Viva La Cola!

Founded in January 2009, PubliCola is a blog about Seattle written by journalists who are dedicated to non-partisan, original daily reporting that prioritizes a balanced approach to news. Started by longtime local editor and award-winning reporter Josh Feit, PubliCola is the first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol.

PubliCola was off and running. In June 2009, PubliCola hired another award-winning journalist, super-sourced Seattle city hall reporter Erica C. Barnett.

People were afraid that blogging would change journalism. Instead, we believe journalism can change blogging. Twenty-first century journalism may look and feel different, and yes Erica isn't afraid to get cranky, but we're committed to making sure online news still delivers independent, reliable, even-keeled coverage. And most of all, we're committed to making sure the coverage sparks honest civic debate.

Bringing you cola for the people, PubliCola is named after Publius Valerius PubliCola, the alias for the authors of the Federalist Papers—the original bloggers.

The first online-only news site in state history to get media credentials to cover the state capitol and Seattle city hall, PubliCola has been called a “must-read” by the Seattle Post Intelligencer and a hot “New Media Mover and Shaker” by Seattle Magazine—which also cited our own Erica C. Barnett as the city's No. 1 news nerd.

McGinn's Left-Right Coalition

Survey USA has a poll on the proposed waterfront tunnel. Forty-nine percent support it and 43 percent oppose it. Seven percent are "Not sure."

The numbers could be bad news for mayoral candidate Mike McGinn, who has made his opposition to the $4.2 billion tunnel the centerpiece of his campaign.

(Even worse for McGinn, the poll also found that only 23 percent of voters wanted to stop the tunnel and go back to square one while 50 percent want to move forward. McGinn could be seen as ditherer and obstructionist who’s wedded to endless Seattle process.)

On the flip side: McGinn—a Sierra Club leader—draws his support from Seattle’s hippie left, young Capitol Hill urban nerds, and greens.

Given that the groups who—according to the poll results—oppose the tunnel are conservative voters (older voters, Republicans) McGinn may be stitching together a formidable coalition: The Seattle sweet spot that unites liberal idealists  and conservative cranks against the status quo.

And ultimately it’s possible the poll doesn’t reflect the beliefs of people who actually vote: The poll, according to SurveyUSA news director Ken Alper, was a random sample of adults. Most SurveyUSA polls we’ve written about before were of people who identify themselves as "likely voters."

Erica contributed to this post.


  • Have anothet toke

    “Hippie left.” Oh, you mean as opposed to the snarky right like The Stranger and it’s alumni blog Publicola.

  • Have anothet toke

    “Hippie left.” Oh, you mean as opposed to the snarky right like The Stranger and it’s alumni blog Publicola.

  • Have anothet toke

    “Hippie left.” Oh, you mean as opposed to the snarky right like The Stranger and it’s alumni blog Publicola.

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    Fascinating poll. The gender divide is enormous — almost 20 percentage points different. Men support the tunnel 59 – 38. Women oppose it 49- 40.

    Is this due to gendered associations of bored tunnels with conquest and progress? Men’s love of construction equipment? What?

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @1,

    PubliCola (part of the hippie left, maybe) endorsed Mike McGinn: http://publicola.net/?p=10948

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @1,

    PubliCola (part of the hippie left, maybe) endorsed Mike McGinn: http://publicola.net/?p=10948

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @1,

    PubliCola (part of the hippie left, maybe) endorsed Mike McGinn: http://publicola.net/?p=10948

  • insider baseball

    “McGinn…draws his support from Seattle’s hippie left, young Capitol Hill urban nerds, and greens.”

    So I have actually heard that he focused his whole primary campaign defining himself as an anti-tax conservative. So I guess I am not sure who McGinn really is.

    Is he an urban nerd greenie or an anti tax conservative?

    He is a Sierra Club activist but worked arm and arm with Vulcan and other developers to oppose the incentive zoning legislation that would require developers to provide public amenities when they get big windfall profits from upzones.

    His greenie persona plays well with the urban hipster bike rider types but does it really pan out? There seem to be some inconsistencies here.

  • insider baseball

    “McGinn…draws his support from Seattle’s hippie left, young Capitol Hill urban nerds, and greens.”

    So I have actually heard that he focused his whole primary campaign defining himself as an anti-tax conservative. So I guess I am not sure who McGinn really is.

    Is he an urban nerd greenie or an anti tax conservative?

    He is a Sierra Club activist but worked arm and arm with Vulcan and other developers to oppose the incentive zoning legislation that would require developers to provide public amenities when they get big windfall profits from upzones.

    His greenie persona plays well with the urban hipster bike rider types but does it really pan out? There seem to be some inconsistencies here.

  • insider baseball

    “McGinn…draws his support from Seattle’s hippie left, young Capitol Hill urban nerds, and greens.”

    So I have actually heard that he focused his whole primary campaign defining himself as an anti-tax conservative. So I guess I am not sure who McGinn really is.

