Frankly, it seems that Sawant's call for making Seattle affordable with $15/hour minimum wage and rent control much more closely aligns with what people in Seattle want to see than anything the Seattle Times calls for.

So that means Mike is guaranteed a win.

Ha And pretty much now I know 2 city council members I am voting for.

In Shen's op/ed from a few months ago he also blasts paid sick leave. I feel like dinging Paid Sick Leave gets you an automatic endorsement from the ST and the DSA.

The link relating to the, "ill-informed, anti-pot, anti-bike-lane, anti-streetcar Albert Shen" seems to go the same article about Mike O'Brien as the previous one.

Dom, you could write w whole other piece on the editorial board's mendacious "we care about minorities" approach to paid sick leave (thanks Baconcat). The Times has been against workers' rights for over a century, but they used to at least come out and say that.

@5) Thanks for catching that. The link should take you to the right place now.

All in the Blethen family.

http://www.amazon.com/Raise-Hell-Sell-Ne…

I just love the Seattle Times endorsements. They show me who NOT to vote for. I figure I'm pretty safe if I take everyone they endorse, and vote the opposite.

Kshama Sawant, is "too hard-left for Seattle."

Hahahahaha. The Seattle Times has no idea what is or is not too hard left for Seattle. Their editorial board is completely clueless.

@10 Has their editorial board even BEEN to Seattle?

All of the challengers in the city council races are weak. Supporting Shen is silly. So is supporting Sawant. Both Conlin and O'Brien have a pretty good record for the city. They are better than average for the council. More to the point, their challengers are really poor. These endorsements would be interesting if this wasn't the case, but at this point, this is all just blather.

I find it interesting how readers - both here and at the Times - say that once the Times makes an endorsement, the reader then votes the opposite. So the Times puts out the George Costanza endorsements - whatever they say, do the opposite.

In between Sawant and Conlin is Brian Carver. The Times: "Challenger Brian Carver, manager of Kindle direct publishing for Amazon.com, brings to the campaign a youthful spirit and progressive voice."

Conlin is a developer's shill and loves to cut backroom deals, created the dumb rule that one can only address Council on issues on the agenda (so when do we talk about issues Council chooses to ignore?), frequently dissembles in public, and prefers to cozy up to the wealthy and powerful rather than the people.

Carver is smart, progressive, and has a good moral compass.

16 years of Conlin is enough...

@14 you think Conlin is a shill and you want to vote in someone who works where?

Apropos of very little: Shen's campaign at least had the sense to put up yard signs along the BGT Lake Union half-marathon route yesterday (or at least that was the first day I saw them). Runners probably at above-average rates, although no doubt some of them were from the 'burbs and so irrelevant. Showing the flag like that probably netted him some low-information liberals.

Oops. "vote at above average rates"

Just an FYI - Conlin has a progressive challenger that isn't a socialist. His name is Brian Carver, and unlike his "pro-labor" opponent, he actually puts his money where his mouth is by supporting Union shops.

@3, you were going to vote for the socialist and McGinn's poodle anyway.

@14 It is clear that Sawant is the only real alternative to Conlin in this race. She is calling for extremely progressive policies like a $15/hr minimum wage and rent control. These would make a huge difference in the lives of tens of thousands of people in Seattle. At the same time, these sorts of policies also anger corporations. Out of an apparent desire to be appealing to big business, Brian Carver is calling for no clear progressive policies, and is running an extremely vague campaign focused overwhelmingly on personal qualities ("I'm a new dad"). When people who take no clear political positions get elected they turn into Richard Conlins. And in reality, when he first ran for office Conlin had more claim to progressive credentials than Carver does.

What strikes me about Carver is how much of his own money (thousands of dollars) he is spending to try to buy the primary election. Another interesting thing about Carver's funding is that it is overwhelmingly coming from *outside* of Seattle. His primary base of support seems to be people from a quasi-religious organization he belongs to called the Art of Living, lead by "his holiness" guru Sri Sri Ravi Shankar - who has made huge sums of money by repackaging breathing exercises and meditation. The group is quite unforthcoming about where all that money goes - interesting bunch of people. Check out http://beyondaolfree.wordpress.com for a little perspective from former members.