A Proud Durkan Voter


Ah come on, let the Bernouts have their fun.

Mayor of Seattle is a low-stakes, relatively powerless position, and it's not going to make one whit of noticeable difference if the office is held by a capable administrator from the local democratic machine vs. a capable administrator from the local nonprofit industry.
I bet that no matter who wins in November your rent will still go up every year they are in office.

I'll bet all of my paychecks for the next three years on that!
@1 -- I disagree. Consider HALA. The mayor organized a committee to look into creating more affordable housing. After a lot of negotiation, they came up with a compromise package. One of the key elements was to significantly change the rules for single family housing. Not as much as many people would like (e. g. Low Rise 3 everywhere) but still significant. You would likely see a huge boom in backyard cottages and basement apartments (similar to what Vancouver B. C. has had for years, which successfully kept rents low until recently). Unfortunately the mayor -- and no one else -- rejected that aspect of the proposal. Now HALA has become a largely meaningless debate as to how to trade a bit more height for a bit more low income housing (producing very little of either). That is the difference between a mayor like Durkan, or a mayor like Moon.

To say nothing of someone like McGinn, who so royally fucked up the operations that he couldn't even get 10% of the vote in a wide open primary. That, in a nutshell, is what a lot of people struggle with. Do we support Moon, who sure sounds like she has a handle on every major issue, or do we play it safe with someone who has administrative and political experience. We rolled the dice with McGinn and paid the price -- do people want to roll the dice with Moon?
@2 The only way we can get lower rents is with a rent bubble. The most likely way we can do that is if we find a much cheaper way to build new units. That could happen if we crack open the vast majority of private land in the city, which is single family homes. It is possible that a Moon administration would loosen the restrictions on development in these areas, since it is part of her platform. I doubt very much that Durkan will.
Detroit's current mayor Mike Duggan won as a write in candidate.
Duggan is the first white person to be elected mayor of Detroit in over forty years. Detroit is over 80% African American.
If Duggan could win as a write in candidate in Detroit, then Oliver could do it in Seattle.

Dan, you are making the same mistake you made in the 2016 election.
You can't expect someone to vote for a candidate they don't like because you think it's the right thing to do.

Maybe you should be telling people why they should vote for Moon instead of trying to piss of Oliver supporters.

Apparently you haven't learned from your mistakes.

Dan is about as likely to get over the bug in his bonnet about "spoiler" candidates as Kirsten Rogers is to vote for anyone other than NIkkita Oliver.

Dan's scolding will be ineffectual, true enough. But scolding Dan about his scolding isn't going to change anything, either.
Civic literacy should be a class in every school.
She is gonna STICK IT TO THE MAN by writing someone in.

That always works, right?

Capitalism will crumble! Neo-liberalism will be vanquished! Wall Street will be in ruins!
People keep saying that we have to start tearing down SFHs to create more apartments but I'm not buying that as long as I keep seeing spaces in Fremont, Ballard and along Aurora that look like vacant lots. We should build some apartments in those places.

The mayor who rejected the SFH zoning change you're hung up on -- Mayor Murray -- came out of the democratic machine, like Durkan. The mayor you excoriate as administratively incompetent -- Mayor McGinn -- came out of the nonprofit industry, like Moon.

The bet you're outlining, then, is "heads I lose, tails I lose." So it looks like you don't forsee any appreciable difference between Durkan and Moon, either.
Did you notice that Dan didn't even mention Moon by name, even though that's the candidate he appears to support?
Dan's more interested in trolling the opposition than he is on getting his own candidate elected.

Part of the reason my two adult children didn't bother to vote in the 2016 election is because people like Dan kept telling them they were idiots for liking Bernie Sanders.

I'm going to continue to scold Dan for this, regardless of what you think.
Maybe someday it will get through to him.
@6 Are you expecting developers to continue developing when there's less profit to be had? The only reason they're building is because of the shortage; if you eliminate the shortage, there's less motivation to develop new housing because the margins will disappear.

I'm guessing the only way for there to be a significant surplus of housing and downward pressure on rental prices is if Amazon, Microsoft, and/or Google have major layoffs or abandon the city altogether.
How sad that people can't participate in their civic duty because their feelings got hurt.

There's plenty of development happening throughout the city on vacant lots (just take a light-rail ride through south Seattle).

And yes, there are still plenty of vacant lots left (just take a light-rail ride through south Seattle).

But that doesn't mean nobody should be allowed to tear down an old, crumbling, cheaply-built SFH and build low-rise apartments or condos on the lot.

(You might notice that it isn't the nice, well-built, well-maintained SFH stock that's getting torn down-- that stuff is too expensive!).

Fair enough. But it sounds like Dan isn't the only one who hasn't learned from his mistakes, eh?
enough with oliver already - she's completely unqualified and way-too-far-left "progressive" that this city doesn't need.
@18 no one cares what you think.
@7 really interesting, the Duggan election in Detroit. A majority-black city gave not one fuck about his lived experience as a white man and wrote him in over a black candidate because he ran a better campaign. He's been in office for two years and must be doing a good enough job because the Black Slate PAC just endorsed his reelection campaign. I'm only musing on this because it's interesting to look at how these issues of race, ideological purity, etc play out in other cities.

You know, that's exactly what people said about Sawant, too.

And while you can certainly make a case that she hasn't done anything with her seat other than grandstand and get in the way, you can also make a case that the rest of the council wouldn't have had the spine to ignore the howling donor class and pass $15/hr if it hadn't been for Sawant's success at the ballot box.

