The problem is the realistic cost of any large transit option for Seattle and the fact voters can not seem to see it as an investment in Seattle vs. just a frivolous expense. Until we can swallow that reality we will only hear lots of great dreams with no actual action being taken.

I think Ms. Velazquez could have better phrased this, "Not rapid transit, bus rapid transit."

Both are good ideas—-buses run more smoothly when they have dedicated lanes, and cottage housing is a good way to add density to single-family neighborhoods—but I wish Velazquez was a little more unabashedly pro-density and pro-rapid transit; cottages and buses are interim solutions, not the solutions, to our housing and transit problems.

Hmm... Apparently, Velazquez has put her finger to the wind and her toe in the water and come away figuring it's the lesser Seattle NIMBY's who need to be feared. I think this is a great opportunity for the likes of Friends of Seattle to sharpen their teeth and make the unmistakable impression that it's the pro-density activists who need to be feared just as much.

P.S. I'm not against bus rapid transit in all cases, but let's face it, the very reason it gets suggested politically in contexts like this is to ensure that it makes so little impact that it ends up being anything but rapid.

That’s what Bruce Harrell does. He gets things done. is awesome. I vote for that.

Wouldn't that have cost us the countless hours of enjoyment brought to us by Charlie Chong?

Growing up in Seattle means you arent qualified to run Seattle. You have no real world experience.

Add a route up Jackson and Denny along with a couple more north/south routes and maybe we can start being a serious city.

Same goes for the present generation of community planners.

Also, the term "public-private partnership" (or "P3", if you prefer) generally implies a combination of public ownership and control with private management. NOT a subsidy for private owners. I'll give you a pass, though, given the trauma caused by the closing of your favorite establishments. Waaah!

Also, the term "public-private partnership" (or "P3", if you prefer) generally implies a combination of public ownership and control with private management. NOT a subsidy for private owners. I'll give you a pass, though, given the trauma caused by the closing of your favorite establishments. Waaah!

But ... at least she would stand up for people. And not be just another Yes vote.

That said, we need to get out of this "My Transit Solution Only!" "No, Mine!" mentality - the time has come to ...

BUILD THEM ALL!

We literally need - not want, NEED - to DOUBLE LOCAL TRANSIT. ALL of it. Not just Monorail (Al Runte's MagLev demo sounded intriguing). Not just BRT (already exists South of the Bus Tunnel). Not just Light Rail. Not just standard (hybrid bio-diesel or electric) bus service.

EVERYTHING.

Time to wake up and smell the reality, folks. Global warming is NOW. As is Peak Oil (actually, that's 2015, but close enough)

oh - and another thing - I noticed that Jean Godden's race just got a lot more interesting ... a number of people changed their minds about her seat at that forum. Who was that young woman running against her? All I can say is I was very surprised by the mood there.

"I grew up in Seattle" mean "I don't constantly get my panties in a bunch about whether or not we're 'world-class'" and "I don't have penis envy when I look at NYC."

I didn't grow up in Seattle, so I can't help but notice that an inordinate number of people who did like to talk about skyscrapers as phallic symbols. I guess if it weren't for Freud, Peter Steinbrueck's political career would never have gotten off the ground (sure there's a (stupid) pun somewhere there).

Actually, if we want to do some NYC comparisons... If I were Greg Nickels looking at Michael Bloomberg, I would have a serious case of cajones envy.

Anyone can buy cojones when they are multi-billionaires like Bloomberg. Hell, Howard Marshall bought Anna Nicole Smith.

Bloomberg is an elitist piece of shit who does not deserve anybody's support or vote.

But blame the hosts of the event -- who don't have the backbone or the wits to just deny that perennial loser candidate dude a spot in the debate.

They ought to protect you, the audience, from his meaningless drivel.
Not torture you with it!

But the prudish goo-goos rule, and it sucks.

You're a saint!

But, hey, I suppose you'd rather we go back to your Bush Elite Party rule under His Royal Majesty, huh?

Runte—He's a riot. His Robin Hood routine just isn't practical, though, and frankly, I'm looking for real solutions, not fairy tale machinations.

Harrell—This guy is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Not only does he contribute to Republicans, but Bob Dole appears to be his political mentor.

Velazquez—Clearly the best candidate we've seen in a long time. Erika, you rag on Venus for only talking about buses and cottage housing, but as I recall, the question was to talk about TWO strategies for dealing with growing density issues. I think Harrell blathered on about nothing for two minutes. As far as I'm concerned, Venus is the only candidate with any real ideas and the only one who's actually done this work in the trenches.

I just looked through the Issues page on her site.

I think Lauren is the candidate to watch.