Comments

2

They're not signing a petition, They're giving other people the opportunity to sign it. I appreciate the stones.

3

Too bad Trump didn't follow a similar strategy!

7

I'm not Sawant's biggest fan, but this kind of chutzpah goes a long way towards winning me over.

8

"... since a recall on the general election ballot will allow more people to vote in the recall."

No, any registered voter in the 3rd District may vote in the recall, no matter when it is. A general election is likely to have a larger turnout than a special election, but that need not be the case.

@4: CM Sawant has great reason to be worried. In the August 2019 Primary Election, she received well less than 40% of the vote. That is a miserable performance by any incumbent, especially by a multi-term incumbent with great name recognition. Into the subsequent general election, she poured the largest amount of money ever spent on a Seattle City Council race, and received less than 52% of the vote -- another bad performance by a multi-term incumbent against a first-time challenger. Based upon those numbers, her only hope for staying in power is a high-turnout election where she spends huge amounts of money. (Even so, she has no opponent to demonize, and, as you noted, running her mouth about 'conservatives' in District 3 simply sounds silly.)

Of course, from the point of view of submitting signatures, it doesn't matter what she wants, or how many citizens sign the petitions her campaign uses. Under Washington State law, the Recall Sawant campaign decides how which signatures to submit, and when. They can simply throw into the trash any petitions CM Sawant's people send. She can't control their timing of the recall election, no matter how much she may want to do so.

@5: While I would never counsel complacency, it's her lack of a ground game in District 3 which drives her desperation now. The above-quoted election results show an incumbent who has failed to appeal to the most reliable voters in District 3, the voters who turn out for the primary. I'd speculate her campaign will use their signature-gathering to collect names and addresses of opponents of recall, because their ground game is anemic enough to need the boost.

Throughout this entire term, her judgement has proven consistently terrible. She had already received criticism for using City resources for her own purposes, and yet she did it again. She imitated Donald Trump, by holding a rally on public property without regard for COVID. She provided privileged information to Socialist Alternative, gave a speech at their bullying, vandalizing attack on Mayor Durkan's family home, then lied about how they and she got there. She employed an out-of-state attorney in her needless challenge to the resultant recall, lost in court, and then wound up admitting that one of the recall charges is indeed true. All of this self-inflicted damage could have been easily avoided, and should have been, especially by an incumbent who could barely purchase re-election in the first place.

9

@8 great post and most telling for me is she has shown zero contrition for her actions instead throwing blame everywhere but where it belongs. Should she survive there is zero probability she will learn from this and 100% chance she’ll pull similar shenanigans and probably feel emboldened to push the envelope even further especially if she is joined by Oliver on the council.

11

Sawant's strategy here is not unlike that of a manager who directs a pitcher to throw an intentional walk. Sometimes that works; sometimes it backfires. We'll see. No question Sawant has political smarts, works relentlessly to maintain power, and will continue to bend rules and demonize big business. She cultivates an image as the ultimate scrappy, feisty underdog, and many buy into that, feeling vicariously that they, too, are partaking in a historically important populist movement. She has her blindspots, though. I think she badly underestimated the depth and durability of the Recall movement, and her brand of sanctimony and dogma wears thin on many people who are not "right-wingers," but simply voters who see through her act to the self-important, us-versus-them bully she is. She feeds on being the underdog, though, and will put up a tough fight. I expect a close election. Many will say, in a manner similar to that of Trump's followers, she might not be nice, but I like her being a bad-ass. She knows this better than anyone. She knows her base and what they want. She understands how to intimidate and shame, and her fans love her for it. To the Recall movement: don't back down. Don't be intimidated. Don't lose your cool. Keep your focus, and get the job done. A slight majority in District 3, I suspect, is with you. You can--and need to--win this.

12

Has anybody in her district ever got her to work on an important issue outside her little red playbook?

13

Chud sputtering is always fun, but it's especially choice here, isn't it?

"Nuh uh we don't have to take your stupid signatures you dumb commies, and we'd win in November anyway, and also backlash only happens to the libs never to us shut up shut up shut up"

Pass the gravy and keep it coming, boys.

14

@9, @11, @12: Aye, there's the rub. Our District 3 office should be a bustling laboratory of progressive legislation, with successful results flowing up directly to the state levels and federal levels, via the 43rd Legislative District and District 7, respectively. Instead, District 3 is a barren wasteland, thanks mostly to the incumbent's dead ideology, but also partly to her extremist attitude -- it's always her way or no way, and thus mostly the latter.

