolled by the undue credit she takes. You can try to qualify least effective Senator any way you want but the measure is empirical-- bills sponsored and their passing. The major pieces of legislation that Brady passed had to go through both chambers so don't tell me he had it easy in the House. It takes a special skill and a level of humility to pass legislation through divided government and Pramila doesn't have it!

People, people: Brady is running for office. He's allowed to criticize his opponent and everything in his ad is demonstrably true. I think "The Progressive Movement" will survive.

Negative ads depress turnout. That will only hurt Brady, in an election where women are going to own this shit. Dumb move Brady, and as for Dan, fairly typical culture war mentality.

I can't vote Jayapal because, I mean...c'mon... Those really are the ugliest campaign signs of all time.

Come on, Dan Savage. By all means, make your best case for your guy. Go ahead and tell people who to vote for. Your readers listen to your opinion and you've earned that. But calling Pramila fucking Jayapal "gutless" and "ineffective"? You don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

Going negative worked for Hillary. So, why shouldn't it work for Walkinshaw? Dan spent this whole election season throwing mud on everybody (Bernie, Stein, Johnson, Trump) in an attempt to make Hillary the cleanest candidate. Now he's doing it to Jayapal.

How about making a case for Walkinshaw besides the feckless Joel's Law? What does he want to do? Why is he better than Jayapal in his goals? Try arguing in the positive for once.

LOL at people being so aggrieved at the idea of a candidate for office pointing out the flaws in their opponent. Are you people fucking children?

@32 yes, I think a lot of them are. Recently turned 18 anyway. Their first experience with politics, gotta build up that cult of personality.

@32 We're people sick of the mudslinging that reframes elections from "best choice" to "lesser of two evils." If you can't sway me with your ideology, then your poisoning the well isn't going to win me over.

@34 So pointing out differences in an opponent's record is now "mudslinging"? Give me a fucking break.

No one is going to win this race based on the power of identity alone. In terms of the diversification of congress, which I very much support, a woman of color takes it no further than a gay man of color does. Therefore the tie breaker lies in how effective a legislature either would prove. Based on their established records, the facts suggest that Walkinshaw would be a more effective legislator. Neither is more progressive than the other. Who will get the job done best? Brady. It's not "going negative" to point out the facts -- it's neither personal nor scurrilous. It's important that voters have all the information, and pramilafacts.com assists in that. It's not enough that she is still basking in the glory of Bernie's endorsement. Yes, Washington voters love Bernie, but we know this region, this district, better than Sanders does. Let us think for ourselves rather than follow the cue of a political rockstar who lives across the country (and, in my view, went around endorsing women candidates during his primary because he was seen to have a woman problem (the feminists were with Hillary)). I say all this a feminst who caucused for Sanders. I am proudly voting for Walkinshaw!

@35 Does it say anything positive about Walkinshaw's ideas? No. Anything that exclusively denigrates an opposing candidate is negative campaigning (aka "mudslinging").

If you can't win on your message, maybe your message sucks and you need to rethink your politics.

Another thing: I take real issue with people calling her "movement" and him not. What movement then? Just Bernie's fundraising platform? Ha. That's not a movement. That's just a lucky break for her... more than that... it makes her the "big money" and "outside money" candidate where as Brady has raised his money locally in a genuinely grassroots manner. That's what I call movement! They are both perfectly progressive. If you define "movement" ideologically I beg you to point out one issue on which Jayapal is more progressive than Brady. Don't name I-732 because a great many diehard progressives (myself included) are FOR it -- because the time to put a price on carbon is now (rather, yesterday). Anyway, thank you Dan Savage for pointing out that the emperor has no clothes...

@37 so if Brady voted for a bad bill, and Jayapal pointed it out, that would be "going negative"? Get real, voting record is part of your job history. It's game to call out someone's voting record when they're running for office.

@39 Yeah. It is. When Sanders pointed out Clinton's problematic voting record, that's going negative. Regardless of its veracity, it's still going negative.

If that isn't going negative, what the fuck do you think going negative actually is?

@40 To the point that reasonable people would actually complain about it, a complaint about an opponent that was disingenuous or worse. This clearly doesn't meet that bar.

