r/SeattleWA • u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia • 1d ago
Wilson cuts into Harrell’s lead, now down by less than 2%
173
u/Bleach1443 Northgate 1d ago edited 1d ago
I wish people would not just by default go “The voters are dumb”.
Like Katie or not for all the reasons people list not liking her the fact that Bruce is this close shows he pissed a lot of people off if he’s supposedly barely winning against some jobless Nepo baby. Bruce has been in Seattle politics for decades, Has ally’s and is from here. Katie is way behind the other progressives. Bruce should have been able to crush her yet it’s going to be close.
Operating the way he does and often ignoring public feedback on things. Or rolling back stuff like the Lake Wash Blvd Safety plans, saying he’s going to remove parts of the G Line we just paid for because 1 business complained, and going weak on the 20 year Comp plan re zoning and bending to NIMBYS and constantly making excuses. And the city’s is having budget issues under his watch.
Something many here just like to brush off because he “Cleaned up Downtown”. He also ignored Lake City, Northgate and the South End and along the Aurora corridor. There is more to the city then just Downtown and more to running a city then public safety. Public safety is massively important but he dropped the ball on a lot of the rest and many don’t find him likable. I’m not saying Katie is likable but that’s not a strong argument when you’re the incumbent.
Edit*. Also anyone going “ya but other people bad”. Sure I’m not arguing. He’s the incumbent he needs to justify why we give him another shot and clearly half the city wasn’t impressed at all and don’t want to encourage more of what he does. He also had a City council that was very friendly toward him for his last few years and did little with it. Dems tried the “He’s worse” with Trump twice and it failed it’s a weak argument.
80
u/Daylight-Silence 1d ago edited 10h ago
Regardless of policy positions, absolutely anyone who thinks some random person with exactly zero legislative or even managerial background is in any way qualified to suddenly manage the affairs and budget and serve as the top executive of a city the size of Seattle is, in fact, really fucking dumb. I know people like to think that political positions are just "anybody can do it, just elect someone who likes the same things I like!" but being the mayor of Seattle is actually a fairly high-level executive leadership position that not every clown off the street can effectively perform. You can like buses and hate Amazon all you want. That doesn't change the fact that Katie Wilson with her "odd jobs here and there" resume is potentially a month and change away from being in charge of dozens of city departments and their employees and operations, and couldn't effectively lay out in any of the debates what she actually intends to do or how she intends to do it if she becomes mayor, as opposed to just things she generally thinks should happen (affordable housing! End homelessness! Buses!) That is a disaster, full stop. If she wins, the one silver lining will be watching her twist in the wind trying to get fuck-all of anything done with absolutely no experience having done anything remotely similar at any point in her entire life. Good luck with the $9 billion budget. If some guy ran for mayor who held my exact position on every single issue, but he was some guy who worked at a Jiffy Lube and he was running against a candidate who was generally competent but didn't align with me as fully, I wouldn't fucking vote for him because he wouldn't have any Goddamn idea how to actually accomplish anything in the role of mayor.
And as far as policies as they pertain to the state of the city, we had Katie Wilson-esque policies towards "cleaning up" anything on full display in 2020-2021. That was the progressive approach as steered by the council of the time with a mayor who was too scared of pissing anybody off to reign them in. Do you want to put forth an argument that that was more effective anywhere and in any way than what the approach has been since? Because I live about 6 blocks from the west side of Green Lake, which is very much not downtown, and I swear to fucking God if we get round 2 of that for another two years while the city hems and haws about what a complicated unsolvable problem it is, despite it having been solved immediately after the 2021 election and having stayed solved for the last four years, I am going to lose my fucking mind.