As her supporters cannot admit this, anyone who dares criticize her poor performance gets called a Trump supporter (in a city where he got single-digit percentages of our vote!) or hater or whatever. They'll never admit a legitimate critique of her performance can even exist -- any criticism is an "attack," always orchestrated by a shadowy conspiracy of "right-wing" (again, in Seattle!) forces. It's all very tiresome, and serves only to divide progressives, and limit our scope of possible accomplishment.

Hopefully, once she's gone, our civic discourse can become more civil, and we can actually have nice legislative things.

16

@13: "Chud sputtering is always fun..."

Name-calling is all you have left, apparently. That's fun to know.

Why should the Recall Sawant campaign accept signatures from Sawant's campaign? Recall Sawant should easily collect enough signatures on their own, as "her" district has more than enough citizens who've tired of her useless antics. The chance that her campaign would intentionally submit fake or otherwise invalid signatures, as a monkey-wrenching attempt, seems quite plausible. They don't seem to have any other option.

The people you should be mocking are Sawant's campaign, who now pretend they can control her recall election schedule, when they simply can't. (Their scent of desperation is truly delicious, don't you agree?)

17

@15 Ah yes, those low-information Seattle voters, if only they weren't so ignorant then surely they would cast their ballots for the sensible if somewhat aloof candidates endorsed by the Blethens.

In a city where 65% of adults hold a bachelor's degree. And are much more likely to vote.

19

Sweet Jesus, the best thing about the chuds has got to be their self-awareness. Never lets you down!

20

@18, @19: Must be comforting for you to know all of those who dare disagree with you are "chuds," "scumbags," and "right wing pieces of shit." (All of this in Seattle, a known hotbed of extensive, chronic, right-wing extremism.) Beats your having to engage us on facts, that's for sure.

22

@21: All those of us who deal in facts. (See @8 for examples.)

(Also, words mean things, and you shouldn't throw around serious terms, like "racists," where they don't apply. That your tiny imagination has utterly failed to produce a longer list of names to call is your problem, not anyone else's.)

23

When you're mad at the commies for sneaking itching powder into your jammies, you're probably just waking up with fleas.

25

@24: Here, let me help the chronically less fortunate. Examples of facts @8 include: "In the August 2019 Primary Election, she received well less than 40% of the vote. [...] Into the subsequent general election, she poured the largest amount of money ever spent on a Seattle City Council race, and received less than 52% of the vote..."

You and @23 are free to address those facts any time you like. Trust me on this.

27

@25: Why do losers always bore us with statistics without mentioning that they lost?

"but, but, but, she got less than 52% of the vote!"

Do you know what we call someone who got less than 51% of the vote?

Council member. It's the same title we use of they receive 100% of the vote.

29

@27: "Why do losers always bore us with statistics without mentioning that they lost?"

I assumed commenters here would know CM Sawant is on our City Council, and thus eligible for recall, exactly because her getting more than 50% of the vote in her most recent election meant she had won. I had also assumed the commenters here would understand all of that was not the point of recalling just how difficult her extremely expensive re-purchase of the District 3 seat had been.

I apologize for having completely over-estimated you on all of these points. In future, (time and memory permitting, of course) I will try to explain the completely obvious to you.

30

@29: You invest an enormous amount of time and energy in reliving how close the last election was when she won as if that means something to her credibility as a council member. It would take too long here to explain the finer points of democracy to you, but I'll just tell you it's sort of am all or nothing thing. No one really gives a shit about how close the win was.

In the end you share about as much new information on this topic as Mariam78 above discussing how she has solved HIV and she does it with about half the words you do. We get it, you don't like Sawant. You already make the completely obvious seem complicated, no need to add another 10 paragraphs for my benefit.

If your so worried about the cost, stop promoting the recall, or better yet, take it out of the police budget. But you don't really care about the cost do you? You just want to whine about how close the last election was as if that means something. For the love of god, give it a rest.

32

@31: Sawant may or may not survive the recall, but basing her chances on this message board would be like polling at a proud boy rally. This section if full of all out fascist, many with clear connections to the RP wing of the same SPD that was involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the capital.

Now, if you were to poll how many posters here think the greatest challenge facing America is that we underfund police departments and we expect too much accountability from the police, then you would see the 70% 30% split you describe.

33

@32 yes because of course anyone who doesn’t support Sawant’s ideologically pure, hate driven, burn it all down brand of politics must be a facist. You should be proud though. In a board filled with toxic bullshit you went above and beyond to set a high mark.

34

Haha, Kshama's a badass.