    Is he an urban nerd greenie or an anti tax conservative?

    He is a Sierra Club activist but worked arm and arm with Vulcan and other developers to oppose the incentive zoning legislation that would require developers to provide public amenities when they get big windfall profits from upzones.

    His greenie persona plays well with the urban hipster bike rider types but does it really pan out? There seem to be some inconsistencies here.

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @4,

    That inconsistency is exactly what we noted in the post: “McGinn may be stitching together a formidable coalition: The Seattle sweet spot that unites liberal idealists and conservative cranks against the status quo.”

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @4,

    That inconsistency is exactly what we noted in the post: “McGinn may be stitching together a formidable coalition: The Seattle sweet spot that unites liberal idealists and conservative cranks against the status quo.”

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @4,

    That inconsistency is exactly what we noted in the post: “McGinn may be stitching together a formidable coalition: The Seattle sweet spot that unites liberal idealists and conservative cranks against the status quo.”

  • TroyJMorris

    Wow, a poll with a 4.5% error margin. Super.

    And I’m going out on a limb and assuming these were actual citizens, not people who work in the city and live elsewhere, and from a varying degree of our segregated neighborhoods. Because people in Ballard care more than the folks in Maple Leaf and Capitol Hill.

  • TroyJMorris

    Wow, a poll with a 4.5% error margin. Super.

    And I’m going out on a limb and assuming these were actual citizens, not people who work in the city and live elsewhere, and from a varying degree of our segregated neighborhoods. Because people in Ballard care more than the folks in Maple Leaf and Capitol Hill.

  • TroyJMorris

    Wow, a poll with a 4.5% error margin. Super.

    And I’m going out on a limb and assuming these were actual citizens, not people who work in the city and live elsewhere, and from a varying degree of our segregated neighborhoods. Because people in Ballard care more than the folks in Maple Leaf and Capitol Hill.

  • Mr. X

    McGinn’s mailer focused on the tax hike for a tunnel, but neglected to mention that he is also opposed to actually replacing the AWV. That fact is gonna be a deal-killer for a lot of the primary voters who supported him if they are made aware of it (that said, there isn’t majority support for any AWV option – so no matter what any candidate’s position is it will piss off a majority of Seattle voters)

  • Mr. X

    McGinn’s mailer focused on the tax hike for a tunnel, but neglected to mention that he is also opposed to actually replacing the AWV. That fact is gonna be a deal-killer for a lot of the primary voters who supported him if they are made aware of it (that said, there isn’t majority support for any AWV option – so no matter what any candidate’s position is it will piss off a majority of Seattle voters)

  • Mr. X

    McGinn’s mailer focused on the tax hike for a tunnel, but neglected to mention that he is also opposed to actually replacing the AWV. That fact is gonna be a deal-killer for a lot of the primary voters who supported him if they are made aware of it (that said, there isn’t majority support for any AWV option – so no matter what any candidate’s position is it will piss off a majority of Seattle voters)

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    @4 What’s your source for this info:

    He is a Sierra Club activist but worked arm and arm with Vulcan and other developers to oppose the incentive zoning legislation that would require developers to provide public amenities when they get big windfall profits from upzones.

    Seems if this were the whole story Vulcan wouldn’t be lusting after Ed Murray, as they seem to be. But if he’s against incentive zoning for *this* reason, it’s a big deal, to me at least. (Much better in my book to be against incentive zoning as an inefficient handout to developers.)

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    @4 What’s your source for this info:

    He is a Sierra Club activist but worked arm and arm with Vulcan and other developers to oppose the incentive zoning legislation that would require developers to provide public amenities when they get big windfall profits from upzones.

    Seems if this were the whole story Vulcan wouldn’t be lusting after Ed Murray, as they seem to be. But if he’s against incentive zoning for *this* reason, it’s a big deal, to me at least. (Much better in my book to be against incentive zoning as an inefficient handout to developers.)

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    @4 What’s your source for this info:

    He is a Sierra Club activist but worked arm and arm with Vulcan and other developers to oppose the incentive zoning legislation that would require developers to provide public amenities when they get big windfall profits from upzones.

    Seems if this were the whole story Vulcan wouldn’t be lusting after Ed Murray, as they seem to be. But if he’s against incentive zoning for *this* reason, it’s a big deal, to me at least. (Much better in my book to be against incentive zoning as an inefficient handout to developers.)

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    @7 Agreed. I’m convinced many voted for McGinn thinking he supports a rebuild. His pieces were intentionally suggestive of that, I think. It’s gonna bite him soon.

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    @7 Agreed. I’m convinced many voted for McGinn thinking he supports a rebuild. His pieces were intentionally suggestive of that, I think. It’s gonna bite him soon.

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    @7 Agreed. I’m convinced many voted for McGinn thinking he supports a rebuild. His pieces were intentionally suggestive of that, I think. It’s gonna bite him soon.

