Tanya Woo Compares Opponent to KKK; Seattle Times Doubles Down
Toxicity Infecting Our City
Ick
In a vile ad this week, Tanya Woo compared her opponent, Alexis Mercedes Rinck, to the KKK. Bear in mind that Rinck’s career has primarily been defined by working to improve marginalized people’s lives. Woo continues to showcase that she is unfit for office.
Woo Still Can’t Answer Basic Questions
This comes on the heels of a rough couple weeks for Woo, who humiliated herself in an interview with Crosscut/Cascade PBS. Crosscut noted in the interview that she was misunderstanding the basic content of a bill she had just passed, and Woo proceeded to say “Bob Kettle has a good answer for that. I forgot what he said…”
It would be one thing if Woo was a new candidate. But this came from someone who not only signed that legislation mere days earlier, but has been campaigning for a spot on the same city council for two years straight. Woo currently has more very recent experience campaigning for the Seattle City Council than any human alive–and she still cannot answer such a basic question.
The Seattle Times Ed Board Wants to Save Woo
Since Woo looks like she may be sunk, the Seattle Times Editorial Board seems to be panicking. They don’t normally add in an extra endorsement article, but they decided to take another swing on behalf of Woo.
But Can’t Come Up With Any Real Reasons
What was particularly interesting about their screed was that their lack of fodder for fearmongering about Rinck meant their writeup was mostly about how much they hate Tammy Morales (who, mind you, is not a candidate!)
We’re supposed to believe that because Morales endorsed Rinck, Rinck is somehow responsible for everything Morales has ever said or done or been accused of.
They conveniently left out that Rinck is endorsed by tons of wildly popular politicians (Girmay Zahilay, Nicole Macri, Joe Fitzgibbon)/folks that the Times has enthusiastically endorsed (Jorge Baron, Dow Constantine, Gerry Pollet) and that she is also endorsed by every Democratic party apparatus around.
They seem also to want to avoid telling you (in their article attacking Rinck about public safety with no real content about her stances on public safety) that Rinck is endorsed by Moms Demand Action and the Alliance for Gun responsibility–the people actually focused on public safety!
I’ll give them this–last year the Seattle Times Ed Board openly lied about my platform (saying it had no drug related enforcement, when it had layers of enforcement, published publicly, well before they wrote) and refused to take it down after I provided the documentation. One wonders if their lawyer told them to step away from straight up lying about candidates and to try to construct an argument, however sophomoric?
Honestly, their piece was so bad I almost get why they resorted to lying last year.
They Had To Remind Readers Tanya Woo Self Identifies As A Democrat.
Setting aside the intern-level case-making, I have to admit I got a chuckle when I noticed that the authors had to remind readers “for the record” that Tanya Woo self-identifies as a Democrat.
Imagine being so conservative that your biggest booster in a deep blue city feels the need explain this.
Vote Rinck.
(As always, to be clear, the editors on the professional reporting side of the house at the Seattle Times are real pros with integrity. They responded quickly and decisively in fixing an error in an article about me last year and published the retraction. It’s the partisan pretenders on the Editorial Board I take issue with.).