35

@33 Well thanks D13, I aim to please.

I have mixed feelings about CM Sawant myself, but she really does seem to bring out the nut jobs on this site, many of whom think the only crime the police ever committed in history was against the protesters on Jan. 6.

My earlier hyperbole aside, I don't think the posters on this board are very representative of most Stranger readers. Especially when it comes to Sawant, I suspect many would be more comfortable with the Blethens, but prefer to post here.

37

@30: I see you do indeed need the completely obvious carefully explained to you, just as you implied @27. (To paraphrase a better writer than anyone here, it is extremely difficult to get a reader to understand something when his ideology depends upon him not understanding it.) Credibility as a council member depends upon performance in office, and CM Sawant is currently facing a recall for her serial abuses of her office. Make of that what you can.

"No one really gives a shit about how close the win was."

CM Sawant and Socialist Alternative are deeply concerned with how close her win was; according to the very article upon which you're commenting, that concern drives her to the very unusual step of collecting signatures for her own recall election: "She said that saving the recall for a special election with a historically low turnout and higher conservative turnout was undemocratic." (That last phrase translates as, "an election I'm likely to lose.") If she'd consistently gotten re-elected in massive landslides, she simply wouldn't need to care when her re-election was. But despite her long tenure in office, great name recognition, and huge financial expenditures, she fared poorly in her two most recent elections. Hence her trying to obtain the most favorable election for her recall.

"In the end you share about as much new information..."

Yet, far more than you have, and in about the same number of words. Jealous much?

"If your so worried about the cost,"

When did I say I was worried about it? If her recall happens in the next general election, it's just another line on that ballot; hardly a great public cost there. To the extent her having to run yet another extremely expensive re-election campaign drains her and Socialist Alternative's finances and energy, that's great and I'm all for it. If we make it costly enough for them, then maybe they'll go have their useless little circle-jerk somewhere else, and leave us to solve our problems via good legislation from our City Council.

"For the love of god, give it a rest."

Facts just stubbornly refuse to be your friends, don't they? For example:

"This section if full of all out fascist, many with clear connections to the RP wing of the same SPD that was involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the capital."

Sure it is, which is exactly why you were able to quote so many of the commenters here supporting that attack. (Snicker.)

Maybe citizens who disapprove of CM Sawant's performance in office have valid reasons for doing so. But you can't allow for that possibility, so you spitefully fabricate and throw around ludicrous "explanations" for why we comment here. You're making absurdly false accusations against your fellow citizens because you simply can't beat us on the facts. I hope you enjoy sitting in your self-created sewer, with your fellow "scumbags" and "chuds." You all deserve each other, just as the citizens of District 3 (not just the ones in Socialist Alternative) deserve actual representation on our City Council.

Meanwhile, I thank you, for exactly validating my words @14: "...anyone who dares criticize her poor performance gets called a Trump supporter (in a city where he got single-digit percentages of our vote!) or hater or whatever."

39

@37: You continue to miss the mark and make little sense.

You presume because you obsess over CM Sawant that my pointing out your weird frothing at the mouth rage against her means I supporter her. As I said, I have mixed feelings on her record, but you are lying to yourself if you think she is facing this recall because of her abuse of office, or if you tell yourself that is your primary problem with her. I mean, Mayor Durkin committed a potential felony by deleting texts relating to the protest last year and I have hardly heard a peep. If your argument is that she is ineffective, do you mean to tell me the other council members have been uber effective and she is some type of standout? If so, you are less familiar with the operations of the council than I thought.

I could give you endless examples of CMs and other city politicians abusing their office without consequence. So why the rabid response from you to CM Sawant? Why do you have such a bee in your bonnet over this one CM? That's rhetorical. Please don't give me another 10 paragraphs of your disingenuous rationalization no one buys about how "well it's different this time." Your claims are not credible and no one believes you. You're too selective in your outrage to be taken seriously for reasons you will likely never share, so we will never know. What we can tell is that it's not the ridiculous reasons you claim.

When Sawant's team focuses on the last election it's to come up with a game plan for the next. You use that close election to delegitimize her previous victory. See the difference? They are coming up with strategy, you are struggling to understand democracy. I know you don't get the difference because you're a fanatic, but others less emotionally invested. It's a shame you don't. If you did, perhaps your criticisms of CM Sawant would have credibility.

Who cares if 1 percent of those who voted for trump live on capital hill if that 1 percent makes up a disproportionate group on this comment board as @31 ironically alluded to. There are plenty of reasonable grown ups that did not support Trump that will no doubt vote to recall Sawant, but that reasonable group is under-represented here. Instead we get you, where a personal obsession is presented as argument.

