Washington 2020: The Calm Before the Drizzle

[Alcon]

+2.  I'd never heard the phrase "single-family character" (whatever it means) used so often since I moved here to Seattle.  So terrible.

And as skeptical as I am of the poll, I hope that it's right about I-522.  I know it's not a big issue, but I'd be really happy to see it crash and burn on principle.

Two weeks to go!  I'm actually getting mildly near-excited!

[RI]

That seems like a reasonable step. Are there any legitimate reasons not to upzone other than offending NIMBY types?

[bgwah]

That seems like a reasonable step. Are there any legitimate reasons not to upzone other than offending NIMBY types?

It might vary from neighborhood-to-neighborhood based on unique circumstances such as the roads & transportation situation (Shoreline being a little freaked out about Point Wells doesn't seem too crazy to me since there's only a two-lane road in and out, for example). But overall, I haven't heard any good reasons. Seattle claims to be environmentalist, and they vote for sprawl-stopping measures like growth boundaries and the politicians who claim to support those goals, but they turn around and stop so much growth from actually happening in the city. What it boils down to is being anti-population growth, and I just don't think that's a realistic or sensible position for us to take. I think growth is good.

New Yorkers are hardly a bunch of eco-nuts, but NYC is arguably the most environmentally-friendly major city in the country by virtue of being dense and walkable with an excellent mass transit system to back it up.

[bgwah]

Out of curiosity, I uploaded California's Proposition 37 (GMO labeling): https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=2012&off=67&elect=0&fips=6&f=0



It roughly follows partisan patterns, but not extremely so. It noticeably outperforms Obama in the northernmost part of the state, even winning a couple Romney counties --- makes me think its chances may be better in WA. Or so I hope. The fundraising is definitely against it though so I won't be surprised if it fails by a similar margin as CA.

[Alcon]

I'm really surprised you're for I-522, bgwah.  I can get disliking the campaign against it, but it's a completely nonsensical, woo-woo initiative.  It's basically the Democratic Party's worst, least rational tendencies rolled into one poorly-written ballot measure.  Why do you like it so much?

I'm hoping the Bay Area suburbs are more of a reflection of its performance among well-educated Democrats than Northern California.  I suspect a lot of those Del Norte/Siskiyou County cross-over yes votes are low-education retirees, fundamentalist Christians (a lot of whom are very anti-GMO), and similar not-very-Washington-y types.  Maybe I'm just being too optimistic.  I think you could argue for the Seattle suburbs being anywhere from 45% Yes to 55% Yes based on that map.  It's hard to find good comparisons to the Puget Sound in California.

Edit: I totally agree with bgwah's evaluation of the upzoning fears.  Seattle drivers are also somehow completely convinced that their traffic (whether it be from the changes to 520 or from new 10-unit apartments) will somehow triple in the next five years.  Seattle is really a car-dependent population, and people are freaked out that the city might become less friendly to cars.  It's not much more complicated than that.

[LastVoter]

Provincialism and NIMBY-empowerment? No thank you.

You just don't want the working class of Seattle to have a voice, do ya?

[bgwah]

Provincialism and NIMBY-empowerment? No thank you.

You just don't want the working class of Seattle to have a voice, do ya?

They might get one seat with districts. Some voice.

[Seattle]

Provincialism and NIMBY-empowerment? No thank you.

You just don't want the working class of Seattle to have a voice, do ya?

You know what's going to have a bigger and better impact? Public financing.

[Seattle]

Two weeks to go!  I'm actually getting mildly near-excited!

I'm already drooling over the thought of seeing more awesome precinct maps!!!

[bgwah]

I'm really surprised you're for I-522, bgwah.  I can get disliking the campaign against it, but it's a completely nonsensical, woo-woo initiative.  It's basically the Democratic Party's worst, least rational tendencies rolled into one poorly-written ballot measure.  Why do you like it so much?

Poor food labeling is a constant source of frustration for me. If I can help others make ethical decisions about what they eat, I'm going to. If you think it's just anti-science non-sense, then feel free to ignore the labels. Give the consumers that information and let them decide.

