Mike McGinn Is Running for Mayor Again


Fuck yeah! Sanity returns.
Hmm. I mostly thought McGinn was a OK-ish mayor, and despite reservations voted for him, but the slogan feels like a sop to the "suppress housing supply, to the benefit of wealthy homeowners and detriment of renters, and pretend there's something progressive about this" crowd.
I voted for him twice (?) but won't again unless
- no Murray;
- weirdos like Oliver in race;
- no one better.

Something slimy about McGinn.
Let's elect a Republican to unite the city through hatred and bigotry.
I guess he didn't feel like going with "Reelect the only one of the last two Seattle mayors who isn't in a sex scandal."
Mike's gettin' the band back together!
About time we return to sanity!

Got my vote.
I'm on board with Nikkita. "Our Seattle is Your City" beats "Keep Seattle", if only slightly.
He's at the very least, sane. If you're criticism is the logo and slogan, well, that's some weak sauce. Will be interested in his housing and homelessness ideas. The homelessness crisis wasn't spilling over under ever bridge in the City back then.... so that's a positive. And he was right to be anti-boondoggle. But he's sane, and not Nikkita Kruschev or Ed the Ped.
This is really good news for Seattle!
@9 totally agree. If it's between him, Murray and Oliver he's almost certainly got my vote, but I just hope he's not signalling a "pander to the NIMBYs" strategy with that slogan. It's wrong on the merits, and indicates a poor understanding of the direction the city's headed.
I voted for McGinn both times. At first, he was something of a disappointment. The whole Strategic Advisor witch hunter was stupid. (SA's are the employees the city can work like private sector employees, but he was too scared to go up against the unions). With time, he showed himself to be a fast learner and a very competent mayor.

But yes, that slogan is stupid.
@2, @11
I see how that could be what he's getting at with that slogan, and I'm a little worried now, but let's wait until he actually says something about housing, homeless, or NIMBYs to say for sure, obviously. It's all of two words.
Not a fan of "Keep Seattle." In keeping with a McGinn message, I'd go for "Make Seattle Seattle Again."

Or how about "A New McGinning"? OK, that's maybe more for the first McGinn go-round.
Anybody but McGinn.
@6: He and the Lord have an understanding. He's on a mission from God.
mcguinn again...the husband said it first
I wonder if Nickels is searching his attic for old yard signs right now. This might turn out to be a reunion election.
In all seriousness, if we're going to recycle past mayors, I'd love to see a Greg Nickels restoration. And I wasn't happy with Nickels when he was mayor with his undermining the monorail project. Now that the monorail is dead and something vastly better in Sound Transit 3 has taken its place, that's all water under the bridge for me. While his two successors both have some street cred (forgive the pun) as urbanists, Nickels has struck me as someone who gets it better than either of them. My assessment may be wrong.

Oh, and like Catalina @12, I voted for McGinn both times, even though my second vote was scarcely enthusiastic and even though I eventually came to be glad I didn't get my way that second time around. I think Murray's done a solid job as mayor.
I like Mike.
I don't think the Seattle Times meant McGinn when they talked about more "mainstream" candidates. From the moment he was elected Mayor, the establishment (Democratic Party, Council and local news media attacked him. (Remember Gregoire trashing him and WDOT releasing the via-duct earthquake footage near election time?) His term as mayor demonstrated how the local "progressive" establishment wasn't really that progressive.
I'm glad to see Mike enter the race. He isn't wholly owned by downtown interests or developers, and he isn't a NIMBY either.

Will be interesting to see him outline a policy platform to address our housing crisis.

He probably has my vote.
McGinn is awesome. Democrats are going to be really really upset and try to run someone who will win on identity politics. I guarantee it. Maybe Hyeok Kim?
I voted for McGinn in the last two elections, but Nikkita Oliver has my vote this time.

