With today’s hectic, fast-paced lifestyles, who has time to read thoughtful, thoroughly researched endorsements like those provided by Hugeasscity’s sugar daddy PubliCola? After all, there are critically important texts to answer, hundreds of scintillating comments on blockbuster deep-bore tunnel blog posts to contemplate, land use committee meetings to attend, etc., etc.
Thankfully, Hugeasscity has a simple, time-saving solution for those of you who want to do the right thing for people and the planet, but have the attention span of a fruit fly (namely, an estimated 98.2% of the people who are reading this post, as well as its author).
Here it is: Don’t vote for anyone or anything endorsed by the Seattle Times.
Okay, enough with the snarkiness. Truthfully, though, it’s not just snark. While obviously there will be exceptions to such a simpleminded rule, in my view the Seattle Times editorial board is so oblivious to the most pressing sustainability challenges facing Seattle and the region that if we ended up with none of the Times‘ picks it would probably be about as good an election outcome as we could realistically hope for.
Three examples:
The Times endorses I-1053 , a Tim Eyman initiative that would reinstate the two-thirds supermajority requirement for the legislature to pass a tax increase. In contrast, here’s what Sightline founder Alan Durning had to say about it:
Should one third of just one house be able to veto the elimination of tax loopholes that shower public resources on coal plants, bull semen, laser interferometer gravitational wave observatories and dozens of other businesses and commercial activities? Should one third of either house be able to prevent collection of the revenue needed to fulfill the state’s constitutionally mandated “paramount duty” to fund your community’s schools?
Green urbanism advocacy groups such as Futurewise and Transportation Choices Coalition are strongly backing Joe Fitzgibbon for the vacated 34th District seat. The Times writes,
Heavey’s most qualified challenger, Joe Fitzgibbon, a Democrat, is well versed on the issues but seems too much of a hard-left candidate to match the critical mission of the moment.
“Seems”? Glad they’re so sure about that. “Hard-left”—you know, transit and stuff like that.
In their half-hearted endorsement of the freeway-loving Chair of the the House Transportation Committee Judy Clibborn for District 41, the Times writes,
Outside of transportation, Clibborn’s record is less distinguished.
Yowza. Less distinguished than trying to “protect” I-90 from light rail? It’s unfortunate that her challengers consist of a “fiscally responsible” Republican and a Constitution-thumping Independent. But either might be worth the sacrifice to get Clibborn off the Transportation Committee.
Tweet
Although it's painful to watch the Times yeild it's one-paper-town power, it'll be interesting to see how long that power will last in our post-paper electronic world.
Both Dan Bertolet and I endorse Joe Fitzgibbon, far and away the best qualified candidate in the 34th District House race no matter what your ideology might be.
Yes, please listen to Dan and DO NOT vote for Derek Kilmer in the 26th, Denny Heck in the 3rd or Derek Stanford in the 1st. Smart advice, Dan!
If you look at the results of local elections over the past few years and compare the Times vs. The Stranger; it's pretty clear that The Stranger's endorsements make a lot more difference than the Times.
Yeah…the blanket is kind of awful, as noted by Your momma's Guest, but overall, not terrible advice.
The fifth, they barely mention Dean Willard, and totally slob all over Glen Anderson.
I fully expect them to endorse Dino Rossi, calling for “change”, because their tax hating asses would really be well served by cutting off the earmarks that Sen. Murray brings home.
I'm just waiting to see if they really eff the kitty, and endorse Koster up in the 2nd. If that happens, I may very well shit myself. Fact.
I'm not saying that their endorsements should always be Democrats. That's not their job. But their half-hearted endorsements seem like tokenism to me. And then come General, do we really think that Stanford and Heck will keep those endorsements?
Oh, and eff you, Bertolet! I think that we have attention spans much longer than a fruit fly. We just have the tunnel vision (pun!), and can only seem to focus on one thing.
Point of clarification – while several employees and board members of Futurewise and Transportation Choices Coalition have personally endorsed Joe Fitzgibbon in the 34th, both organizations have 501(c)3 status and neither organization endorses nor expends resources on candidate races.
I felt like The Time's editorial board was very thoughtful with their questions in my interview with them. I'm not sure what they're to say about my campaign, but they were certainly more respectful than The Stranger in our group interviews.
They will ignore your campaign, as everyone else has done.
Snap!
I'm glad that they asked you nice questions, Scott. But their analysis of candidates and the issues they back are short-sighted, destructive, conservative, irresponsible, and seem to only further the interests of the few and the privileged. Thankfully, as Stacy noted above, their endorsements tend to not pan out. Probably due to the fact that the editorial board at the Times has completely lost touch with the residents of the city. If I wanted to live in Issaquah, I would move to Issaquah.
Of course, going against the Times endorsement would have meant voting for McCain-Palin in 2008. Contrary to the oh-so-precious, self-congratulatory, aging-hipster, couldn't-get-a-real-journalism-job-so-we-started-our-own-website drivel so often found here, the Times has real reporters who actually collect, synthesize and report facts. The editorial page can be odd, but it certainly isn't the fascist rag you make it out to be. Tally the candidates they've endorsed over the decade, and you'll find many more D's than R's.
The MSM-bashing is so boring.
correlation does not imply causation
What she said.
I'd rather vote for a completely honest person I disagree with than a sleazy politician that lines up directly with my ideology. Character matters a lot.