  • ap

    yikes, @4 goes into a whole lot more detail as to just how whacked that coalition might be.

    the problem is, i don’t know anything about mallahan’s issues, so i can’t tell if i’d prefer the devil i know or the one i don’t…

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @7,

    Good point on McGinn’s anti-tunnel appeal falling flat when voters realize it’s a pro-surface transit position as opposed to a rebuild option.

    I’ve always been suspect of McGinn’s mo on the anti-tunnel position, but I couldn’t put my finger on why.

    I think you just made sense of it Mr. X.

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @7,

    Good point on McGinn’s anti-tunnel appeal falling flat when voters realize it’s a pro-surface transit position as opposed to a rebuild option.

    I’ve always been suspect of McGinn’s mo on the anti-tunnel position, but I couldn’t put my finger on why.

    I think you just made sense of it Mr. X.

  • ap

    yikes, @4 goes into a whole lot more detail as to just how whacked that coalition might be.

    the problem is, i don’t know anything about mallahan’s issues, so i can’t tell if i’d prefer the devil i know or the one i don’t…

  • http://publicola.net/ Josh Feit

    @7,

    Good point on McGinn’s anti-tunnel appeal falling flat when voters realize it’s a pro-surface transit position as opposed to a rebuild option.

    I’ve always been suspect of McGinn’s mo on the anti-tunnel position, but I couldn’t put my finger on why.

    I think you just made sense of it Mr. X.

  • Who?

    And what of tht coalition? Someone sure is going to be disappointed I mcginn gets elected, won’t they? It seems to me the only way you can reconcile all this is to do nothing. Support development, but put so many requirements on developers to keep nimby’s happy that developers won’t develop. Support transportation options, but logjam projects so nothing gets done. Be anti-tax, but only when you don’t like the tax (see parks levy and head tax vs Rtid and tunnel).

    All I’m saying is that the more mcginn is willing to build super sketchy coalitions, the more nervous I get about him. I mean, the guy had a party with kemper Freeman for god’s sake. That’s intense dealing with the devil!

  • Who?

    And what of tht coalition? Someone sure is going to be disappointed I mcginn gets elected, won’t they? It seems to me the only way you can reconcile all this is to do nothing. Support development, but put so many requirements on developers to keep nimby’s happy that developers won’t develop. Support transportation options, but logjam projects so nothing gets done. Be anti-tax, but only when you don’t like the tax (see parks levy and head tax vs Rtid and tunnel).

    All I’m saying is that the more mcginn is willing to build super sketchy coalitions, the more nervous I get about him. I mean, the guy had a party with kemper Freeman for god’s sake. That’s intense dealing with the devil!

  • Who?

    And what of tht coalition? Someone sure is going to be disappointed I mcginn gets elected, won’t they? It seems to me the only way you can reconcile all this is to do nothing. Support development, but put so many requirements on developers to keep nimby’s happy that developers won’t develop. Support transportation options, but logjam projects so nothing gets done. Be anti-tax, but only when you don’t like the tax (see parks levy and head tax vs Rtid and tunnel).

    All I’m saying is that the more mcginn is willing to build super sketchy coalitions, the more nervous I get about him. I mean, the guy had a party with kemper Freeman for god’s sake. That’s intense dealing with the devil!

  • insider baseball

    @5,

    Josh, I get it! I just don’t know who he is in his heart of hearts and I think the liberal greenies will be surprised to discover he is not as liberal or green as they think he is. His courtship of anti tax conservatives would have an impact on his policy decisions. (If you lie down with dogs you get fleas and that sorta thing)

    Many of these northender, greenie, bike riding liberal folks have a viseral dislike for anything Paul Allen/Vulcan yet don’t realize MCGinn used to basically lobby for Vulcan via Seattle Great Cities, against things like requiring developers who get big rezones to provide public amenities such as afforbale housing, sidewalks, open space, etc. Personally I do not have a viseral disdain for Vulcan or Paul Allen but I do disagree with them and McGinn on their anti public benefits stance.

    A city employee friend of mine recently said…”it’s ironic that most of these folks complain that Nickels is in the pocket of developers…they don’t realize that Dan McGrady (gov relations for Vulcan) has walked around with McGinn in his pocket for the last few years)

  • insider baseball

    @5,

    Josh, I get it! I just don’t know who he is in his heart of hearts and I think the liberal greenies will be surprised to discover he is not as liberal or green as they think he is. His courtship of anti tax conservatives would have an impact on his policy decisions. (If you lie down with dogs you get fleas and that sorta thing)

    Many of these northender, greenie, bike riding liberal folks have a viseral dislike for anything Paul Allen/Vulcan yet don’t realize MCGinn used to basically lobby for Vulcan via Seattle Great Cities, against things like requiring developers who get big rezones to provide public amenities such as afforbale housing, sidewalks, open space, etc. Personally I do not have a viseral disdain for Vulcan or Paul Allen but I do disagree with them and McGinn on their anti public benefits stance.