I'll be curious to see how McGinn does and as a previous commenter mentioned, how he might cooperate (or not) with the sitting council. At the very least, he's the only candidate so far who seems likely to have an environmental component in the platform (one of my biggest personal criticisms of Oliver.) And at the very least he likely still has some name recognition and probably a few decent endorsements lined up.
"A New McGinning"! Yes! @cressona
Also, this is totally not a biased article written by Heidi "There's a well-financed woman entering the election and I just happen to know before anyone else" Groover.
@3: like what? what is "slimy" about McGinn? his sincerity?

we tossed him out in favor of Murray because why? the DBA didn't like him? because Murray was gay and McGinn was straight? because of the 99 tunnel?

ABO: anybody but Oliver. Nickels, McGinn, Bagshaw, even Burgess. we need an actual Mayor - a competent executive. like Dow Constantine is for the County.
We might get municipal broadband under McGinn. Definitely won't under Murray.
Whew! Indeed, I like McGinn too.
I wish him good luck.
Glad to see this! Mike is awesome and he's learned a lot. I hope McGinn challenges Murray to many debates because that man is awful at debates and the issues, and McGinn will dance circles around him. McGinn knows the issues, the players, is innovative, and has friends, AND he has a sense of humor, and I don't trust anyone who doesn't have a sense of humor. And Seabiker is right; he is not owned by developers and you can expect them to spend lots of cash against him.

But lose the meme because, yes, wtf does that even mean? It's it's a little too close to Keep Seattle Great Again. "I Like Mike" is better.

He'll be on "Week In Review" today at noon.
If he's on, it'll be "Weak in Review."
@31 is sad the Suburban papers can't run Seattle as their Feifdom
gripe, is that the first time in your life you've been funny? Well done lol

KUOW 94.9, Radke and McGinn, together again.
Nikita Oliver is about as intelligent as a trailer park redneck from Georgia. McGinn should win this easily, however I don't think i'll be able to vote because I'll be too busy adjusting my fantasy football lineup- King of Football
What exactly does it mean in this context to be more progressive or more to the left? With national politics, it is obvious. Politicians of that type favor spending more, taxing more, and creating a tax system that puts more of the burden on the wealthy. None of that is possible in Seattle. We are limited by how much we can spend (and progressive taxes are not allowed).

I think saying one candidate is more progressive or not misses the point. What matters are priorities as well as how effective you spend the money. How do you balance spending on things like police, transit, sidewalks or street maintenance? What do you actually do with that money? These are the most important issues -- who cares if you spend more on the homeless, but spend it so poorly that it doesn't achieve any of your goals? What if you spend more for the police, but we are less safe?

You also have the seemingly boring, but extremely important issue of zoning. Do we continue to only allow growth in a handful of small places while watching rents skyrocket? If not, how we will balance the goal of lower rents and higher density versus the desire for preservation? This does not always follow the standard left-right divide, as allowing more growth can be seen as favoring business (those who build) while limiting growth can be seen as favoring wealthy (those who own property). Trying to summarize the candidates along a left-right divide works OK in national politics, but is pointless for local races (unless someone actually runs on lowering taxes, which seems unlikely).
Oops. Not "Week In Review." It's "The Record." Now
Maybe "Keep Seattle Again"
His appearance on Week in Review a few weeks ago might give a glimpse of his campaign -- namely, Murray has managed the budget poorly, the city shouldn't put forth a homeless levy without managing programs better first, etc.
All in for McGinn - and I expect a different candidate / mayor this time around. A better listener, aiming for consensus and yet still steadfastly independent.
"Oportunistic"? Grow up. Who cares?? Taking advantage of an opportunity to do good work is fine.

Seattle is so fragile and immature.
Jesus. I can't tell if you people have amnesia or are bike fetishists.

McGinn was an asshole. He accomplished nothing other picking expensive fights he couldn't win with... literally everyone.

