Tin foil hat: many people oppose density as it would logically lead to a further empowerment of working class and/or more liberal voters, which would reduce the power of the wealthy outer ring "establishment voters".

Ed Murray, Mayor of Broadmoor.

"There are clearly two teams in Seattle politics: Call them what you will, the wealthier, older moderates/conservatives and the working-class, younger liberals."

I'd push back a little on this. Note that in Anderstone's analysis, poor and working-class SE Seattle is one of the most anti-tax areas of the city. It isn't just elderly and white Magnolia and Broadmoor who don't vote The Stranger's ticket - working class Rainier Valley residents also join the Republicans on levies and tax increases.

Wow. It's almost like you don't believe every politician running for office doesn't seize the moments that highlight something to be a perceived deficiency in the incumbent (be that some crazy ex con boarding a metro bus at the busiest downtown bus stops and shooting the driver or the small business owners on 65th who are concerned about a realignment for bike lanes taking away their parking). Murray didn't exactly jump up and down saying McGinn is a fat liar about being able to roll out municipal internet (or put a light rail package before voters) but you take your opportunities where offered (like McGinn did when he passed the primary by opposing the DBT before switching to the more popular view of accepting it in time for the general election).

Utter banality.

Winning politicians draw support from a broad coalition, some more extreme than themselves, others more centrist.

The whole story is based on the straw man that "there are NO conservatives in Seattle". Who said such a thing? Care to name them?

Nobody said that? Exactly. Silly straw man used to prove a banality.

Here's one recent article about Seattle's political homogeneity:

By Seattle he means a one-party town, a place where orthodox views and political correctness prevail, where the legislative districts litmus-test candidates in a game-show atmosphere of political "Survivor" as each contestant tries to prove they're more progressive than their rivals.

Electoral dissent in Seattle doesn't come from the right much any more, it comes from the left. The so-called liberal monoculture does have many shades of blue and extends far enough leftward to occasionally include socialist candidates.

@6

Is that in reply to me? Do you think that quote is saying there are no conservatives in Seattle? Even simpleminded Knute Berger wouldn't actually say that.

Prior to Sawant, would anyone have said there are no socialists in Seattle? Or only that there are so few that they don't win office and so instead vote for the next best thing? Just like conservatives here vote for the next best thing.

Next shall we shock the world by finding a liberal voter in Provo?

The spectrum in Seattle is essentially progressive-liberal-libertarian as left-center-right. With a small number of anarchists (complex ideology) and Republicans (fascists) as their own thing.

Liberalism is a thing, with a certain meaning, which is essentially center-left in America (or center-right if you're in Europe or South America). I'm certainly not a liberal. On the other hand, there's "progressive", which means left (or center-left in Europe/SA), also known as "social democratic", "green", or "socialist" in the Kshama Sawant style.

Progressives include Kshama Sawant and maaaaaaybe Mike McGinn, Mike O'Brien, and Nick Licata on certain white-guy issues. Liberals include the rest of the city council and Ed Murray.

I don't think we're at risk of any "Republicans" on the city council, but we're certainly at risk of libertarians or more right-leaning liberals.

I voted for both Mallahan and Sawant, I guess that makes me an outlier for this guy.

The Lesser Seattle crowd is still very much alive. They oppose expanded liquor sales and marijuana. they are the biggest NIMBYs in the neighborhoods. Opposition to density now, and backed CAP in the 80s. Seattle was founded by and still has a streak of morally zealous Methodism in it. These issues don't necessarily fit on the liberal/conservative spectrum but they are positions that our politicians will listen to, and they have money.

@8 And if Seattle did have a libertarian in the council, so what? If we can have a socialist, we should be able to also have a libertarian giving SOME voice to all the non-left wing authoritarians in this town.

I love how the same liberals who go on and on about diversity of race, sexuality and income (that I support, btw) are the same people who FLIP OUT at the notion that Seattle has some ideological diversity. So there are conservatives in Seattle. Big deal. That's also diversity. It sucks to have a city where conservatives and libertarians can't even be themselves without having some socialist moron scream at them and call them names. And yes, I say the same thing for "redneck" parts of the country that are that way for progressives.

I think of the divide as being less liberal and conservative and more "Little Seattle" vs. "Greater Seattle." "Little Seattle" represents people who are capitalism's winners, knowledge economy folks and longtime residents who would never dream of voting for a GOP mouth-breather, but whose do-gooding ends at driving a Prius. They're the people who say "Seattle people will always drive cars," and recoil at the thought of a state income tax. They're not conservatives in the revanchist, contemporary sense, but more in the Nordic sense, in that their ideal city is the Seattle of recent memory, with bungalows and Volvos as far as the eye can see. "Greater Seattle" folks represent an emerging, coalescing constituency of young people being squished by static wages, rising rents, ballooning student debt, and a disinterest in ever owning a car; traditional but aging organized labor and POC communities, concerned about the same; urbanistas who think four shoe boxes are better than one bungalow, and the rest of the usual suspects. It's this fissure that's going to determine the shape of city politics over the next decade, and ultimately what our city is going to become: an enclave for the wealthy surrounded by sprawl or an emergent world-city that extends Seattle's regional dominance for another century.