She got my vote! Good lord I hope she wins.

Uh can anyone explain what the office actually does and WHY it should be elected independently from the Mayor? Seattle is an outlier with this one. I think we’d get more accountability if this reported to the Mayor, an office that voters understand, then creating another elected official who believes they have some sort of mandate.

So by Rich's analysis two of the claims are true, one can't be verified by him and one relies on interpreting data differently than he would. These things disqualify her for office and leads Councilperson Lewis to state she doesn't understand the role of the office.

By comparison, The Strangers recommended candidate is running on a platform of abolishing the entire judicial system, not prosecuting any misdemeanor crime (including domestic violence) and spending the departments resources on social justice causes. That sounds like a lot more disqualifying and derelict in the duties of the office than anything Ann Davison has put forward. Hoping the voters agree.

That's not nothing, but I wouldn't exactly call an increase of 8.5% "skyrocketing," especially in a city whose population increased (using SPD's numbers) by 25% over that same time period."

Rich, your comment regarding population increases is stupid, even for the Stranger. Those crime statistics are express as a rate of crime per 100,000 people. Population growth is therefore properly reflected. You are clearly out of your depth here: the analysis you are trying to make requires basic math skills, which you lack.

I love the idea that somehow there are "questions about whether throwing people in jail for these felonies actually reduces their prevalence". How would incarcerating criminals for committing felonies not hamper their ability to prey on others? Would they use astral projection?

Immediately defending the crime increase with REPUBLICANS TOO sounds all too familiar, and undercuts the argument that we elect people to actually change things. I mean, whatabout the whataboutism, man

Somebody actually read a mailer? Why?

Regardless of how Rich tries to spin crime figures, everyone living in reality can see that crime has increased by a lot since Pete has been elected. One only needs to look at our skyrocketing figures in auto thefts and break ins, arguably most peoples 1st or 2nd largest asset, or pass a homeless encampment filled with peoples stolen bikes and the likes. Just the hands off policies and allowance of anything goes, even shooting up drugs in public fearlessly tells everyone Pete,'s lack of concern for law and order is misguided. Yes voices here will (mostly) parrot new "progressive values" of excuses and unending compassion for those who commit crimes but I believe that the majority of voters will vote for Ann and have a strong desire to see Seattle return to a place of safety for average tax paying citizens to be able to once again enjoy what Seattle offers without the fear of crime.

Most of the commenters seem to be ignoring the FACT that the City Attorney only handles misdemeanors, and as Rich says, Davison (why did she ditch her previous last name on which she ran her last two campaigns?) should wait until she can run against the current County Prosecutiing Attorney.

@10: Misdemeanors are crimes too.

She's a Bellevue kinda gal. I hope she wins.

People are getting tired of the feckless criminal justice in this city. If the problems don't actually get addressed, it's going to lead people who want to vote for someone more aggressive. A lot of privileged but otherwise bleeding-heart leaning people who are fed up with things might swing her way.

@2 I agree. Not only shouldn't prosecutors be elected, but neither should judges or sheriffs (happily no longer an elective position in King County). The potential for demagoguery is just too great, and the inherent insularity of the bar makes challenging a sitting judge a very dicey proposition even in egregious cases of corruption or malfeasance. All criminal justice personnel should be chosen in a manner that is at least one degree removed from direct democracy. (How best to do this is a debate for another time.)

Now to the matter at hand: It's obvious from this mailer that Davison, like Trump, doesn't care about being factually correct or fear the consequences of being called out for it. She's not offering an intelligent, nuanced center-left critique of Seattle's criminal justice reform experiment (which admittedly has had some false starts and misjudgments, as all large-scale social change efforts inevitably do). No, she's simply pandering to that segment of the electorate who want to abort the whole project and return to the days of zero-oversight, ham-fisted policing and stiff, formulaic punishments for minor offenses (both of which inevitably come down hardest on young Black men). That would be a terrible waste of a decade's imperfect but substantial progress toward authentic justice, guaranteeing that we would spend the rest of the 2020s needlessly refighting the battles of the 2010s. There may be a reasonable case to be made that Thomas-Kennedy's proposals go too far too fast (as the SECB, which endorsed her, acknowledges), but Davison clearly has no interest in doing that. If you can't vote for Thomas-Kennedy, at the very least you should vote for Holmes.

Face it, they just want us to live in Fear, because they're unpatriotic.

We are made of sterner stuff than that, here in Seattle!

Like the Pied Piper for dipshits.

She's a social conservative from Texas who switches parties at the drop of a hat, and is engaging in fearmongering demagoguery. We don't need that.