On the left — no, the *far* left — that’s District 3 rep Kshama Sawant at Tuesday night’s rally for Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton. She’s not with her.

But he is. Capitol Hill’s other very important political person Mayor Ed Murray has thrown his liberal credentials firmly behind the former First Lady and Secretary of State:

Hillary Clinton is a powerful voice to unite our country and break down the barriers to opportunity holding back far too many people. She has spent a lifetime fighting for working people, and as president she will be the leader we need to make meaningful progress on pressing issues like income inequality, comprehensive immigration reform, and ensuring equal pay for women.

OK. Your turn, Sawant:

“We have to talk about how we use this momentum to build.” Sawant, who won reelection in November, believes that if labor and the left do not harness the energy and capacity generated by the Sanders campaign to elect “independent working-class candidates” to city council, state government, and even Congress, “we will have squandered this moment.”

“The Sanders campaign demonstrates on the national level what we had already proven in Seattle,” says Sawant, “that there is an overwhelming feeling, especially among young people, that this system—the capitalist system—has failed them.”

With the Bernie Sanders crew set up on E Pike, it looks like the senator’s campaign has home field advantage here heading into Saturday’s Washington caucus day. We wrote here about the two campaigns’ plans to win Capitol Hill (Seattle) voters and here about how Seattle picks a president. More caucus coverage to come.

Given the difficult choice, have you made up your mind yet? Take our CHS Caucus Poll.

UPDATE: Re: the “difficult choice” link above, we should say more. The Stranger, unwilling to be misunderstood for long periods of time, has felt it necessary to explain their punchline:

We actually printed two papers. About 3/5 of the run had Bernie Sanders on the cover and a Bernie endorsement inside and a 2/5 had Hillary Clinton on the cover and a Hillary endorsement inside. We distributed Hillary papers to the areas of the city we figured she would have the most support and Bernie papers to the parts of the city with the most Bernie support. And we didn’t put anything online when the papers went out. So people saw papers, and figured “YAY! THEY BACKED MY CANDIDATE!” or “BOO! THEY DIDN’T BACK MY CANDIDATE!” Some Sanders supporters initially insisted the Hillary cover they were seeing pictures of online was a hoax — and vice-versa. At 1 PM on Wednesday, six hours after the paper went out, our endorsement went up online. Readers who clicked on our endorsement got a popup window that read, “Please take this quick survey before seeing the content you requested!” There were three choices: “17-30,” “31-118,” and “I will not answer this question.” People who clicked on 17-30 went to the Sanders endorsement, people who clicked on 31-118 went to the Clinton endorsement, and people who didn’t want to answer the question went to the Sanders endorsement.

Adding to the confusion: A printing error caused the dead tree version of the endorsement write-up to be buried in the back of this week’s edition. Given the complexities of the Democratic race to name a candidate, CHS enjoyed the Stranger’s experiment in journalism even if many readers apparently did not.

UPDATE 11:45 AM: Through midday, it’s a landslide. Sanders has been the choice for 73.5% of respondents in the poll so far. Maybe doesn’t mean much. Maybe highly predictive. For what it’s worth, here are the top priorities from the campaign issues we included across all respondents:

Further spending good time on bad science, here’s a look at how the campaign priorities compare for Sanders respondents vs. Clinton respondents — Bernie’s Berners are highest on economic and health issues. Foreign policy and terrorism were the only categories where Hillary supporters chose the issue as a priority at a higher rate than the Sanders crowd:

Sanders selectors, meanwhile, were twice as likely to include an “other” in their answer. When not taking the opportunity to scold CHS for what we left out of the to level choices, here’s a look at how the verbatims have sifted out thanks to SurveyMonkey’s text analysis:

Meanwhile, CHS Clinton respondents were more likely to *not* be participating in Saturday’s caucus, according to current results.