Rich's seething jealousy ruins an otherwise sound argument. "Grrrr, those people with MONEY. I just HATE them!" Also, cheap shot on the dude's post about bettering himself.

you should give a fuck about the showbox, personally and politically.

Do you know what I'd love to see on the cover of The Stranger? A picture of someone in a Kshama Sawant mask punching Saul Spady in the face!

Based on that IG post, I'm not entirely sure Saul knows what the word alacrity means.

Perhaps the alt-right cannot (willingly) discern the dif between destroying America / planet Earth (for the benefit of a Few) and building America (for the benefit of everyone).

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." Go, Corporate America! Keep them (happily!) baffled!

"The rich make me sick." ~ Raymond Chandler

I'm quite surprised there isn't a "Wealthy Only" twitter, where these skeevers can gloat about their undeserved wealth and privilege to a select audience of those kinds. It just looks bad when the commoners discover that stuff and run to the press.

I really hope someone else gets into that City Council race - there's no way I could ever vote for either of those two.

Kshama Sawant?! Nope---Saul Spady gets my vote for local Mein Trumpfy-wannabe.
@2 German Sausage, @3 Max Solomon, @6 kristofarian, @7 blip & @8 Zapotec: Agreed, and thank you all.

@9 Zapotec: I know, right?

HAHAHA. God. The permutations of hypocrisy and tortured logic Alt-Right trolls will entertain. It's actually glorious in the shameless stupidity.

It's clear Trump is starting to go down flames. So. Sure. Compare a socialist woman of color to Trump. Why not? Makes about as much sense as saying Trump or the Republican Party are "conservative" in the first place.

Why bother with facts or context. Just go with any crazy, stupid shit that resonates with your dumb shit base and spikes the news cycle for a few minutes. I guess Sawant and Trump can both be said to be 'populists" of a sort. But that about it.

I don't like Sawant all that much. She's not very bright and ridiculously delusional. But I'll keep voting for her because it's nice to have some sort of firebrand in the city council willing to pitch shit to the status quo. And just out of spite.

Trump and Sawant share at least one common characteristic, they're exhausting.

"on being publicly coy about running for city council against Sawant next year"

So The Stranger cognoscenti are bucking the (local political punditry) odds that Coucilmember Sawant ain't running again? That is, she's done feeling claustrophobic in that pesky little city council venue (what with packing the stands with a shouty chorus) and will move on to 'greater things' (possibly national).

This guy is obviously a grade-A douchebag...but, that doesn't mean he's wrong.

Considering Sawant was basically saying “Hillary=Trump” in 2016, I’d say this is sauce for the goose...

Wow. Only in Seattle is a head tax called progressive. Such bullshit. Look, a progressive income tax is progressive (it is right there, in the name). A billionaire pays a lot more than someone making minimum wage. Not only that, but if you do it right, the billionaire pays a higher rate.

A head tax is a very regressive tax. Someone making minimum wage pays the exact same amount as someone who makes $250 grand a year. The truly rich people -- the ones that just live off of their investments -- don't even pay a dime. In other words, not only do high income people pay a lower rate, they often pay a lower amount!

Meanwhile, you treat this guy like he is a Rockefeller. You don't even bother to figure out how much money he has, or how much money the Spady's have. I'm sure they are doing OK, but come on. There are only a handful of restaurants. They treat their employees better than just about any fast food restaurant anywhere, and give plenty of money to charity. Yeah, he is probably wealthier than most people in America, but that is true of most people in the city.

Meanwhile, you not only entirely miss his point, but you manage to provide a very example of the type of bullshit he was talking about. Trumpism, at its essence, is about character assassination and tribalism. His willingness to smear McCain, and talk shit about his war record is just one example. Holy shit, he attacked a well respected member of his own party. I'm not talking about a policy disagreement, but a full fledged attack on his character. It is us-versus-them politics, and it permeates his very being. Does Sawant do the same thing? Of course she does, although not nearly to the same level . She is quite comfortable blaming one group or another for the problems that we confront in Seattle, instead of taking a more reasoned, "we are all in this together" approach.

Now you come along and just pile on the bullshit. Did you bother to address what he actually said about the poll tax? Did you bother to compare our approach towards the homeless with Boston's? Did you address his criticism of Sawant and the handling of the Showbox? Of course not. You simply combed Facebook so you could make personal, slimy attacks on his character as well as a class of people (children of business owners).

Jesus, no wonder we can't do shit in this city. Rather than argue the issues, we have stupid image wars and ridiculous arguments about who is "more progressive".

I think Mr. Smith is confused by the comparison before him. Sawant isn’t Trumpian in her politics, she’s Trumpian in her demeanor. They’re both black-and-white thinkers (you’re either with them or an enemy), they’re both vitriolic and bombastic, they’re both political opportunists, they both constantly play to their hardcore base, and neither seem to realize that politics isn’t about ideological purity, it’s about compromise, pragmatism, and getting things done. Both are extremely ineffective leaders and government officials, not to mention unpopular ones to boot.