Quit your whining.

Just looking at primary bills sponsored and won is a low level analysis. Jayapal helped lead the fight to stop payday lenders from easing restrictions on their efforts to squeeze money out of poor people's pockets. And won. Republicans had been fighting to help out these sleazy companies for years, but then some Democrats got donations from them and started doing their bidding. Jayapal will stand up to R's and D's no matter what the cost - if it's the right thing to do. Strange reading from some folks that Jayapal and Walkinshaw are essentially the same? In addition to being a State Senator, Jayapal has a 30 year record of effectively fighting for social justice, bringing broad coalitions together, and mentoring new leaders - she's been in the streets leading rallies and in meetings with Eastern WA law enforcement getting them on board with immigration reform. That's street for "working across the aisle." Walkinshaw sounds like a nice guy and has an impressive resume, but it's markedly different than hers and I prefer the street fighter mixed with smarts, broad experience, and an unyielding hope.

@40 Sander's pointing out Clinton's voting record isn't going negative. If i'm voting for a politician I want to know how they've voted in the past so I can judge how they're going to vote in the future. Clinton voting for the Iraq war is an issue that she should address as it had an impact.

Going negative is trump calling Clinton a "Nasty Woman", or Kerry getting swift boated. But voting record is fair game when you're a politician. You should be held accountable on how you voted, that's the whole point of elections.

@44 He isn't going over her record (how did she vote on issues). He is attacking her character by claiming that she isn't doing her job when skipping a vote that she couldn't affect. It's as going negative as it gets.

@44 Swiftboating and name calling are but two methods of negative campaigning. The ad about that former port commissioner who supported oil companies is also an attack ad. Hell, attacking Trump for attacking Hillary is negative campaigning. As is attacking Hillary for attacking Trump.

Whether it's fair game or not, it's still slinging mud to discredit your opponent, and not trying to win based on your issues, endorsements, or accomplishments.

@46 really? Personally i'm happy when our elected officials are held accountable for their time in office. At the end of their term they should be able to say "Here's what I did the last term and I stand by it". It's 100% fair to say stand by what you did in your last term.

@45 he's not attacking her character, he's pointing out her actions while an elected state senator.

Fuck are we really at the point where an elected official being called to stand on their record in office is "mud slinging".

Sounds to me like A-Gay cronyism, which we'll probably see more of coming from Dan. This is one gay man who will vote for Pramilla.

@47 "He is pointing out her actions"

Being absent for the vote is fact but claiming that willfully missing that vote means something about her efficacy is an attack on her integrity as a legislator.

@48 That's not being called to stand on her record. One sided Attack ads are mud slinging.

Are we at the point where anything short of using expletives and calling each other names is considered healthy competition and fair game? This election year sucks.

@51 it's not a one sided add. The add compares his time in office vs hers. Rebut the comparison if you want (i.e. saying she was doing work outside that was more effective is a completely fair rebuttal), but crying fowl and comparing it to a trump like attack is just ridicules.

I some how read "less effective legislator" as meaning: less aligned with the other mainstream politicians. Sounds good to me.

And could some one please explain to me how McDermott needed to go? I've after seen dems critiqued for attacking other "good dems" as being destructive and not loyal. But I guess this narrative can be written both ways.

Finally, can anyone explain if there really is any sort of substantive ideological difference between the two? Or is this all about personalities and loyalties? Because I have seen no distinction of substance yet made in the campaign. And don't tell me they're both good progressives in the sense that Clinton and Bernie are both good progressives

By this metric, Cyrus Habib was 2nd least effective. Why doesn't anyone talk about that? Oh right he has a dick so he gets a pass. Meanwhile it's a talking point against Pramila. And calling her bullshitty and ineffective? What about the pre-apprenticeship programs? I'm guessing since those benefit women and POC you don't think it counts as an accomplishment right?

Dan,

I find more and more that our politics are diverging.

So the fact that you are going Brady makes me even more sure of my vote for Pramila...

Dan Savage -- the guy who was a cheerleader for the war in Iraq and who blamed black people for California's Prop 8 -- now there's someone I turn to for political guidance!

