Let’s hope this year’s elections follow the pattern from two years ago, when the Stranger’s endorsements got loony-left candidates through the primaries, each paired with a solid liberal — who then trounced them in the general.

Let's hope this year's elections follow the usual trend around here, where the corporate shills do well in the Primary and then are soundly crushed by the more left candidates that are their opponents.

Looks like The Seattle Times still got it as well. It sucks, really. Two papers with really poor editorial staffs, each trying desperately to justify their endorsements. It wasn't always this way. Not too long ago, what #1 wrote would have been absurd. The Stranger was endorsing progressives, but very qualified progressives -- candidates that would kick-ass in the general election. Now the assessment is sadly true.

If you go way, way back, the Seattle Times editorial board was actually decent as well. They were always too right-of-center for my taste, but they would never nominate someone who hadn't voted regularly. Now both papers do that. They don't give a shit about competence, or endorsements from their colleagues or other organizations -- they just pick their choice based on who gives a good speech I guess. If ObeySumner advances, and loses to Cathy Moore (who is far to the right of Jenks) we will have the Stranger and the Times to thank (just as they were essential in getting Sara Nelson and Ann Davison elected).

@2: Specifically, were you referring to Oliver vs. Nelson, Gonzalez v. Harrell, or NTK v. a REPUBLICAN? Because I’m totally 100% with whichever one(s) of those you choose.

Discuss.