Sawant is VERY Trumpian in all aspects but policy. Her popularity is for the same reasons people like Trump.

@21, you apparently have no understanding of what the head tax would have done, and you spend multi-paragraphs demonstrating that. Hint: Employees would't have paid the tax.

@25 Bingo! Amazing @21 used that much energy without having a clue what he was talking about.

' "Yes, she stumped for Jill Stein, and that was stupid but ultimately harmless"

It was stupid and it wasn't harmless.

Agree on the spoiled heir claiming insight to much of anything.
But if you take the "Trump" allusions as analogy rather than so literally, there's some truth.
Loud, annoying, populists touting simplistic solutions to complex problems to a cultish base.
And both she and Trump are scorched-earth know-it-all extremists who hate Amazon.

21: It's not like they had the option of a progressive income tax and rejected it in favor of the head tax. The Washington state constitution(thanks to some provisions forced into it in the early 20th century by the local robber barons of the era)currently bans state or local income tax. It would be better to change the(there was an initiative to do just that in the Nineties and Steve Ballmer bought its defeat/shouted it down). I think the vast majority of Washington state residents would support replacing the state sales tax with a progressive income tax AND that a wealth tax would pass overwhelmingly in Seattle and Olympia and perhaps even in places like Spokane and Yakima.

Kshama Sawant is nothing like Trump. She has never incited anything remotely resembling the bitter, spiteful white-fragility supremacism that defines Trump's followers. She speaks bluntly, but never hatefully, and never with any form of bigotry.

First of all Fuck the Showbox. It is a dilapidated old buildings in the heart of downtown. Probably a fire hazard and too expensive to renovate. Everyone who supports mob-rule to save it is a baby. Grow up. Spady supported alternatives like working with the developer for a new venue in the new building. But the pitchforks were already out.
And opposition to the Head Tax is not being anti-homeless. How can you equivocate the two? A Head Tax reduces employment, period. It hurts businesses like Dicks more than Amazon because it was based on revenue not profit. It was a dumb Tax. It would hurt the working class. Which is why they booed Sawant in public in mass numbers. Sawant is good at one thing at least, being incompetent. And calling Police cold blooded murderers before she or anyone had any evidence to make such a claim.

Sawant stumping in an out of WA state, saying there is no difference between Clinton and Trump was not "ultimately harmless." Trump is the frickin' president and it's a big fucking deal, perhaps even doing away with the last chance to address climate change globally. Still no apology or admission of error. Sawant is willing to sacrifice a lot of innocent and defenseless citizens in the interest of her apparent ideal of "tear down and rebuild" socialism.

I was looking forward to doing some door to door for who ever opposes her when the time comes. BUT, I have to say, Spady really really doesn't look like a candidate to get me door knocking...

Well now I kinda want the deets on Saul's Europe-related sins.

... nah they're probably tacky

alacrity

Frickin comment system strips hash chars?

@36, yes Hillary's billion-plus-dollar campaign—touted at the time as the most sophisticated campaign operation ever—was foiled by a city council member. That makes total sense.

@25 & @27 Read up some more on economics. The head tax was regressive since it was a flat rate tax instead of a percentage of salary. It would be a strong disincentive for companies to hire low wage employees in Seattle.

@21, you apparently have no understanding of what the head tax would have done, and you spend multi-paragraphs demonstrating that. Hint: Employees would't have paid the tax.

As @26 said, that is a distinction without a difference. That also misses the entire fucking point. It isn't progressive! Holy shit, how hard it that to understand. Here, let me give you three simple scenarios:

1) A grocery store barely makes money. They take in a lot, but spend a lot as well. They also employ a lot of people. They are thinking of hiring more people, but aren't sure they can afford it.

2) A midsize software company is making shitloads of money. They only employ fifty or so people, but profits are through the roof.

3) A small financial consulting firm is also making a lot of money. The owners are making a bunch, and the employees are extremely well paid.

So, the grocery store pays the most, while the software company pays less, and the consulting firm doesn't pay a dime. The grocery store thinks twice about hiring more people, because each time they do, it costs them a bunch of money (beyond their salary). Technically, the employee doesn't pay the tax, but it actually works that way when it comes time to hiring or retaining workers.

But even if you ignore employees, and assume that this magically doesn't effect them, it is a fucked up, regressive business tax. It doesn't tax profits, nor does it even consider them. To qualify it ignores profit, and only focuses on revenue (i. e. gross income). That in itself is fucked up, since it means that highly profitable -- but small -- companies slide through, but companies that are barely making it (but take in a lot of money) qualify. Then it taxes per person. It doesn't matter if you make shitloads of money or not -- what matters is how many people you employ. It just isn't progressive and saying so is ridiculous.

