- This topic is empty.
October 11, 2009 at 10:21 pm #592645
Ok… The Seattle Times once again today covered the two mayoral candidates for Seattle. Does anybody here know anything more about these two except what I already have read over and over again. It’s just regurgitated nonsense. If this is the two best we got going for our vote, lord help us here in Seattle for the next four plus years. I thought Nickels was bad but….October 12, 2009 at 12:27 am #679538
Pitch to PLEASE come to the West Seattle Candidates’ Forum this Thursday (Oct. 15), 7 pm, Youngstown Arts Center, sponsored by the Southwest and Delridge District Councils (which in turn include reps from almost every major community group on the peninsula). It’s the only forum that is FOCUSED on WS-specific issues. Both mayoral candidates are supposed to be there, along with candidates from the council races.October 12, 2009 at 1:02 am #679539
I will admit this time has me stumped.
I ended up voting for Nickles in the primary because though we disagreed on several issues, he was not an idiot.
I have not seen anything reassuring out of these two clowns.
Pandering to WS seems to involve a light rail fantasy to cover up the insane ” surface streets” plan for 99?
Every word he says reminds me of the vulture capitalist of the 90’s who took over a promising startup, hired all their friends and looted it after off shoring, out sourcing and firing the people who built the company.
In theory they are both Democrats and can be at least trusted to not do too much damage, but they are from opposite ends of the party and from where I stand, I am finding it hard to get excited about either one.
The only thing I am sure of is that all three Seattle times reporters are really getting the hang of dumbing down a story to tabloid length while applying their own slant to it.
They really miss a republican to endorse.October 12, 2009 at 2:32 am #679540October 12, 2009 at 3:16 pm #679541
“The only thing I am sure of is that all three Seattle times reporters are really getting the hang of dumbing down a story to tabloid length while applying their own slant to it.”
yes, Ken- I wasn’t sure what the point of those articles was. they didn’t tell me anything on why either of them would/ would not be a good mayor. I thought they were more articles on how they got where they are today. hopefully, it was the beginning of more in depth coverage ? otherwise, there wasn’t anything there.October 12, 2009 at 7:50 pm #679542October 12, 2009 at 8:13 pm #679543
I will be voting for Mallahan, only because of the viaduct/tunnel issue. If McGinn wins we’ll be putting the For Sale sign out in front of the house the day the votes are tallied. I certainly hope it doesn’t come to that since we love it here, but we can not live here with McGinn’s transportation ‘solutions’. I welcome him to stay the night at my house so he can see how bad the morning commute to north of downtown is already. With how long it would take to get to work with no tunnel or viaduct, I may as well live in Snohomish- ugh. It would be the same amount of time for commuting.October 12, 2009 at 8:38 pm #679544October 12, 2009 at 8:46 pm #679545
I’m w/Ken–I voted for Nickels by default, and I’m wondering if there’s anything brewing to add him to the ballot.
I am completely stumped and do not feel trusting of either candidate.October 12, 2009 at 8:50 pm #679546October 12, 2009 at 8:55 pm #679547
If you can’t drive across or around a major city, it ain’t a major city, it’s a timesink.
Boeing gave the congestion on I-5 as one of the reasons for moving their HQ as well as moving production to other states and countries.
I am hoping McGinn as Mayor really doesn’t have the power to block the tunnel, but is it worth taking the chance?
Light rail boosters managed to kill the monorail with the help of a few politicians including the mayor and county executive.
Either way the giveaway to the downtown developers is already a done deal.October 12, 2009 at 9:01 pm #679548October 12, 2009 at 9:02 pm #679549
I, too, have decided to be a single-issue voter. If McGinn is so determined to try to derail the tunnel for a surface street, he can do so without my vote.October 12, 2009 at 9:07 pm #679550
The major thing I took away from the article is that you probably shouldn’t underestimate McGinn. So if he is intent on killing the tunnel, don’t be surprised if he succeeds.October 12, 2009 at 10:07 pm #679551
Driving isn’t a right, its a heavily subsided special interest. The funding for the tunnel is the worst type of give away. The tunnel itself might be an ok idea, if we had a choice in it.October 12, 2009 at 10:47 pm #679552
Sadly, it has come down to this one issue for me. Being able to get around quickly and efficiently is extremely important to me not only for personal reasons (sorry I don’t enjoy sitting in traffic), but because our city economy depends on it to keep commerce moving. If McGinn wants to destroy the ingress/ egress to our fair peninsula, I can guaranty I won’t be helping him get to the point where he can do so.October 12, 2009 at 10:51 pm #679553
I am not sure we can afford Mallahan… would the tunnel look so good if it came with a toll?