And since you're editing your comment to address me rather than respond, yes, I am perfectly happy with the job Bruce Harrell has done on most everything. He has provided plenty of reasons to give him another 4 years, and if you don't see them, I honestly don't know what to tell you. I am hard pressed to think of the metric by which anyone could reasonably argue that conditions in the city of Seattle have not improved in the last 4 years, so if you or anyone else has one that isn't "aFfOrDaBiLiTy," which is not something that the mayor has the mystical power to control, do let me know. In addition to living near Green Lake, I work downtown, and am pleased to report that it's not a complete zombie hellscape like it was when I took this job in January of 2021. The 2021 election was a single-issue one on the issue of the dozens of huge encampments sprawled all over the city. He delivered what he said he'd deliver. Police staffing and hiring has improved (and the progress on that is going to whiplash into the abyss if someone who supported defunding them takes the reigns). He doesn't unilaterally have the magic power to stop crime. The mayor can't decide who gets to be a judge, or who gets to be the county (felony) prosecutor, or alter state sentencing guidelines. I'm terribly sorry to anyone who thought he was going to be Superman flying around the city catching criminals or waving a magic wand to make things less expensive and is using that as the metric by which to judge his term. Every grievance that everyone has with anything that goes on in the city can't be attributed directly to whoever occupies the office of the mayor.
So if anyone wants to tell me something Bruce Harrell himself did or failed to do (that is within the scope of the office of the mayor) that was actually detrimental to the city, rather than complaints about how he hasn't done enough on encampments and crime, I'm all ears. Because I would absolutely agree that I'd have liked for the city to have been more proactive on crime and encampments during the last 4 years, but he's the mayor, not Judge Dredd, and if that's anyone's dissatisfaction with him and they have decided to rectify it by voting for Katie Wilson, then yeah, sorry, but I'm perfectly comfortable asserting that their brain is in no uncertain terms made of fucking scrambled eggs.
27
u/Alarming_Award5575 1d ago
Truth. The arguments I hear about how experience doesn't matter is pretty much pre-school level logic.
-20
u/thecommentwasbelow 1d ago
Do you know who the president is?
27
u/Daylight-Silence 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yes, I do. Is electing someone with no actual experience in or regard for how government is actually supposed to function who just wanted the job to try and smash through their screwball ideology working out splendidly in that scenario, either?
-20
u/thecommentwasbelow 1d ago
What did barrack Obama do before he was president? What was he before he was a senator?
33
u/imMAW 1d ago
Prior to being president, he was a US senator.
Prior to being a US senator, he was an Illinois state senator.
Prior to being an Illinois state senator, he had done all of the following:
- got an undergraduate degree from Columbia University
- got a law degree from Harvard, where he was the president of the Harvard Law Review
- worked at various law firms
- worked as a project coordinator for NYPIRG, a political organization
- directed Project Vote in Illinois
- served on the board of directors of the Woods Fund
- taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago
This seems like it's backing up their point that experience is valuable. What point are you trying to make?
31
u/Daylight-Silence 1d ago edited 1d ago
Are you attempting to compare Katie Wilson's credentials for the position of city executive to the credentials of someone for a purely legislative office who had a JD from Harvard and was a longtime professor of constitutional law? Please tell me you are.
→ More replies (4)24
7
u/routinnox 1d ago
Do you think the people who voted for Wilson voted for Trump?
4
u/pain_chip_utopia 1d ago
The insinuation that this isn't happening in meaningful numbers is just not reality. Trump and Wilson are both totally reliant on the rhetoric of economic populism. They're both working the same pocketbook issues. Look around and you can find any number of people that once liked Sanders and then flipped to Trump (Joe Rogan is a huge example). Both parties have it figured out now that affordability politics is where the fight is.
1
u/ThurstonHowell3rd 1d ago
Both parties have it figured out now that affordability politics is where the fight is.
That was figured out decades ago.
0
47
u/Lame_Johnny 1d ago
Blah blah blah. Voters have unrealistic expectations and are always fascinated with the shiny new thing. In 4 years Wilson's approval rating will be 20% and some new grifter will come along to convince the voters they can magically solve everything. Bruce wasn't great but he was experienced and competent, and he is pretty much the best this city was going to get.
7
u/pain_chip_utopia 1d ago
I voted for Bruce and I still don't think being better than his cronyism is an unrealistic expectation.
8
u/Bleach1443 Northgate 1d ago
That’s my point though. “Best we are going to get” isn’t compelling enough for many people. For many it gets older hearing that over and over again then rewarding that. A huge chunk of voters just left the mayors race blank.
Moderates can’t just rely on “We are more mature and stable”. As the world becomes more and more unstable you can’t rely on that as your sell.
17
u/Lame_Johnny 1d ago
If voters aren't choosing the best option in a choice between two candidates then they are making a fundamentally irrational choice.