    A city employee friend of mine recently said…”it’s ironic that most of these folks complain that Nickels is in the pocket of developers…they don’t realize that Dan McGrady (gov relations for Vulcan) has walked around with McGinn in his pocket for the last few years)

  • insider baseball

    @5,

    Josh, I get it! I just don’t know who he is in his heart of hearts and I think the liberal greenies will be surprised to discover he is not as liberal or green as they think he is. His courtship of anti tax conservatives would have an impact on his policy decisions. (If you lie down with dogs you get fleas and that sorta thing)

    Many of these northender, greenie, bike riding liberal folks have a viseral dislike for anything Paul Allen/Vulcan yet don’t realize MCGinn used to basically lobby for Vulcan via Seattle Great Cities, against things like requiring developers who get big rezones to provide public amenities such as afforbale housing, sidewalks, open space, etc. Personally I do not have a viseral disdain for Vulcan or Paul Allen but I do disagree with them and McGinn on their anti public benefits stance.

    A city employee friend of mine recently said…”it’s ironic that most of these folks complain that Nickels is in the pocket of developers…they don’t realize that Dan McGrady (gov relations for Vulcan) has walked around with McGinn in his pocket for the last few years)

  • insider baseball

    @12,

    You said it much better than me!

  • insider baseball

    @12,

    You said it much better than me!

  • insider baseball

    @12,

    You said it much better than me!

  • David L.

    Let’s remember that there was a poll not long ago that also asked whether people thought it would get built. That showed a different picture.

    So, to my thinking, this poll shows that there are a lot of “Imaginary Tunnel” supporters, but it doesn’t show how many “Real Tunnel” supporters there are.

  • David L.

    Let’s remember that there was a poll not long ago that also asked whether people thought it would get built. That showed a different picture.

    So, to my thinking, this poll shows that there are a lot of “Imaginary Tunnel” supporters, but it doesn’t show how many “Real Tunnel” supporters there are.

  • David L.

    Let’s remember that there was a poll not long ago that also asked whether people thought it would get built. That showed a different picture.

    So, to my thinking, this poll shows that there are a lot of “Imaginary Tunnel” supporters, but it doesn’t show how many “Real Tunnel” supporters there are.

  • Zelbinian

    Let me get this straight for a second.

    20 years of community and environmental activism, leader of Sierra Club, founder of Great City and you guys are confused about where he stands? How is being anti-tunnel not in tune with “hippie”ness and being green? Seems copacetic to me. The fact that the tunnel also happens to cost an ungodly amount of money is just one of many ways he’s framed the debate.

    And since when can’t a green-thinking liberal be fiscally conservative? If he thinks like me (which is my assumption, since I support the dude), he’s quite willing to spend that money if it’s on something that’s actually worth while in 20 years (unlike >2 mi of highway).

  • Zelbinian

    Let me get this straight for a second.

    20 years of community and environmental activism, leader of Sierra Club, founder of Great City and you guys are confused about where he stands? How is being anti-tunnel not in tune with “hippie”ness and being green? Seems copacetic to me. The fact that the tunnel also happens to cost an ungodly amount of money is just one of many ways he’s framed the debate.

    And since when can’t a green-thinking liberal be fiscally conservative? If he thinks like me (which is my assumption, since I support the dude), he’s quite willing to spend that money if it’s on something that’s actually worth while in 20 years (unlike >2 mi of highway).

  • Zelbinian

    Let me get this straight for a second.

    20 years of community and environmental activism, leader of Sierra Club, founder of Great City and you guys are confused about where he stands? How is being anti-tunnel not in tune with “hippie”ness and being green? Seems copacetic to me. The fact that the tunnel also happens to cost an ungodly amount of money is just one of many ways he’s framed the debate.

    And since when can’t a green-thinking liberal be fiscally conservative? If he thinks like me (which is my assumption, since I support the dude), he’s quite willing to spend that money if it’s on something that’s actually worth while in 20 years (unlike >2 mi of highway).

  • better-future-now

    Mike got votes from anti-tax folks but to suggest that he’s “in their pockets” is silly. Mike cares about gaining the support of people, not special interests. That’s how his other efforts–No on RTID, Yes on Parks, ended up working…by listening to what people wanted, not the established politicians likes Nickels.

    Plus, I don’t consider myself an “anti-tax” person. But I believe in common sense. And spending that much money during a recession, and when we’re facing bigger budget shortfalls than ever, just does not make sense.

  • better-future-now

    Mike got votes from anti-tax folks but to suggest that he’s “in their pockets” is silly. Mike cares about gaining the support of people, not special interests. That’s how his other efforts–No on RTID, Yes on Parks, ended up working…by listening to what people wanted, not the established politicians likes Nickels.

    Plus, I don’t consider myself an “anti-tax” person. But I believe in common sense. And spending that much money during a recession, and when we’re facing bigger budget shortfalls than ever, just does not make sense.