You people act like all this gentrification, displacement and unmanaged growth just magically happened in the last four years. McGinn's "policies" were disastrous NIMBY nonsense.
@27 As I recall, there was a good deal of criticism towards McGinn from progressives due to his response to the local OWS demonstrations, and general handling of police use of force, etc. His support from the left was greatly eroded because of the perception he was coddling SPD in the face of heightened sentiment for reform, and helping to slow/prevent implementation of the consent decree.
Opposing McGinn because the Council and Politburo Dems knee-capped him is the Seattle equivalent of saying Barack Obama should have lost in 2012 because he was ineffective, as though the GOP congress didn't exist.

The Council and the Politburo Dems did everything to break McGinn and then pointed saying "Look! McGinn's ineffective."
@43 Oh. Come on. Politburo dems? Talk about false equivalence fallacies. McGinn faced nothing like an obstructionist GOP. McGinn "knee capped" himself.
@14 cressona and @25 in-frequent: "A New McGinning"! I like that!
Are you still concerned about the poor response to the homelessness issue? If you are, McGinn's actions as mayor helped get us to the problems we have now. His solution? Let the Jungle go on, let encampments persist, let programming that NEVER EVER reduces homelessness and protect vulnerable people remain funded! He was part of the massive intransigence that has plagued our ineffective homeless system. I talked with him at length at an event on homelessness when he was the mayor and all he could talk about were A-Pod-aments. That's what he came up with. At least Murray has been slapped around enough by this issue that he's moving on the problem. McGinn? He'll be happy to ride his bike around in all the bike lanes around town and feel he's done something good. Unless he can speak clearly about moving on the homlessness issue, he isn't what this city needs.
@44 uhh... kneecapped himself? you mean the Third Way centrist Dem corporatists in city council (all of which will be gone by the time McGinn takes office) screwed him on every turn. They even called in favors from Olympia and got Gregoire to release a ridiculous 3D simulation of the city crumbling if we don't go for Big Bertha.

Even Burgess, the "more liberal" member of the city council tried to screw over Jon Grant's run for council, and McGinn blew the whistle on that one too (and wasn't even mayor!)

But have fun dreaming where Seattle doesn't have an organized crime family called the Democratic Establishment.
@43, I agree.
@43 and @44 are both exaggerating fairly wildly; the truth lies somewhere in between. At any rate, from what I understand most of the councilmembers seriously invested in seeing McGinn fail are, or won't be, on the next city council, so this bit of history needn't guide our thinking about McGinn too much.
@47 Oh FFS. The hyperbole.

So far it's been the "Politburo," (a juicy "Red Scare" metaphor). And now "Organized Crime!"

My, oh my. Poor Mike. He could've achieved so much if it wasn't for those meddling Democrats! Evil incarnate!

What's next "Those Hitler Nazi Child-Molester Democrats?" Or "The Ebola Democrats!"

Go stroke at a photo of Jill Stein or something and calm down.

McGinn was an abrasive asshole. That was his problem. Nobody who worked with him liked him. Except other assholes.

Have you ever sat down and talked to the guy? I have. Many times. He is just insufferable and exasperating. He could've gotten shit done if he actually knew how to work with people.
@4: I have a better idea: let's not.
It is amazing to see how completely the term NIMBY has been hijacked. For decades, it referred to a refusal to have facilities that everyone agreed were in the public' s good, hospitals, recycling centers, sewage treatment plants, located near the wealthy. Now it is used as an epithet for those who object to having older and more affordable housing torn down and replaced with new, high priced units. It is Industry jujitsu, painting those who oppose gentrification as elitists. Sad to see how successful it has been.
It is amazing to see how completely the term NIMBY has been hijacked. For decades, it referred to a refusal to have facilities that everyone agreed were in the public' s good, hospitals, recycling centers, sewage treatment plants, located near the wealthy. Now it is used as an epithet for those who object to having older and more affordable housing torn down and replaced with new, high priced units. It is Industry jujitsu, painting those who oppose gentrification as elitists. Sad to see how successful it has been.