@42 Dead on accurate but I think you meant to address @25

Run, Saul, Run!

@2 German Sausage: For the Win. Spoiled Rich Saul Spady is a good enough reason to boycott Dick's, no matter how good their burgers are.
@29 Dadddy: As usual, you're full of shit.

@26:

You probably haven't been around here long enough to recall when Seattle HAD a head tax for several years back in the late 2000's. It didn't, nor would the newer version have been passed along to employees, as you suggest with your faulty analogy, for the simple reason that it's illegal under federal labor law to force employees to pay for business expenses, with a very small number of exceptions (e.g. breakages, till shortages, and in some cases, the cost of tools & uniforms - but it can also vary from state to state). This is very different from your renters example, where the landlord is allowed to pass along the cost of things like property taxes.

36: Pretty sure that, by "harmless", he just meant there was no chance Sawant's support of Stein could've thrown this state to Trump. And she wasn't going to influence anyone's votes in any other state.

Sawant has more in common with Trump than she has differences. Both narcissistic meglomaniacs. Both hate Bezos. Both speak ill of the dead. Both rile their bases with identity politics. This author is a kid with a weak education and a ton of indoctrination. Saul Spady for city council!!!

@48 irrational space cadet: I'm Seattle born and have been in the Puget Sound area more than twice as long as you have. For someone so insistent on making a point, you sure do ramble.
@50 theheaves: A spoiled rich white boy basking in his grandfather's entrepreneurial glory is the last person I'd choose for Seattle City Council.

"A spoiled rich white boy basking in his grandfather's entrepreneurial glory is the last person I'd choose for Seattle City Council." Way to say it, auntie gee!

I grew up here and have heard plenty people call it Pike's Place

@49 At the time Sawant had a significant national platform, coming off the $15/hr win in Seattle with which she was closely identified. People with half a brain understand that it is the sum of the actions of individuals that causes political effects. Furthermore, in the age of borderless internet and social media the excuse that "WA was always going to go for Clinton so nothing we did matters" is a selfish cowardly copout.

How does supporting "Green Party" candidate Jill Stein help with building a meaningful broad based Socialist Party that looks like it could lead to serious practical achievements in the real world? It doesn't. That was either 1) childish self-indulgence, OR 2) a desire for total destabilization of society by the worst forces of capitalism in order to come along later to vulture on the fallout in some kind of unattainable 1917 fantasy scenario.

Hey Rich Smith,

Too bad you marred your otherwise-excellent article by making a lesser-evillist lunacy.

Kshama Sawant and Socialist Alternative were completely correct in calling for a mass vote for the Green Party’s Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka at the 2016 presidential election.
Why?
As a step towards building a mass party of the 99 Per Cent.
Independent of, and in opposition to, our corporate overlords and their Republican and Democrat parties.

Sure, in a temporary attack of political cowardice many millions of our class voted for Trump.
Or for Hillary — “Donald-in-a-Dress”.
Just as previously for Obama — “Trump-with-a-Tan”.

That is certainly not to say that those 3 Wall-Street creatures are the same.
If they were, Wall Street would have no use for them.
Just like you can’t have a full orchestra made up only of Bongo Drums.

We fight for a world we can all live in, for a life worth living.
By helping to build mass movements — for Women’s liberation, against the police murder of Black youth, for LGBTQ rights, for affordable housing.
And to give those mass movements lasting organizational form by building the Movement For A People’s Party and Socialist Alternative.

So come join us — we have a world to win!

https://www.socialistalternative.org/

He doesn’t remind me of Trump as much as he reminds me of Stephen Miller (smug and whiny), but with a veneer of compassion meant to make him sound reasonable. Watched the video, and all he does is complain - I didn’t hear one concrete thing he’s proposing to do. From the article, I get he’s against Sawant. Easy stance to take - but what are you for, besides more Dick’s in Seattle?

Yes, there is a huge difference between Clinton and Trump, and thank the gods Clinton will never be president! We will be getting a blue wave this fall, instead of watching the Republican hold on the House grow stronger, and that blue wave will see some very progressive voices elected. The Mueller probe is going to be sending a lot of Republicans either to prison, or an early retirement, and may have a major negative impact on some dangerous Republican donors. We have a nation awakened to the need to get money and corruption out of our political process. Most importantly, we have a chance in 2020 to elect a real progressive, and not a Republican-lite centrist who puts Wall Street's interests ahead of Main Street's needs.

The best we could have hoped for with Clinton is 8 years of grid-lock while the Republicans further Gerrymandered themselves into permanent legislative control, and the certainty of a Republican president in 2024. It sucks in the short term, but we will all love the show when the Trump Crime Family goes on trial for treason.