  • better-future-now

    Mike got votes from anti-tax folks but to suggest that he’s “in their pockets” is silly. Mike cares about gaining the support of people, not special interests. That’s how his other efforts–No on RTID, Yes on Parks, ended up working…by listening to what people wanted, not the established politicians likes Nickels.

    Plus, I don’t consider myself an “anti-tax” person. But I believe in common sense. And spending that much money during a recession, and when we’re facing bigger budget shortfalls than ever, just does not make sense.

  • Zelbinian

    I am also curious how, in two years, we went from 70% opposing a tunnel to 49% supporting it. That smells of iffy statistics and damn good marketing by the tunnel proponents.

  • Zelbinian

    I am also curious how, in two years, we went from 70% opposing a tunnel to 49% supporting it. That smells of iffy statistics and damn good marketing by the tunnel proponents.

  • Zelbinian

    I am also curious how, in two years, we went from 70% opposing a tunnel to 49% supporting it. That smells of iffy statistics and damn good marketing by the tunnel proponents.

  • Rob

    So let me get this straight – McGinn’s anti tax stand – specifically being opposed to making Seattle homeowners pay for inevitable cost overruns on the tunnel boondoggle – suddenly makes him an anti-tax conservative?

    Are the specific questions available from these tunnel polls? Do they actually mention mention the cost overrun, tax caveat?

  • Rob

    So let me get this straight – McGinn’s anti tax stand – specifically being opposed to making Seattle homeowners pay for inevitable cost overruns on the tunnel boondoggle – suddenly makes him an anti-tax conservative?

    Are the specific questions available from these tunnel polls? Do they actually mention mention the cost overrun, tax caveat?

  • Rob

    So let me get this straight – McGinn’s anti tax stand – specifically being opposed to making Seattle homeowners pay for inevitable cost overruns on the tunnel boondoggle – suddenly makes him an anti-tax conservative?

    Are the specific questions available from these tunnel polls? Do they actually mention mention the cost overrun, tax caveat?

  • Rob
  • Rob
  • Rob
  • Timothy

    Can we dispel the notion that McGinn, himself, is going to do anything that the Tunnel proposal, on its own, won’t do?

    If you believe that the Tunnel is a done-deal, that we are now poised and ready to move forward, you’re delusional, and have bought directly into a carefully crafted plan of misdirection.

    The Tunnel is never going to be built. The politicians, realizing they had nothing they could sell, crafted a weak agreement that they announced on Jan. 13th, 2008. They took that weak agreement to the legislature, who disregarded that agreement, and crafted a legally dubious piece of law that leaves nearly every major question unanswered. And, then, they announced that the Tunnel was a “done deal” and many, many in Seattle, fatigued by the discussion, moved on.

    But, the fight is still there, it’s just been hidden. And McGinn is the only Candidate who is honestly talking about it. The Tunnel won’t fail because McGinn kills it; it will fail entirely on its own lack of merits. I prefer someone in the office of Seattle Mayor who actually cares about how Seattle is treated in Olympia (we were treated very poorly this past session, and Nickels handled this all terribly), and who actually understands the reality of the Tunnel.

  • Timothy

    Can we dispel the notion that McGinn, himself, is going to do anything that the Tunnel proposal, on its own, won’t do?

    If you believe that the Tunnel is a done-deal, that we are now poised and ready to move forward, you’re delusional, and have bought directly into a carefully crafted plan of misdirection.

    The Tunnel is never going to be built. The politicians, realizing they had nothing they could sell, crafted a weak agreement that they announced on Jan. 13th, 2008. They took that weak agreement to the legislature, who disregarded that agreement, and crafted a legally dubious piece of law that leaves nearly every major question unanswered. And, then, they announced that the Tunnel was a “done deal” and many, many in Seattle, fatigued by the discussion, moved on.

    But, the fight is still there, it’s just been hidden. And McGinn is the only Candidate who is honestly talking about it. The Tunnel won’t fail because McGinn kills it; it will fail entirely on its own lack of merits. I prefer someone in the office of Seattle Mayor who actually cares about how Seattle is treated in Olympia (we were treated very poorly this past session, and Nickels handled this all terribly), and who actually understands the reality of the Tunnel.

  • Timothy

    Can we dispel the notion that McGinn, himself, is going to do anything that the Tunnel proposal, on its own, won’t do?

    If you believe that the Tunnel is a done-deal, that we are now poised and ready to move forward, you’re delusional, and have bought directly into a carefully crafted plan of misdirection.

    The Tunnel is never going to be built. The politicians, realizing they had nothing they could sell, crafted a weak agreement that they announced on Jan. 13th, 2008. They took that weak agreement to the legislature, who disregarded that agreement, and crafted a legally dubious piece of law that leaves nearly every major question unanswered. And, then, they announced that the Tunnel was a “done deal” and many, many in Seattle, fatigued by the discussion, moved on.

