Image Field: 

Elated! That’s how I felt when I first laid eyes upon the front page of Sunday’s paper. Perhaps this would be the big, end-all expose that would give me a clue as to which way our big, beautiful city will swing as we pit two consummate Seattle archetypes against each other in our latest soul-searching quest to define who we are. I am speaking, of course, of our impossibly lackluster race for mayor.

On the surface it would appear that there could not be a more inertia-filled lack of enthusiasm on the part of our populace to engage in this incredibly low-stakes contest in a field that we collectively regard with the same backhanded wave that we grudgingly give to the fruit-fly that won't get out of our face. If we look a little deeper, however, we find that we didn’t need to. It’s kind of like dissecting that classic Seattle half-smile that we give to each other when we make eye-contact. What’s that emotion in the eyes? Oh, right, NOTHING.
On the one hand we have Mike McGinn: highly educated, bearded white guy who is capable of making really good money but needs that pursuit to be meta for something more, something meaningful. On the other hand we have Joe Mallahan: highly educated, clean-shaven white guy who does make really good money and understands that the reason for doing so is to elevate his own personal ambition.

Does this sound like Seattle yet? Just wait. It gets much, much better.

Both candidates are Democrats, which in our one-party town is pretty spot on. Neither candidate looks entirely comfortable in a suit. Neither has the belly that Mayor Nickels sports, but both of them seem capable of putting one on. McGinn likes outdoorsy type stuff like cycling and kayaking while Mallahan prefers to spend his free time at his family’s cabin on Whidbey Island.

McGinn has the look of a man who has had every advantage and yet still feels incredibly put-upon. I imagine him feeling that “something needs to be done” and that he alone may be able to bring some sanity to the mayor’s office. Mallahan has always said that he would like to have a career in politics and this may be his gateway. So here we have two men who are both about political office for personal glory; one who probably doesn’t believe it and the other who is obtusely outspoken about it. It’s difficult for me to determine which of these makes me more uncomfortable.

McGinn is a transplant whose complexion evidences that he spends a lot of his time outdoors in the environmental paradise that is our scenic Pacific Northwest. Mallahan, on the other hand, is a native who has the look of someone who knows plenty well the virtues of staying inside where it’s warm and dry, thank-you-very-much. McGinn wants to get to know me; Mallahan wants to know what my contribution is. McGinn is about quality of life, even if it may inconvenience business. Mallahan knows that a rising tide raises all boats, just as long as you are in one of them—otherwise, you just get soaked.

If you’re still undecided as to which side to be on in this campaign we could also engage in the time-honored practice of comparing where these guys stand on the issues. Let’s give that a whirl:

McGinn would like to create a city-wide broadband utility, improve schools and bus service and stop any action involving a tunnel to replace the viaduct with. Translation: We will all be much better at communicating why we’re late because we’re stuck in a gridlock of awesome public-transportation somewhere downtown.

Mallahan wants to accelerate the hiring of police officers, cut consultants and reduce the number of highly-paid employees and go ahead with the tunnel. Translation: Let’s give badges to anyone who wants to carry a gun and fire all the smart people who are on the City’s dime. Then, we’ll dig a big hole and throw all the money we saved right into it!

Again, I’m not sure which option makes me more uncomfortable.

I, too, am living in Seattle, and so I reserve the right to criticize all options while proposing no solutions of my own. Sound familiar? Well this just doesn’t work for me so I decided to hit the street today and engage with my fellow citizens to see if I could find anybody who might enlighten me.

Because transportation and education are at issue and children are our future and all, I decided to take up camp amid the throng of stroller-pushing, toddler-bearing breeders at the Farmers’ Market. Members of the crowd were happily doing their part for public-funding of the Arts by instructing their little ones on the proper way to drop dollar bills into the instrument cases of the three intrepid Ballard High School students who showed out to raise money for their orchestra's upcoming trip to New York. I guess I figured that the only thing that could possibly enhance the drone of Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" was some local political discourse.

Of the twelve or so people I asked, only one exerted any opinion other than the standard “I haven’t looked into that yet” or “I haven’t decided. I still need to do some research.” I was reminded of the countless times that I have both said and heard in our NW, PC, aren’t-we-so-slickly-polite way, “We should get together sometime.” Yea, that’s going to happen. Just as soon as the wizard who makes pigs fly waves his wand to make my put-on-the-spot good intentions a reality. The one person who did have an opinion told me “My wife is a native and doesn’t like it, but I’m a Nickels guy. At least he got sh*t done.” His wife looked uncomfortable.