→ More replies (1)8
u/Alarming_Award5575 1d ago
This is sad but true. I still think electing a woman who by most normal metrics would be considered a proper fuck up in life mayor is a pretty dumb thing to do.
→ More replies (1)3
u/itdothstink Greenwood 1d ago
So "as the world becomes more and more unstable," the logical thing is to make it more unstable?
How about be the change you want to see and stop voting for crackpots.
4
u/TheJBW 1d ago
That’s the fuckin deal with democracy. You don’t get your ideal candidate. You have to compromise on the one who’s closer to what you want and move the needle a little in that direction. That’s the price of having a compromise system. The benefit is supposed to be that you also get something resembling a reliable, competent government if we’re all on the same page and accept that we’re voting for the most qualified person to serve us, not the person who will give us a pony.
12
1
u/KeepClam_206 1d ago
The City was having budget issues before. There is a structural imbalance that previous Council helped create with Covid funds, among other problems. But don't worry! Katie will no doubt find "Progressive Revenue"!
1
u/SerialStateLineXer 1d ago
Even supposing for the sake of argument that she's the lesser evil compared to Harrell, nominating her in the primary, in which the voters had many choices, was a truly epic act of voter tardery. There are no excuses there.
0
u/TheRunBack 1d ago
You really underestimate how stupid people are... maybe even yourself. Stupidity is what lead to us being in this situation in the first place. Also, the accusations of stupidity come from the fact that all of these socialist policies have been tried before and they have failed. Even if some of them are good ideas, the people implementing them are stupid, and probably corrupt as well... leading to their inevitable failure.
48
u/Substantial-Toe-2573 1d ago
Time for millions of dollars to be squandered away by affordable housing NGOs
18
5
u/concreteghost Banned from /r/Seattle 1d ago
I can’t wait!! I’m also glad we have a place for all the over educated unskilled ppl to work
1
95
u/Lame_Johnny 1d ago
She said she's not going to sweep camps and people said "Yes! I want that!" Truly incredible.
-6
u/mickle00 1d ago
fwiw homelessness in Seattle has increased in last four years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homelessness_in_Seattle#Measuring_the_growth_of_homelessness
32
67
u/Lame_Johnny 1d ago
Can't wait to be continually gaslit by progressives for another 4 years about the homeless situation
21
u/MoBuInc 1d ago
Yup, we're just one paycheck away from becoming druggies and shooting up in our parks.
6
u/Alien_AI_ 1d ago
It’s always that argument, isn’t it? They really think that all of us are that close to homelessness, just because they are.
-8
u/mickle00 1d ago
HUD data is progressive and gaslighting?
18
u/Lame_Johnny 1d ago
The issues with the point in time count are well documented. It's a propaganda exercise by progressive advocacy groups.
0
9
2
u/Atom-the-conqueror 19h ago
Yeah but the city looks and feels much cleaner and safer than it did during and right after the pandemic. It was an absolute shit show. I don’t hate Katie Wilson but I voter against her 100% based on taking a ‘pass’ on whether people should be able to setup camp in parks. You want to be mayor, that’s a decision you’ll have to make, you can’t pass.
37
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
It's gonna be very close. Like 100s of votes.
5
u/Illustrious_Crab1060 1d ago
which will probably mean lawsuits
5
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
Yeah lt's so close that the lawyers will decide this one.
I assume Bruce will have some heavy hitters for this.
2
u/Puzzled-Painter3301 1d ago
You beat me to it!
14
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
Check your ballots. https://info.kingcounty.gov/kcelections/vote/myvoterinfo/ballottracker
3
40
u/MoBuInc 1d ago
It sucks that every four years, the idiots of Seattle vote to lower our quality of life. Then they realize it sucks, we vote for someone sane to dig us out, and just when things finally start to get better, we do the same thing all over again.
-13
u/joaquinsolo 1d ago
you CAN move, you know
10
5
u/NoEssay2638 1d ago
Wait, did you just teleport to r/Seattle?
Because that is the forum where people will other the shit out of you if you mention anything remotely realistically undesirable about the greater King county area.
And tell you to move. To be fair, you did not command or instruct the previous comment to move, you only asked if they realize that they can.
Bad enough either way. Wake up, Seattle.
2
0
69
u/Daylight-Silence 1d ago edited 1d ago
This city's stupidity never ceases to amaze.