    But, the fight is still there, it’s just been hidden. And McGinn is the only Candidate who is honestly talking about it. The Tunnel won’t fail because McGinn kills it; it will fail entirely on its own lack of merits. I prefer someone in the office of Seattle Mayor who actually cares about how Seattle is treated in Olympia (we were treated very poorly this past session, and Nickels handled this all terribly), and who actually understands the reality of the Tunnel.

  • Joe G

    I’m thinking that this is another out of touch poll. Much like the ones that suggested Nickels was a sure thing for the primary. McGinn will pull this out in the end because he can represent ALL segments of Seattle, not just the business, non-voting, unaware of how city agencies work segment.

  • Joe G

    I’m thinking that this is another out of touch poll. Much like the ones that suggested Nickels was a sure thing for the primary. McGinn will pull this out in the end because he can represent ALL segments of Seattle, not just the business, non-voting, unaware of how city agencies work segment.

  • Joe G

    I’m thinking that this is another out of touch poll. Much like the ones that suggested Nickels was a sure thing for the primary. McGinn will pull this out in the end because he can represent ALL segments of Seattle, not just the business, non-voting, unaware of how city agencies work segment.

  • Morgan

    We don’t need a tunnel, we don’t need a surface option, we need fewer cars. We want a waterfront park.

  • Morgan

    We don’t need a tunnel, we don’t need a surface option, we need fewer cars. We want a waterfront park.

  • Morgan

    We don’t need a tunnel, we don’t need a surface option, we need fewer cars. We want a waterfront park.

  • Mr. X

    …you might try Myrtle Edwards and Elliot Bay Parks – they comprise a mile-and-a-half of park that’s closer to the waterfront than you’ll ever get even if the AWV is torn down.

  • Mr. X

    …you might try Myrtle Edwards and Elliot Bay Parks – they comprise a mile-and-a-half of park that’s closer to the waterfront than you’ll ever get even if the AWV is torn down.

  • Mr. X

    …you might try Myrtle Edwards and Elliot Bay Parks – they comprise a mile-and-a-half of park that’s closer to the waterfront than you’ll ever get even if the AWV is torn down.

  • Good Grief

    @18 here is how — it was a different tunnel that was voted on in 2007 — one that would have entailed shutting down the waterfront for years and that would have required the viaduct be torn down before they could really start on the cut and cover. The current plan allows the viaduct to stay in operation (assuming it hasn’t collapsed) while the tunnel is being bored, which is a huge difference. That difference is something that McGinn and his shills like you seem to conveniently ignore. There are good reasons to be concerned about the current plan, but pretending like the 2007 vote has any bearing on the bored tunnel is dishonest.

  • Good Grief

    @18 here is how — it was a different tunnel that was voted on in 2007 — one that would have entailed shutting down the waterfront for years and that would have required the viaduct be torn down before they could really start on the cut and cover. The current plan allows the viaduct to stay in operation (assuming it hasn’t collapsed) while the tunnel is being bored, which is a huge difference. That difference is something that McGinn and his shills like you seem to conveniently ignore. There are good reasons to be concerned about the current plan, but pretending like the 2007 vote has any bearing on the bored tunnel is dishonest.

  • Good Grief

    @18 here is how — it was a different tunnel that was voted on in 2007 — one that would have entailed shutting down the waterfront for years and that would have required the viaduct be torn down before they could really start on the cut and cover. The current plan allows the viaduct to stay in operation (assuming it hasn’t collapsed) while the tunnel is being bored, which is a huge difference. That difference is something that McGinn and his shills like you seem to conveniently ignore. There are good reasons to be concerned about the current plan, but pretending like the 2007 vote has any bearing on the bored tunnel is dishonest.

  • Good Grief

    @21 — you may be right, but you should talk to the McGinn campaign — they are the ones claiming that he will “stop” the tunnel. It doesn’t seem like McGinn gives a crap about how the city is “treated” in Olympia — in fact, his platform seems to be that he will piss off as many people as possible in the legislature.

  • Good Grief

    @21 — you may be right, but you should talk to the McGinn campaign — they are the ones claiming that he will “stop” the tunnel. It doesn’t seem like McGinn gives a crap about how the city is “treated” in Olympia — in fact, his platform seems to be that he will piss off as many people as possible in the legislature.

  • Good Grief

    @21 — you may be right, but you should talk to the McGinn campaign — they are the ones claiming that he will “stop” the tunnel. It doesn’t seem like McGinn gives a crap about how the city is “treated” in Olympia — in fact, his platform seems to be that he will piss off as many people as possible in the legislature.

  • Timothy

    @25 Good Grief…you are giving voters more credit than I think they rightly deserve in distinguishing between the 2 tunnel options. You have no way of knowing why voters opposed the tunnel in 2007, and no way to know why this poll shows 49% support. My theory is that many people are fatigued by the Viaduct question, and have resigned themselves to the current idea.

    …moving onto @26 Good Grief…I understand that McGinn is claiming he’ll stop the tunnel. What I’m pointing out is the reality of the situation. The tunnel, with this current legislation, is not going to happen; and it may very well involve the actions of the Seattle City Mayor or a targeted lawsuit to bring it down, but something will bring it down.