Having had no luck with the guardians of our future, I decided to move on. The next six or seven people also had no opinions. “Do you have any strong preference between these two?” I would ask as I held up the front page of the Times. “I haven’t decided yet” was the most popular response.

I decided to reword my question. “What do you think of these two?”

“Not much...he he...Just some more white people, I guess,” replied a guy whom I expected to be for McGinn. It was funny to hear him say it, though. His tone and timing were impeccable.

“No, thank you,” came from the younger gay guys with the tiny dog and the really big coffees, although I think that their response was directed more at me than at my question.

One guy who was raising awareness to preserve the Puget Sound was very decisive. “McGinn!” he exclaimed.

“Oh, yea? Why is that?” I asked.

“He directed the Sierra Club," was the answer.

“And that’s it?”

“Yep. That’s all I need to know,” he said, smiling.

In sharp contrast was the answer from one of the market’s vendors, who grimaced and answered: “Oh God, anyone but McGinn.”

Again, I asked “Why’s that?”

“He always comes by and hovers...’You’ve had enough free samples. Buy some fish already!’...but he never does”

So I asked, “And how about Joe Mallahan? Does he ever buy any?”

“Dunno, I’ve never met the man.”

Mr.McGinn, if you would like the fisherman’s vote, you might consider buying some of his fish. Mr. Mallahan, if you get the fisherman’s vote, it might be because your opponent didn’t buy any of his fish. Sometimes it’s just that simple.

Of the two folks who were campaigning to squash the latest Tim Eyman headache, one of them stated, “I’m not following this issue ‘cause I’m not old enough to vote. I’m only seventeen.”

“You’re old enough to enlist in the military,” I offered. She just stared at me.

The other girl said, “I like McGinn because he has younger ideas, and I’m young and what he says will affect me better.” (Mike McGinn is three years older than Joe Mallahan.) I believe that it was this same girl who added, “You know, I do think we need to build the tunnel though.”

“Why’s that?”

“Because we already voted on it.”

For some reason the smart-ass in me was compelled to retort, “So? We voted against a stadium and for a monorail. Three times in fact. Is leadership really about what the people want or is it about getting done what you’re determined to get done?”

“I see your point,” she said, with an intelligence in her eyes that saw right through me. I wish I could vote for her. She was the most informed person I spoke with all day.

One of the last encounters I had was with an astute homeless man whom I know rather well and whose take on life I have come to often admire. He was orphaned and raised within "the system" in Seattle and is an educated, articulate Air Force veteran who can very handily box a person into their own conversational corner. A lifetime of being on the defense has honed his debating prowess into a force not to be trifled with unless one is well-prepared. The trouble is, though I would like to keep a conversation on subject, I can never fully anticipate what I’m getting myself into.

Here’s what he had to say: “Should I care enough about either one of them? Which one is going to help the homeless?”

“Well” I started, “I don’t have any quotes about that, but we might infer some things based on their bios. McGinn has a history of civic activism and community organizing. He rides his bike around a lot so I’m pretty sure he at least has actual encounters with homeless people. He has managed to get lots of people into volunteering and most of what he has accomplished has come by way of that, so he definitely knows how to move peoples’ passions. On the other hand, Mallahan was raised Catholic, adopted two kids, and took care of his mother with Alzheimer’s, so he definitely understands compassion. He also helped T-Mobile out by creating a market for pre-paid service aimed at low-income and uncreditworthy individuals, so he knows how to connect with and motivate those people toward a profitable relationship.”

“OK, enough of that. Where do they stand on marijuana?” he demanded to know.

“Well, McGinn studied law and economics and...”

“STOP!” he shouted. “He’s the one! A Lawyer who bikes and boats? He smokes. The other guy likes cops and Catholic guilt. If I were a voting man I would have to say that I would vote for ME! But why would I want to do that when I already have enough sh*t to deal with in the office I currently hold?!”

So there we have it: Of the twenty-plus Seattleites to whom I put the question, only two had any concrete opinion and both of them were quite young. When I first began my day, I was elated by the symbology of our two candidates for Mayor. I figured that between them we had a near perfect dichotomy that represented the ambivalent nature of our city quite well. I had figured wrong. I had completely missed another massive archetype within our local culture- us.

Who will reign victorious in the battle to represent the soul of our city? I am no closer to having an answer to that but I am very certain of one thing: Whoever it is it will be underwhelmingly and barely decided by a coalition of the very few who care to exert an opinion. As for myself, I would like to model my decision on our two most recent presidents. First, I would like to engage each candidate in dialog, have a conversation, talk to them. Then, I would like to look into their eyes and see their souls. In the end, I will remain the product of my environment and embody the optimistic cynicism we all know so well.