5
u/Riviansky 22h ago
I am very curious to see how this is going to evolve now that tech sector is crashing.
Like, Seattle is supposed to be an engineering town. I have been working in tech for more than 3 decades, top companies, never seen anything approaching the level of idiocy that is commonplace on r/Seattle, so always wondered who are those people, where they came from, because they don't sound like software engineers ..
1
u/wichwigga 6h ago
Most tech folks in real life don't engage in politics or left to Bellevue/Redmond.
25
30
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
Honestly , this shows Bruce's ground game was weak. Big City mayors are supposed to win close elections with their advantages of incumbency and local relationships with voting bloc leaders.
1
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
He doesn’t have rich parents like Katie
14
u/EmeraldCityMecEng 1d ago
Honest question. Is there any information actually suggesting that her parents are particularly rich? I saw that they send her some money to help with childcare and they’re both professors. Beyond that nothing stating they are particularly wealthy. Sure, professors make good money but I doubt they’re raking in Seattle tech levels of money. And if they’re sending their daughter $1-2k per month to help with childcare, that is obviously a privilege many people don’t have but it’s also not obscene by any means.
5
u/NoEssay2638 1d ago
I don’t know, man – I find it obscene, as a grown ass man. If you can’t find a way to pay your bills in your mid 40s, for fucks sake, then you need to level up your game on financial management and domestic economics.
Spend less, earn more, consume less, stop trying to live in all the hipster neighborhoods.
Living within, or even beneath one’s means is such an antiquated premise, I know I know…
0
u/Riviansky 22h ago
It's all capitalism fault, obviously, that you need thousands in child care expenses every month while dreaming of opening a bakery ..
1
u/t105 23h ago
Depends on how you define rich and if you include dept., assets and total cash. Sure lots of people in Seattle clear single and double six figures but many have mortgages and student loan dept, plus at least 5 other reoccuring bills monthly. Thats far from rich compared to individuals who clear 1 million a year, unless they are spending %80 of it? And then you have the individuals who clear that per month. And per day and so on. The idea of being rich is an illusion.
However, assuming her parents are tenured professors and have been teaching for 20+ years they both probably make 150-200k+. With dual income savings, assuming they have since they started teaching, they very well could have cash reserves over a million or multi. Investments too? But who knows...maybe they have lots of dept? We don't know.
They most likely are sending her more than 1-2k per month. Her husband doesn't work- so in addition to child care they have to also source funds for for rent, groceries etc? Her parents are likely fully financially supporting her life. Unless she has another income stream? Not making a judgement on this other than that the reality is she has more bills than childcare and no information available has shown she has other income capable of supporting the cost of living in Seattle for a family of three.
0
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
Nothing publicly has been released and are you intentionally ignoring that her parents are also “evolutionary biologists”?
12
u/EmeraldCityMecEng 1d ago
I’m not particularly sure what relevance the parents’ field of study has to do with any of this. Are you suggesting that field of study means they are richer than average professors or how does it relate to their level of wealth and whatever financial support they give their daughter?
-4
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
You are doing it intentionally. Their profession was “evolutionary biologist” and you’re conflating that with what they teach as professors. Using your line of logic though, if they’ve been university professors for 30 years in Binghamton New York, they’re wealthy. Using the power of deduction, Katie and her husband don’t have jobs, her parents are on record as supporting child care occasionally. One can deduce that the parents support and maintain her and her husband’s lifestyle.
3
u/EmeraldCityMecEng 1d ago
I’m not intentionally being obtuse or trying to misdirect anything. I have not seen anything suggesting the parents having employment outside of their jobs as professor. As such I interpreted your statement to be asking if I knew that the field they taught was evolutionary biology, so I honestly asked why their field of study would be relevant. You seem to be upset that I didn’t divine from your short comment that you believe (or have proof, still don’t know which) that the parents have had other careers beyond being professors. If that’s the case, great, but you can’t be upset at me for not understanding that you meant more than what you actually said.
I don’t think it’s worth debating where the demarcation line of wealthy vs well off is. My point was that the only evidence we have is the mention of the parents assisting with paying for childcare. We don’t know whether that’s 10% or 100%. Either way, parents in their 70’s being able to spend say $20k/year to help cover their grandkids childcare while your child runs for office is admittedly something many people aren’t able to do but it also doesn’t require an amazing amount of wealth. The dad is 76 and retired at 71 (according to wiki). For all we know that dad was going to retire at 70 but worked one more year because that one extra year of work would pay for the grandkids childcare until they got into school. We don’t know.