    Joe Mallahan has demonstrated any nuanced understanding of the Viaduct issue. In fact, he hasn’t demonstrated any nuanced understanding of any issue. Others are claiming that the Viaduct is a done deal, and it’s time to move forward; they’ve largely swallowed the bait from the Governor and the Legislature.

    McGinn’s position is the only logical and honest position in the race for Mayor.

  • Timothy

    @25 Good Grief…you are giving voters more credit than I think they rightly deserve in distinguishing between the 2 tunnel options. You have no way of knowing why voters opposed the tunnel in 2007, and no way to know why this poll shows 49% support. My theory is that many people are fatigued by the Viaduct question, and have resigned themselves to the current idea.

    …moving onto @26 Good Grief…I understand that McGinn is claiming he’ll stop the tunnel. What I’m pointing out is the reality of the situation. The tunnel, with this current legislation, is not going to happen; and it may very well involve the actions of the Seattle City Mayor or a targeted lawsuit to bring it down, but something will bring it down.

    Joe Mallahan has demonstrated any nuanced understanding of the Viaduct issue. In fact, he hasn’t demonstrated any nuanced understanding of any issue. Others are claiming that the Viaduct is a done deal, and it’s time to move forward; they’ve largely swallowed the bait from the Governor and the Legislature.

    McGinn’s position is the only logical and honest position in the race for Mayor.

  • Timothy

    @25 Good Grief…you are giving voters more credit than I think they rightly deserve in distinguishing between the 2 tunnel options. You have no way of knowing why voters opposed the tunnel in 2007, and no way to know why this poll shows 49% support. My theory is that many people are fatigued by the Viaduct question, and have resigned themselves to the current idea.

    …moving onto @26 Good Grief…I understand that McGinn is claiming he’ll stop the tunnel. What I’m pointing out is the reality of the situation. The tunnel, with this current legislation, is not going to happen; and it may very well involve the actions of the Seattle City Mayor or a targeted lawsuit to bring it down, but something will bring it down.

    Joe Mallahan has demonstrated any nuanced understanding of the Viaduct issue. In fact, he hasn’t demonstrated any nuanced understanding of any issue. Others are claiming that the Viaduct is a done deal, and it’s time to move forward; they’ve largely swallowed the bait from the Governor and the Legislature.

    McGinn’s position is the only logical and honest position in the race for Mayor.

  • Joshua Daniel Franklin

    @5, all I remember is McGinn talking in SLU about how “Design, open space, affordability, and our environmental aspirations need to be taken into account as well.” Meanwhile Nickels was lobbying the city council to fast-track the Vulcan-Amazon project (thanks for the $1.3m save, Nick Licata). That’s because Nickels knows that generic office buildings built to lot edges means livability. If there’s one thing we need more of in the center city, it’s office space!

  • Joshua Daniel Franklin

    @5, all I remember is McGinn talking in SLU about how “Design, open space, affordability, and our environmental aspirations need to be taken into account as well.” Meanwhile Nickels was lobbying the city council to fast-track the Vulcan-Amazon project (thanks for the $1.3m save, Nick Licata). That’s because Nickels knows that generic office buildings built to lot edges means livability. If there’s one thing we need more of in the center city, it’s office space!

  • Joshua Daniel Franklin

    @5, all I remember is McGinn talking in SLU about how “Design, open space, affordability, and our environmental aspirations need to be taken into account as well.” Meanwhile Nickels was lobbying the city council to fast-track the Vulcan-Amazon project (thanks for the $1.3m save, Nick Licata). That’s because Nickels knows that generic office buildings built to lot edges means livability. If there’s one thing we need more of in the center city, it’s office space!

  • seven

    Mr. Feit,

    I think your attempts at categorizing McGinn supporters as either “hippy idealists or conservative cranks” is too simplistic a summation.

  • seven

    Mr. Feit,

    I think your attempts at categorizing McGinn supporters as either “hippy idealists or conservative cranks” is too simplistic a summation.

  • seven

    Mr. Feit,

    I think your attempts at categorizing McGinn supporters as either “hippy idealists or conservative cranks” is too simplistic a summation.

  • morgan

    McGinn supports moving forward with the process that Nickels, Simms and Gregoire short-circuited in the spring. The Survey USA poll doesn’t ask about this, because they probably didn’t know that our city and state departments of transportation, along with numerous other stakeholders, recommended we pursue a surface replacement bolstered by improvements to I-5 and local transit. Analysis clearly showed this could handle our transportation needs at a far lower cost.

    We should also notice that the USA poll results are statistically insignificant, since the sampling error is +/-4.5% and the difference between “support” and “oppose” is only 7%. While it’s likely there is some actual difference in opinion today, the public debate on the sensibility and viability of the tunnel has only just gotten going. The numbers, the dollars and the rationale for the tunnel fall apart for most folks as we come to appreciate them. So, I expect public opinion to shift dramatically as people learn more about the situation instead of applying 20th century thinking to our transportation future.