40

@31: You were being facetious.

Well played. Right over my head.

41

Desperate times ... call for desperate action.

She is pretty desperate at this point. If it comes to a recall then let it come. It will be a good start on clearing out the dead wood, rot and decay which is hobbling this city.

43

@9 " she has shown zero contrition for her actions" this is false. She admitted she was at fault and paid for the copies she printed on the city machines.

@15 this is how you know she isn't "simply flip sides of the same rotten coin" as Trump. Trump is a unique evil, he never admits fault, he never listens to anyone.

Another thing that separates her from Trump is that she has one not just one but three consecutive elections. But sure, I'm sure now the majority that has repeatedly voted her in has evaporated. Her election has pretty much been a coin toss each time and anyone saying that a majority agrees with them about Sawant is clearly projecting... although anyone saying that a majority wants Sawant to be on the council has the benefit of three consecutive elections to support their view, rather than wishful thinking that seems to be motivating many of you in this thread.

45

Casino Royale's "You presume to obsess over Sawant despite my respectfully pointing out your frothing at the mouth rage against her means I support her. I have mixed feelings on that, but you lie to yourself to think she is facing this recall because of her abuse of office, or if that is your main problem with her. Mayor Durkin committed a potential felony by deleting texts relating to the protest last year. And we have hardly hear a peep. If your argument is that she is ineffective, do you mean the other council members have been effective but she is some type of standout?"

This edited quote reminds me of a joke: Silicon Valley exec leaves his exurban gated estate washed and suited for the office tower after a 90 minute in his personal robolimo sedan staggering drunk and blurts "The me to thuh near cliff and drive off." After a robolimo moment of pause, "Excuse me, sir. Did you say "Take me to thee near cliff and drive off?" This sobers the guy up enough to say "No. No. Go to the near cliff parking lot. I'll get out. Then drive off and make it look like an accident so I can get the insurance company to pay for my new car. The latest model!" Another robolimo pause is followed with "I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that." (^:

46

@39: "When Sawant's team focuses on the last election it's to come up with a game plan for the next. You use that close election to delegitimize her previous victory. See the difference?"

(Wait, so now someone -- Sawant's team -- does indeed care about how close the last election was?) I didn't quote the statistics of past elections "to delegitimize [sic] her previous victory." That is your idea, not mine, and I'm proud to say I bear no responsibility for it. I quoted the results of previous elections to validate, with evidence, her "game plan for the next." She's in a lot of trouble already, and recent history strongly suggests she can't risk having her recall vote happen during a low-turnout election. Her most recent winning formula consisted of spending gobs and gobs of out-of-city money during a high-turnout election. For a repeat of that, she obviously needs a high-turnout election, just as she said. Somehow, you misinterpreted my full agreement with her as some kind of criticism of her (!). It's not; it's just my acknowledgment of the reality she now faces.

"I could give you endless examples of CMs and other city politicians abusing their office without consequence."

But you don't. Just as you have given no examples -- zero, zip, zlich, nada -- of your fellow commenters here supporting the January 6th attack on our Capitol, or of their being comparable to Proud Boys, or any of the other accusations you made against your fellow readers. Assertions made without evidence will, as always, be dismissed without evidence.

"...Mayor Durkin committed a potential felony by deleting texts relating to the protest last year..."

B-bu-but whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout whataboutism? (I mean seriously, whatabout it?!?)

Interesting how someone who has repeatedly claimed prosecutors railroad innocent persons and disregard constitutional rights now simply ignores a huge number of due process requirements. You've got a very long way to go before even getting an indictment of Mayor Durkan on any charge of any kind whatsoever, and yet you're already throwing around felony accusations. (Perhaps the reason you don't like those aforementioned prosecutors stems from your envy of their alleged successes?)

"If your argument is that she is ineffective,"

The Showbox is saved!

"...do you mean to tell me the other council members have been uber effective and she is some type of standout?"

So, during election season for a Council Member in one District, most of the debate is about the performance delivered by Council Members for other Districts? This new learning amazes me!

Seriously, I do not grade on a curve, especially in team efforts like legislation, where one underperforming member can cause the entire team to fail.

"So why the rabid response from you to CM Sawant?"

Quoting statistics to show she is likely correct: "rabid response." Calling her critics fascists, violent insurrectionists, Proud Boys, and nut jobs: totally rational, deeply respectful, valuable civic dialog. Got it.


Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.