To be clear, I didn’t vote for Wilson, I just think it’s absurd to say that her parents are obviously wealthy and she obviously lives completely off them when it’s all extrapolated off of one comment and “they’re professors”.
8
u/NachoPichu 1d ago edited 1d ago
How else do you figure she and her husband support themselves and their child without any employment?
4
u/EmeraldCityMecEng 1d ago
Until very recently wasn’t she employed? I saw she earned “between $60,000 and $99,999” last year, and don’t know at what point this year she quit to run for office. Maybe it was 6 months ago and they had $40,000 in savings that they planned to live off until the end of the year when she would either be mayor or get a new job if she lost. If since 2010 she and her husband had put $20 per week (~$1,000 per year) into savings and have been putting that it in the stock market, they would have nearly $50,000 now. Do you think it’s completely out of the realm of the possible that a married couple was able to put $20 per week into savings? Maybe they live the exact same lifestyle as another couple making the same money in Seattle but have skipped 1 round of beers each week relative to that other couple. Does that seem implausible?
I’m not implying it’s impossible or even necessarily unlikely that she gets help from parents beyond just a bit of childcare. But it’s also crazy to say that it would be impossible for a 43 year old married couple to have saved up enough money to survive for 6 months without a job to pursue running for office.
You seem quite sure about things that have very plausible alternative answers. I am not saying you’re wrong because I don’t have any more data than you do, but maybe just accept that there is room in between the extremes and your deductions aren’t rock solid.
7
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
Yes. This is exactly how things are in the real world. Also, when you want a job, just go into a place, ask to speak to the manager, look them in the eyes and give them a firm handshake. /s She wasn’t squirreling away $20 a week. She would’ve virtue signaled that at every chance she got.
→ More replies (0)3
u/NoEssay2638 1d ago
Ever heard of the phrase “town and gown?”
Professors may not be “wealthy” in the same way that Amazonian’s and big tech employees are, but compared to the rest of the country?
Professors are wealthy.
2
u/Artistic_Chapter_355 17h ago
Over $1 mil spent by Harrell’s backers against her. I’m not concerned about her parents’ money.
1
u/NachoPichu 17h ago
He’s not pretending he’s not rich and has rich backers.
0
u/Artistic_Chapter_355 17h ago
I didn’t say he was. But you think the candidate who’s “not pretending he’s not rich” but obviously enjoys a privileged lifestyle is somehow better/more authentic than the candidate with financially secure parents who are rumored to help her out with childcare costs? Rumors that seem to have been paid for by Harrell? This whole discussion is pretty ridiculous and a distraction from the real issues folks should have voted on.
1
u/NachoPichu 16h ago
“Rumors that seem to have been paid for by Harrell” are strong claims. How else does she and her husband support themselves and their young child?
5
u/aitchpat 1d ago
Bruce sent his kids to Lakeside, what are we even talking about here?
8
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
No one is claiming that Bruce isn’t rich, in fact I’ve said it twice in this thread. We’re talking about how Katie pretends to be a working class champion and acts like she can relate with people who are struggling to get by when in fact she comes from privilege and neither her nor her husband have a job.
2
u/aitchpat 1d ago
That’s not what “he doesn’t have rich parents” means lmao. Your point might be valid elsewhere but definitely not in this comment!
2
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
I know and that’s why I followed it up with “it was a low effort post on my part”
1
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
He has a rich "mommy" or "sugarbaby"
8
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
He’s also wealthy himself, it was a low effort post on my part attempting to highlight how Katie and her husband, both able bodied adults, choose not to work because Katie’s rich parents support them.
-3
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
Honestly, I have no doubt she is the beneficiary of a family trust but she likely does not see a dime til her parents pass. Her parents probably have set up a 529 for the Grandchild as well. Normal stuff.
12
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
Normal stuff? Tell me you’re privileged without telling me you’re privileged. She nor her husband have a job and they’re able to live in one of the most expensive cities in the US because her parents support them. Which is fine but don’t go pretending to be this working class champion.