I understand that you have a need to believe in something you work on, but this definitely reeks of cognitive dissonance to me. You're trying way too hard to justify this. I think deep down inside you know there's nothing wrong with labels and are trying to put a progressive spin on your opposition. Sorry, but I'm not buying it.

[Alcon]

bgwah, that doesn't make any sense, considering the reason I ended up working on this issue is because I argued against it at public forums.  Maybe you should consider actually addressing my points instead of being patronizing.  You're not working hard enough to justify this: your "justification" is basically an over-simplistic TV commercial tagline.

If you think I'm not typically this aggressive about things I think are logically nonsense, you clearly don't remember how annoying I was about R-74 last year.

[bgwah]

Fine. But you've been plenty patronizing.

[Alcon]

Fine. But you've been plenty patronizing.

No, sugarlips, I've been condescending.

[Fuzzybigfoot]

I really don't remember eating anything really "organic" in the past few months.  The GMO thing will hurt the demand for such things, meaning they'll be cheaper for people like me!     

[RI]

Fine. But you've been plenty patronizing.

No, sugarlips, I've been condescending.

Just get a room already.

[Fuzzybigfoot]

Fine. But you've been plenty patronizing.

No, sugarlips, I've been condescending.

Just get a room already.

But it's so indecent!!!

[LastVoter]

Provincialism and NIMBY-empowerment? No thank you.

You just don't want the working class of Seattle to have a voice, do ya?

You know what's going to have a bigger and better impact? Public financing.

Obviously, but districts are good too.

[Meeker]

I've decided to vote no on I-522, and I am increasingly annoyed by the Yes campaign. I'm far more bothered by I-517 though. I think if it passes people will come to dislike it pretty quickly.

[publicunofficial]

I've decided to vote no on I-522, and I am increasingly annoyed by the Yes campaign. I'm far more bothered by I-517 though. I think if it passes people will come to dislike it pretty quickly.

Anyone smart enough to read the Voter's Guide they received in the mail would vote against I-517. "The annoying guys who ask for your signature would be allowed to petition at high school football games" is a pretty compelling argument.

I was also surprised to see Rob McKenna was one of the authors of the "Vote No" argument.

[Alcon]

I noticed that too AG!  There actually are a fair number of institutional Republicans who are against I-517, even among the rank and file.  Other than the Mainstream Republicans (who dissent on a lot) there aren't any GOP LD groups against it or anything, but at the Republican LD meetings I've been to lately, a few individuals did speak out against it.

My favorite part is the second banner headline on the Yes on 517 site:

"Senator Pam Roach says Yes on I-517!"

Who can you trust on interpersonal respect and propriety if not Pam Roach?

[Meeker]

I think the institutional Republican opposition comes from how much grocery stores hate it. That's where a lot of the No on I-517 money is coming from.

[Fed. Pac. Chairman Devin]

What do y'all think of the thefts from the State Democratic party?

[bgwah]

http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2013/10/28/gma-pours-more-money-into-no-on-522-moms-for-labeling-lawyer-cries-foul

Geez, that's a lot of money. I don't see how they lose but I can hope for the best.

[Alcon]

Eyman's I-517 is sinking after TV ads start airing and people actually start voting, says terrible pollster who's probably right

http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2013/10/29/poll-eymans-i-517-is-rapidly-losing-ground/

Moore Information (R-lol):

Yes 33%
No 40%
Undecided 27%

Among those who have already voted, support is sharply negative, although it's not specified how, besides both Ds and Rs oppose.  Among those who haven't voted, 21% are definitely No, but only 11% are definite Yes.

[Alcon]

48 hours, gents.  Predictions?  I'll take a stab...

Eyman thing
Yes 45%
No 55%

GMO labeling
Yes 49%
No 51%

Seattle mayor
Murray 57.5%
McGinn 42.5%

Seattle City Council (with minimal thought)
Conlin 57%
Sawant 43%

Anything else worth predicting?  I can't even muster the mental energy to consider the advisory votes.  Those make helping people vote a huge pain in the ass, by the way.  I'm quite convinced that some people just give up on finishing their ballot after seeing those.