The mayor does have to direct day-to-day operation of the city, though... and yeah, anti-capitalist ideologues don't exactly have a stellar track record when it comes to civic management.
Don't forget Sawant's impact re: the Wells Fargo divestment, too.
@21 Eh, Sawant is a council member. Big difference if she was running for mayor.

I'll keep voting for her as long as she does not go completely off the rails and keeps being in a thorn in the sides of greedy malignant developers.
tuff dan ruff dan, what a can-dan does is wash someone else's hands.

Er, sure, but let's put some scare quotes around "divestment."

The contract doesn't expire until 12/1/2018, and I haven't heard about any progress toward finding a bank for the City that isn't invested in the Dakota Access Pipeline... have you?

Wells Fargo even told the city that they were willing to waive any penalty for ending the contract early, but the City has declined to do so. So the overall impact of the resolution (and Sawants influence thereupon), is purely symbolic to date.
A write-in vote is a vote for Durkan.

That's not quite true. In my neighborhood quite a few perfectly serviceable, not in the least bit run-down SFH's were demolished, often because they were on property contiguous with old, crumbling houses and the developer wanted more footprint to put up four-over-ones or six-over-ones.
@13- FTW. Mr. Savage seems to lose all sense when intra-party politics come into play. He savagely (hah!) attacks anyone who isn't bowing to his moderate-ism. But he's rich and gay marriage is probably safe in Washington, so what does he need progressives for anymore anyway?
Here's the thing, Dan is an internationally known columnist and you and I are not.

You think it's pointless for me to tell Dan that it would be better for him to try to support Moon then to mock Oliver supporters.
Isn't it just as pointless for you to tell me to ignore his ridiculous position?

Just so we're both clear on this, write-in votes for Oliver are not going to be counted.

I realize there is almost no chance that Dan is going to realize the error of his ways, but I feel the need to point them out anyway.

The real question is, why do you care what I do?
I'm glad to see someone understands what's going on here.

Dan likes to go on Real Time with Bill Maher and pretend to be a liberal, but in reality he is a Centrist and a corporatist and is only interested in protecting his own Elite status.

Dan used to be very liberal, so we know he can change. I doubt he will, but he could.
Welcome to the Stranger, Dan Savage's personal blog where he attacks far leftists for things that aren't true.

Did Sanders voters sink Clinton? No, they fucking didn't. Oliver voters aren't going to sink Moon. Being a milquetoast candidate could, like Clinton

We get it, Dan. You're old. You're not as extreme as you used to be. It's just incredibly sad to see you using what used to be a decent weekly paper as your own personal soapbox to hate leftists on.

It's getting pathetic.
@19: Actually, opinions are more interesting than insults.
@18 RACIST!!! I think you're known for throwing that at people quite frequently on this blog.

"The real question is, why do you care what I do?"

Because I'm not a libertarian? Or anarchist, I guess? I care about stuff that everyone does.

If you meant to ask "why do you care what I think?" the answer is of course "I really don't," but I will point out that you seem hellbent on doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different outcome every time.

I try to avoid that, myself, so this time I'm expecting the same outcome, and I won't be trying it again.

What's pathetic is your desperate grasping at straws. Let's ignore the fact that you confuse the Stranger (a publication) with Slog (a blog) and just point out that Slog is far from Dan's personal blog. He posts far less often than almost all other contributors. He also co-founded the bloody paper and authors the longest running and most read column in it (only reason to still read this rag imo). The idea that is too old (ageist much?) and not liberal enough is laughable. He gets called a reactionary by morons like you when he calls out the self-defeating ideologically bankrupt fringe left which cares more about symbolic issues than real ones and whose purity tests enfranchise conservatives. Turns out the Bernie bro phenomenon WAS real and many DID vote Trump (or Stein, same diff). Now we know what a grandstanding narcissist Oliver is that she would split the progressive vote to advance her own political clout. Make no mistake a write in vote for Oliver is a vote for Jenny Durkin and her pro-business agenda. Dan Savage is only sane person left on this paper and we would do well to listen to him.
What nonprofit does this person work for?
@7 the fact that Oliver legally can't win the election because write-in votes for her won't be counted probably should lead one to the conclusion that, uh, she can't win. Regardless of someone in Detroit winning as a write-in, or Lisa Murkowski winning as a write-in.
can people at least start typing durkin or durkun or durkon or durken or durkyn please already, this is some serious stuff folks, some rando on twitter is gonna write in oliver's name otherwise. please validate thestranger's endorsements page that got 100ks clicks we gotta be real here.
Good god, who in their right mind would want to be mayor?

@robotslave,adam - everything on slog is pointless, just enjoy the ride.
I don't even live in Seattle, so I'm not too worried about who the people of Seattle elect as their next mayor.

I just wanted to point out that Dan is more interested in bashing opponents than in actually supporting his candidates, just like in the 2016 presidential campaign.
Then robotslave came along, agreed with me, then told me I shouldn't even bother sharing my opinion.
If you meant to ask "why do you care what I think?" the answer is of course "I really don't," but I will point out that you seem hellbent on doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different outcome every time."

I'm not expecting a different outcome.
I would be very surprised if anything I said changed Dan's behavior,
If he is going to continue to blame Bernie Sanders supporters for Donald Trump being elected president, I will continue to call him out on his bullshit.
Every time I see him say something as ridiculous as "voting for X is actually voting for y" I'm going to call him out on it.

I don't understand why you have a problem with me expressing my opinion, especially since you agreed with me.

There is an old saying in progressive politics:
Speak truth to power.
I'm not going to stop speaking truth to power because you think it's pointless.