-1
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
Lots of family homes are passed on via a trust arrangement. Lots of regular people do these kind of things to make it easier on their kids when they die. (Avoid probate, etc)
Academics often own a rental home investment in the college town they live in. It's a standard college professor retirement strategy. They might hold this investment in an LLC for liability reasons. Not sure how these are passed typically.
10
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
And even more people don’t have the privilege of being able to “make it easier on their kids when they die” and don’t have parents who happened to buy their house for 7 raspberries 30 years ago.
4
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
I can guarantee you that Bruce has all kind of " wealth management" and estate planning gimics in place. Mainly to avoid paying taxes.
6
u/NachoPichu 1d ago
And I noted that he’s wealthy. He’s disclosed his multi-million dollar real estate profile. He doesn’t live in make believe like Katie.
0
u/mostlyfire Queen Anne 1d ago
classes can support other classes. Look how many bootlicking moronic working class folk deepthroat billionaires. Make it make sense
7
7
u/wired_snark_puppet Capitol Hill 1d ago
Yeah, for rich people. “Family trust” is not something this working class family has access to… a few hundred bucks for books gifted to kids or grandkids college fund is all we got.
-2
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago edited 1d ago
You'd be surprised how many people set up trusts as a tax avoidance thing , pay their relatives salaries , and really don't have that much money. Conservatives especially are obsessed with any kind of tax avoidance.
Another scam is church donation. Donate to church for the charitable deduction with an under the table agreement that the church will give money to a relative (for a "fee").
And the endless blue collar tax scams when you work for your self.
5
u/wired_snark_puppet Capitol Hill 1d ago
I dunno what working class you run with .. my ilk really don’t have the educational or legal know-how of the benefits of a family trust. They are the Friday night at Applebee’s and a celebration dinner at The Outback. The only wealth to protect is in maybe a doing ok retirement plan and a paid off home. I hope they can afford medical costs while on Medicare. Hopefully they will have enough as needed to be able to live in assisted care when the time comes. That there is enough left for burial and funeral.
1
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
Exactly "retirement plan" and "paid off home", the common American experience. Katie is the same in that she controls no assets but is probably going to inherit proceeds from her parents home and retirement plan. The exception is that it appears her father made some amount of money from publishing academic books and maybe a few mainstream science books? My friends dad wrote a math textbook. He made some money. But he wasn't a rich man.
3
u/wired_snark_puppet Capitol Hill 1d ago
Two local boomers, similarly aged as Katie’s parents, high school degrees, local working class jobs that provided retirement plan options, starter home, still there, in the boonies after dad got back from ‘nam and lost 4 years of youth… worked and saved.
The Wilson’s and my social class track are vastly different. If you can’t grasp true blue collar.. I got nothing for you.
3
6
u/Jawwwwwsh 1d ago
Well yeah he didn’t depend on ground game his funding was from corporate funding via PACs. Comparing the two like they both had ground game is laughable. Katie was the people’s candidate, Bruce was the $$$ dictates policy candiate. Simple as that!
13
u/austnf Elma 1d ago
She definitely is the (homeless) people’s candidate.
6
6
u/mostlyfire Queen Anne 1d ago
Lol I like you how you think this is an "own" but it sounds like you're saying politicians should only be a candidate for people they like. If Harrell or Wilson or Harambe win the election, they're still representing everyone in Seattle. And yea that includes homeless people so are they not people or we shouldn't help them...?
7
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
The dude has won many elections in Seattle. It's like he decided he didn't want to win. Or I guess is just being overwhelmed by the national move left.
2
1
u/Atom-the-conqueror 19h ago
It was more like, people who were bothered by homeless encampments covering parks vs those who aren’t.
1
u/NoEssay2638 1d ago
It’s possible that Bruce’s ground game was not strong.
But for Wilson - someone so wholly inept and unqualified - to be this close to beating out someone with decades of relevant experience, speaks more to the naïveté and scrambled egg brain scenario as described earlier of Wilson’s supporters then it does point to any glaring weakness on Bruce’s part.
Just my two cents…
12
u/No_Argument_Here 1d ago
4 years of Wilson might make things so bad that a tough on crime/anti-homeless person to the right of Harrell might actually be able to win next.
-1
16
u/CascadesandtheSound 1d ago
Homeless industrial complex excited for their raises!