So are you suggesting that papers just tell people what they want to hear?
Whose character are you referring to, and who are you saying is sleazy? Would you care to name names?
I think the real issue here is that the Times editorial board no longer represents Seattle, but rather their own opinion, which tends to be comparatively conservative.
I also don't think it's a matter of Non-MSM v. MSM. The Times gives people a lot to gripe about, and this happens to be one of the ways to express those gripes. Hell, people regularly bitch about the Stranger, and anyone who's paying attention has seen the way commenters here treat Josh and (especially) Erica.
And the Times endorsed Bush. Eff the times. Eff them right in the A.
No, I'm saying that the editorial board has an agenda which is out of tune with the majority of the city. I'm glad that the city in general seems to favor progressive reforms, sustainability, environmentalism, blah blah blah, and sad that our one print newspaper is in favor of sprawl, irresponsibility, and NIMBYism. And whether they act more professionally in their candidate interveiws than, say, the stranger, if they still editorialize based on skewed ideas of the vision for a future Seattle, than I hope they become more obsolete than they are.
To be fair (why?), the Times only endorsed Dubya once. In 2004, they were actually one of the first (formerly) major papers to endorse John Kerry.
I'd like to know too, Jakers, because I've grown to respect your character and I'm curious. Ivan's, too.
Is it any worse that Publicola's method….If it has a 'D' then by all means endorse the hell out of them….
Editorial boards are painfully obsolete in the modern world. I mean why exactly should I care what people who publish a newspaper think? And really why should I pay to hear it?
I can get a free opinion from any random schmuck on the street or guy with a blog. Newspapers should focus on the one thing they do well, reporting local news, and forget the rest.
“I think the real issue here is that the Times editorial board no longer represents Seattle, but rather their own opinion, which tends to be comparatively conservative.”
They have gone conservative, but so have so many people outside the shrinking liberal, PubliCola base. They are closing in on us, brother.
The question then becomes…if right thinking (I mean, left thinking) is in the minority, and we support democracy (and liberal thought), do we accept that they will “Eff” us “right in the A.” because that is the majority opinion? And maybe that's not so bad, after all; as long as they leave a note? Flowers?
Or do we fight ever onward even if the Tea Party is the party of the future? When does the majority finally win? When do we give up?
I'm not saying we should…
True, but that year they also endorsed Dino Rossi, and literally over 80% of Seattle voters voted against him.
The only reason I can come up with is that paper news has to survive the…paper-on-the-doorstep thing (wrapped in plastic, hand-delivered), or the fiddy-cent thing.
They're scared, and they're turning away from the feel-good thing to the safe-bet thing. Which unfortunately is further right.
If you want to feel good these days, you'd better be prepared to pay $100/lb for fresh greens and a lefty view. And $110/lb for tofu.
And $4 for coffee. Worth it, until the Visigoths come knocking.
Or the French.
I hear something right now, so gotta go. Don't want to lose my head.
Thirty years ago, if you were undecided about a particular race, all you had to do was check the Times endorsements and vote for the other guy.
Nowadays, it's not quite so cut and dried. They tend to endorse incumbents, but if there's no incumbent, they tend to endorse the Republican, unless it's a national race, in which case all bets are off.
If they do this, are they doing this because they are totally off base, or because they are trying desparately to survive in a world of Stranger and PubliCola?
Or because I don't see one Democrat sign outside of my neighborhood?
Someone said recently that they didn't see one Rossi sign on the other side of the mountains. I didn't see one on this side, either.
And very few Dem signs. What's up?
What the f-ck is up?
If I may be so bold as to answer my own question:
A food coop used to mean lower prices.
An REI coop used to mean lower prices.
Those were for the people that wanted something useful and good, but that couldn't get them on their own. But together they could.
Now instead of lower prices at the farmer's market, it's double. Double what you would pay at a local grocery. That is some serious BS.
That goes against the whole reason for farmer's markets.
And if you don't agree, you aren't old enough to even Discus this.
Why? You're not marrying them, you're wanting them to do what you think is right. Being a liberal, I'd rather vote for a sleazy liberal than an upright fundamentalist Republican who will do what is hateful to me with a clear conscience.
I don't think we should ever give up, and I don't think that we're a shrinking minority.
I do think that the screaming, left-wing liberals are a shrinking group, and there are more pragmatic progressives coming out of this city. But that's just my opinion/observation.
(Sometimes it's frustrating that the “Like” button won't work for me while I'm at work. This is one of those instances.)
Papers haven't been 50 cents in this town in years.
I would like to beleive that's true. Whether it is or not may be clearer in the next year or two. The trend seems to be with a lot more true Progressives going Independant, here and elsewhere. Especially the ones who saw Obie for what he really was BEFORE the 2008 election, and were ostracized by those same zelots.
Besides, Teabaggers, neocons, and their enablers don'teven kiss before they 'Effin you.
This happened in part when the Greenwashing PR flacks co-opted that sentiment. Co-ops are for suckers now, unfortunately.
I'm still with Jakers.
Character matters.
Matters a lot.
No wonder you post as Ski9266503. I would, too.
To add anecdotal evidence though, last year my voting guide was a hybrid of Publicola and The Stranger. Same goes for my roomie, my boyfriend, and two other frends. The Times doesn't represent me or the Seattle that I want.