  • morgan

    McGinn supports moving forward with the process that Nickels, Simms and Gregoire short-circuited in the spring. The Survey USA poll doesn’t ask about this, because they probably didn’t know that our city and state departments of transportation, along with numerous other stakeholders, recommended we pursue a surface replacement bolstered by improvements to I-5 and local transit. Analysis clearly showed this could handle our transportation needs at a far lower cost.

    We should also notice that the USA poll results are statistically insignificant, since the sampling error is +/-4.5% and the difference between “support” and “oppose” is only 7%. While it’s likely there is some actual difference in opinion today, the public debate on the sensibility and viability of the tunnel has only just gotten going. The numbers, the dollars and the rationale for the tunnel fall apart for most folks as we come to appreciate them. So, I expect public opinion to shift dramatically as people learn more about the situation instead of applying 20th century thinking to our transportation future.

  • non

    Even worse for McGinn, the poll also found that only 23 percent of voters wanted to stop the tunnel and go back to square one while 50 percent want to move forward. McGinn could be seen as ditherer and obstructionist who’s wedded to endless Seattle process.

    Gee, ya think?

  • non

    Even worse for McGinn, the poll also found that only 23 percent of voters wanted to stop the tunnel and go back to square one while 50 percent want to move forward. McGinn could be seen as ditherer and obstructionist who’s wedded to endless Seattle process.

    Gee, ya think?

  • non

    @21: But, the fight is still there, it’s just been hidden. And McGinn is the only Candidate who is honestly talking about it. The Tunnel won’t fail because McGinn kills it; it will fail entirely on its own lack of merits.

    Then why is McGinn poising himself to take credit for “stopping it”? Isn’t that alittle disingenous? Or would that be this idea that anyone who disagrees with you is merely being duped by the Man?

  • non

    @21: But, the fight is still there, it’s just been hidden. And McGinn is the only Candidate who is honestly talking about it. The Tunnel won’t fail because McGinn kills it; it will fail entirely on its own lack of merits.

    Then why is McGinn poising himself to take credit for “stopping it”? Isn’t that alittle disingenous? Or would that be this idea that anyone who disagrees with you is merely being duped by the Man?

  • non

    @21: But, the fight is still there, it’s just been hidden. And McGinn is the only Candidate who is honestly talking about it. The Tunnel won’t fail because McGinn kills it; it will fail entirely on its own lack of merits.

    Then why is McGinn poising himself to take credit for “stopping it”? Isn’t that alittle disingenous? Or would that be this idea that anyone who disagrees with you is merely being duped by the Man?

  • Timothy

    @32…Because McGinn is actually working to hasten the inevitable, and to bring us back to the reality of what the Tunnel means. Either way, you’re merely splitting hairs at this point. If you disagree with me on it, then outline why.

  • Timothy

    @32…Because McGinn is actually working to hasten the inevitable, and to bring us back to the reality of what the Tunnel means. Either way, you’re merely splitting hairs at this point. If you disagree with me on it, then outline why.

  • Timothy

    @32…Because McGinn is actually working to hasten the inevitable, and to bring us back to the reality of what the Tunnel means. Either way, you’re merely splitting hairs at this point. If you disagree with me on it, then outline why.

  • Bob

    Mr. McGinn will not get my vote for a couple of reasons: 1) This sounds like Tim Eyeman in his inflammatory and innacurate anti-tax rhetoric with ideas that dump alot of trouble on others without detailed workable solutions (I’ve been commuting on the AWV for 39 years). 2) The tunnel option has far more benefits for encouraging biking and leaving room for buses on city streets while Not dumping traffic from the viaduct directly into the downtown core (a benefit for bikers). Does he really expect me to drive from Shilshole marina to I-5 across winding 65th to 50th and sit in a traffic jam on I-5 which is worse now because it’s the Only route out of town southbound??? The idea is simply nuts.

  • Bob

    Mr. McGinn will not get my vote for a couple of reasons: 1) This sounds like Tim Eyeman in his inflammatory and innacurate anti-tax rhetoric with ideas that dump alot of trouble on others without detailed workable solutions (I’ve been commuting on the AWV for 39 years). 2) The tunnel option has far more benefits for encouraging biking and leaving room for buses on city streets while Not dumping traffic from the viaduct directly into the downtown core (a benefit for bikers). Does he really expect me to drive from Shilshole marina to I-5 across winding 65th to 50th and sit in a traffic jam on I-5 which is worse now because it’s the Only route out of town southbound??? The idea is simply nuts.

  • http://twitter.com/fattailed Fat-tailed

    Fascinating poll. The gender divide is enormous — almost 20 percentage points different. Men support the tunnel 59 – 38. Women oppose it 49- 40.

    Is this due to gendered associations of bored tunnels with conquest and progress? Men's love of construction equipment? What?