#55- I voted for Habib. I'm just saying it's not fair to criticize Pramila, a woman over this when Habib, a man could be arguably worse. Karen Fraser only missed 8 votes. Why wasn't she the LG nominee? And you're ignoring the latter half of my post

59
This criticism was around in the primary from Brady supporters. Many of them also supported Habib. So my question is why Habib got a pass then but Pramila didn't. If we vote on attendance, Karen Fraser would have had him beat.

#61
No, what I'm saying is no one on our side of the fence brought up habibs attendance during the primary, but they're all willing to jump on Pramila over the same thing. Double standard. Now, habibs attendance is something we can overlook, but when it was down to him and a female democrat, we never really brought it up despite his female democratic opponent having a much better attendance record

Walkinshaw wins this round. IMHO Jayapal's response (comparing him to Trump) is completely uncalled for. Walkinshaw kept it to the facts and merely pointed at her record. Jayapal is desperately trying to associate him with the greatest demon of our time. It holds no water. Sorry, but that Cuban-American, gay urbanist, feminist and environmentalist has absolutely nothing in common with Trump. As a woman I am disappointed in Jayapal for hiding behind her gender when she feels attacked. Brady's contrast adds (call it criticism, hardly "attack" as such) has literally nothing to do with her gender or race and it's appallingly misleading and cynical of her to claim they did. I have lost all respect for her. Too bad, I used to appreciate her as an activist -- though I've always preferred Walkinshaw as the politician who can do best by us in congress.

#64 They did endorse Habib in the primaries, then again they also endorsed Pramila. However, there were several organizations that refused to endorse Pramila over attendance but endorsed Habib http://www.thestranger.com/news/2016/07/…

Not one person brought up who Jaypal was also seeing in NYC and got campaign donations from: The Indian Government. Funny, I never realized they lived in her adopted district.

still no one can explain why mcdermott needed to be replaced...

Upchuck - McDermott needed to be replaced because he stopped actually doing things years ago. Pramila would probably just be another McDermott in that regard: Unable to actually work with Republicans (who control the house) to get things done.

@70 Because he said he was retiring back in January.

Was undecided until Primila's response. I can't vote for someone delusional. Comparing Brady to Trump is laughable and desperate. Brady's ad is simply competitive. I'm with Walkinshaw.

I have two gripes about Jayapal. (1) She spoke at a Bernie Sanders rally last August when she had not endorsed Bernie. That is just a little bit hypocritical. (2) On the same day, Black Lives Matter protesters disrupted another Bernie event, where hundreds of people had gathered to hear Bernie, took over the stage and prevented Bernie from speaking. In her "guest editorial" in The Stranger about that incident, Jayapal criticized those in the audience who "turned ugly" when the protesters hijacked the event. But she had not one word of criticism for the two women who did the hijacking. It is one thing to support the BLM movement (which I do) and another thing to condone the stupid and outrageous tactics they employed that day. Not only was Jayapal unconcerned about the protesters' interference with Bernie's right to be heard, and the audience's right to hear him, but apparently it didn't bother her at all that the women attacked those who objected to their hijacking as racists. http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/20…

@10 "He's a young gay person of color. Period." Wow. That's like my drunk uncle Orville saying he's voting for Donald Trump because "He's an old white straight guy. Period." When you start citing someone's color, age, and orientation as reasons to vote for anyone you are no better than my Uncle Orville. And he's a drunk. Also, a racist, homophobic, sexist pig. I hope your parents are proud of you.

Brady believes that climate change is a real problem and that we need to do something about it. Jayapal doesn't. So that's more than enough for Brady to get my vote.

Facebook sponsored ads really wants me to read this slog post.

Well, there we have it. Congratulations to US Representative-elect Pramila Jayapal.

Dan: the editorial board probably should be speaking with one voice. Your involvement, followed by Danny Westneat & the Cap Hill/Downtown Association cohort was not helpful.

Sorry, I've been pretty involved in social media this election, and it's no wonder Pramila won by 14 points. Pro-tip next time don't have white people working for the Victory Fund on Facebook bashing Pramila as an outsider

What DragonSlayer said....and for the life of me, I will never understand who thought that was a good strategy to begin with.