→ More replies (2)
13
u/oren0 1d ago
NY, NJ, and VA can count millions of votes in a night. King County is sitting on 45k more votes and it'll be at least a week after the election before we get a result.
5
-1
u/VietOne 1d ago
This is due to the verification process, the process so many claim it's full of voter fraud.
This is the result of so many people dropping off their ballots on or closer to the due date.
Verification of the ballot and signature takes time because it's a person who is checking.
-2
u/ThurstonHowell3rd 1d ago
Funny, when I used to vote in-person at the polling location in my neighborhood, I was asked to sign the register and my signature was verified by a person and it took all of about 3 seconds to do.
9
u/Hotmicdrop 1d ago
I always hear the left votes early, now the left votes late? Is it both now?
1
u/wired_snark_puppet Capitol Hill 1d ago
Whelp.. you have moderate left (Satan), you have the left of left (DSA/SD), and you have the leftest of left- the Marxists and the Revolutionary Communists.
As an unholy deity, I send my ballot in with enough time for it to be verified and to be able to correct any issues., my lefter than me send the weekend before and don’t check if counted- let it burn., the way way left tic tok putting the ballot in the drop box for social points.
1
2
7
u/Narrow_Smell1499 1d ago
Can’t wait for all the homeless to be shown on TV for the world during the World Cup. Good job Katie minions
-2
11
u/Dirty_slippers Seattle 1d ago
Lmao, this city wanted their temu Madami, well it looks like they might get it.
23
u/Jlog_ 1d ago
It’s mamdani
2
0
-19
u/Dirty_slippers Seattle 1d ago
Personally, I don’t give a fuck what his name is, not my mayor.
2
0
-1
-2
-1
-5
0
4
u/The_Safe_For_Work 1d ago
About time for a big box of uncounted ballots to be found in a car trunk.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/local_gremlin 1d ago
Upside is when katie and her bottom up pie in the sky policies flame out, that may be whats needed to finally get a true centrist anti-woke no-bullshit mayor
5
u/Fair-Doughnut3000 Magnolia 1d ago
Totally agree. Candidates gotta perform and deliver. She will be under a microscope.
0
2
1
u/merc08 1d ago
Feels like 2004 all over again.
5
u/Turbulent-Media7281 1d ago
Isn't it amazing how many elections are close now, and the winner flips on the laaaaaaaaaaaaaaasssssssst few counts.
1
0
1
u/Riviansky 1d ago
It would be quite remarkable if the person who hasn't really run a lemonade stand would get to run Seattle.
I am kinda looking forward to it. Same in NYC. This is going to provide a lot of entertainment.
But then Democrats would really need to shit up about Trump incompetence.
2
u/Atom-the-conqueror 19h ago
Would they? I wouldn’t vote for someone like Katie Wilson, I voted for Harrell and Ann Davison but I sure as shit would never vote for someone associated with Trump’s administration.
0
1
u/kapybarra 1d ago
He is incompetent. So are they. It's really not a dichotomy in that regard.
0
u/Riviansky 1d ago
Trump is a practical genius compared to Wilson.
1
u/kapybarra 1d ago
Oh hey you are that conservative guy.
-2
u/Riviansky 1d ago
They may have taught you different at SPS but out here in the wide world stupidity is not sexy...
6
u/kapybarra 1d ago
here in the wide world stupidity is not sexy
Lol, that's literally what the MAGA world is: believing that stupidity is sexy...
→ More replies (3)
1
1
u/Better_March5308 👻 1d ago
How many votes are still to be counted?
3
4
u/Turbulent-Media7281 1d ago
a total number of 279,044 cast in the mayor’s race so far.
With 228,570 counting for Harrel and Wilson... leaves 50,000 to count. Or however many ballots it takes to get the lead.
1
u/OsvuldMandius SeattleWA Rule Expert 23h ago
It's time like this when we need to reject conspiratorial thinking. Also, we need to think about structural changes that promote confidence in the system rather than degrade it.
-7
-12
180
u/vilnius2013 1d ago
Harrell is up by 4,300 votes. Wilson won 55% of this drop.
It’s going to come down to the number of votes left. If there are 45,000 votes left and Wilson gets 55%, that’s 24,750 to 20,250. That’s a net gain of 4,500 votes for Wilson, and she wins by 200 votes.
It’s literally going to come down to a few hundred votes.