I wish i knew if McGinn was pandering or really does intend to derail the tunnel.
West Seattle can’t afford another failed transportation issue.October 12, 2009 at 11:07 pm #679554
I certainly hope this topic is brought up on Thursday night at the candidate meet and greet forum. I unfortunately can’t go (I don’t think the 14 month old would behave very well) or else I’d ask McGinn myself!October 13, 2009 at 12:29 am #679555
Problem with McGinn derailing the tunnel is that he would put all the traffic on surface streets and West Seattle would get the short end of the stick. On most other issues I think they agree in there really isn’t much difference between the two.
JimOctober 13, 2009 at 1:59 am #679556
I don’t know if Tracy has seen the figures, but I heard once that West Seattle (as defined by WSB roughly) accounts for 25% to about 30% of the City population. I was here in 2001, and the morning after the quake when the Viaduct was closed I stayed home because of the predictable chaos.
That morning I drove down Admiral and rescued a relative who’d been on the 56 for 1.5 hours and was stranded at Chelan. I seem to remember it basically took 3/4 of the day to commute to work 6 miles away.
Assuming we shut down the viaduct and replace it by a laughable series of two-dozen plus lights, how can we handle 100,000 car trips a day on what remains? Can we just assume all these car trips will disappear because we want them to? Do we really want to see the slow economic stragulation that results?
While the tunnel is not ideal (No Seneca exit, for instance), it is a better solution for our isolated but populous part of the City than nothing but arm waving and thinking good thoughts. While I may be a “Single-issue” voter, no single issue would affect me more.October 13, 2009 at 3:47 am #679557
Sorry Vincent, I need my Van for work. Let us know who you’re voting for. Wish I had a good paying job like yours that lets you ride whatever.October 13, 2009 at 6:26 am #679558
JayDee – it’s at least 20 percent, per figures cited by neighborhood leaders. We’re waiting for the 2010 census to really crunch numbers but the ones we’ve crunched from the city’s boundaries for the Southwest plus Delridge Districts equal somewhere between 60,000 and 80,000 people.October 13, 2009 at 1:04 pm #679559
If McGinn becomes mayor, we should all be healthier and in better shape because it will take us less time to walk downtown than drive.
He was recently at a Cascade Business Association Forum and the good news is that most of the people there don’t live in WS. Many of the people were aghast at his comments and made the decision right there that they would not be voting for him. He basically said, if we make the roads unbearable, everyone will have to find alternate transportation and go to buses, etc.
Well, we’ve all had the additional density in WS shoved down our throats. Even since the earthquake in 2001 I would guess our density has increased. The question is are we willing to take a chance on McGinn? I think not, but unfortunately, we are going to get what we ask for and by voting out Nickels we got rid of the devil we knew.
I lived through one lane going each way in the late 70’s and 80’s when the bridge was hit and the traffic was still better then than it is now.October 13, 2009 at 5:19 pm #679560
Magpie, I’m with you. Seems like we have a history in this city of cutting our noses off to spite our faces. The choice this time, to me, is frightening.
I remember that old low bridge, too.One lane, each direction, and people were patient, for the most part. Not gonna be that way this time, for sure.October 13, 2009 at 6:24 pm #679561
Also it is time to remind voters that this is the consequence of not paying attention back when the top two primary needed killing.
Many people made the mistake in the last primary election of voting for the recognizable tv name candidate who had the words “non partisan” printed beside their name. They actually thought “non partisan would be a good thing” (yes I have talked to these people…)
It never occurred to them that when the low info voters chose to make the king county executive race “non partisan” the were really opening the door for republicans to lie or keep silent about their actual views and history as a way of using fairly well known crowd behavioral mechanisms to gain elected office.
The people I talked to were horrified to learn their vote went to a former director of the creationist discovery institute.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.