Post navigation

Prev: (11/12/24) | Next: (11/13/24)

Mapping Scott and Rinck wins across Capitol Hill, the Central District, and the ‘blue city’ of Seattle

Maps of the neighborhood by neighborhood totals show recent political fault lines across Capitol Hill, the Central District, and Seattle held firm in the November election even as city leaders stoked rising priorities around law and order solutions to the city’s drug crisis and street disorder.

Meanwhile, anybody looking for clues about the changing political nature of “blue cities” will likely be confounded by our local results.

In the battle for Tanya Woo’s appointed citywide seat on the Seattle City Council, progressive challenger Alexis Mercedes Rinck dominated the core of the city with some of her strongest precinct showings in Capitol Hill’s renter-dominated center and on her home turf in the Central District with results approaching 75 to 80% of the vote.

As Rinck held onto ground won in the August primary above the E Republican line, Woo’s few Central Seattle strongholds were north of Volunteer Park and on First Hill in addition to her expected success in the wealthy neighborhoods along Lake Washington.

Overall, Rinck will finish with around a 16-point win and 58% of the vote across Seattle as she will be immediately installed to replace Woo before again facing an election battle next year as Position 8’s next term will begin.

While Rinck’s victory solidified recent patterns for progressive victories built on renter-dominated areas of the city, the candidate also cleaned-up in the city’s still wealthy but less affluent single-family zoned areas in the north and south of the city.

Woo, who has filled the Position 8 seat since her appointment to finish the final year of the term when Teresa Mosqueda left to take the seat she won on the King County Council, made public safety a center of the debate in her campaign, joining leaders like council president Sara Nelson in championing a traditional law and order approach while Rinck has said she will champion public safety legislation that addresses root causes of crime like social and housing programs.

43RD LANDSLIDE
Meanwhile, as pundits are examining the national wreckage left by the results of the presidential election and attempting to ponder the future of Democratic stronghold “blue cities” like Seattle, another Central Seattle vote should be part of the equation.

Shaun Scott scored a landslide victory over Andrea Suarez in the race for the Position 2 seat to represent the 43rd District in the State House of Representatives, claiming 69% of the vote and generating results maps that are nearly comical in their restriction of his challenger’s totals.

Suarez, who has gained notoriety through the We Heart Seattle organization she started as a neighborhood clean-up and homelessness volunteer group and who has courted controversy in her association with conservative pundits and Republican officials, managed majorities in only the 43rd’s wealthiest, waterfront precincts along Laurelhurst, Madison Park, and Denny Blaine, where Scott still managed 45% of the vote.

Voters weren’t buying her approach to cleaning up the city, and they weren’t buying endorsements from the Seattle Times and the Seattle Police Officers Guild.

They also didn’t buy her criticism of what she called Scott’s “defund” policies and looked past her attacks on the candidate’s support for Palestine liberation.

Meanwhile, Scott won big with support from Frank Chopp, the Washington political legend and housing champion whose retirement opened the seat, and a campaign he said was focused on continuing to respond to the issues that drove the Black Lives Matters protests, and the responses to the COVID-19 crisis that forged progressive policies including the creation of a public social housing developer in Seattle.

In a country that has supposedly shifted to the right, Washington is being reported as an outlier as pundits and leaders debate what comes next for cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle. The map of Scott’s success — and Suarez’s failure — in the 43rd District might paint one clear picture of what holding steady looks like.

UPDATE: For the morbidly curious, here is a look at how Trump fared across Seattle. Those blue precincts? Harris victories. President-elect Trump scored just over 22% of the vote in King County this time around — pretty much what he scored in 2020 and 2016. According to the 2024 dataset, Trump managed to “win” one Seattle precinct — King 3693 where a single voter cast a vote for the Republican. According to the voter database, the precinct includes the Jefferson Day Center Shelter and King County Work Release facility.

 

You can view Washington’s November 2024 election results mapped at wacommunityalliance.github.io.

 

$5 A MONTH TO HELP KEEP CHS PAYWALL-FREE
🌈🐣🌼🌷🌱🌳🌾🍀🍃🦔🐇🐝🐑🌞🌻 

Subscribe to CHS to help us hire writers and photographers to cover the neighborhood. CHS is a pay what you can community news site with no required sign-in or paywall. To stay that way, we need you.

Become a subscriber to help us cover the neighborhood for $5 a month -- or choose your level of support 👍 

 
 

Subscribe and support CHS Contributors -- $1/$5/$10 per month

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

23 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
chHill
chHill
7 months ago

wait, but I thought Tanya Woo and her policies were popular?!?

among other things, it seems like traffic safety being one of the highest reported complaints city-wide didn’t jive with her record lol

d4l3d
d4l3d
7 months ago
Reply to  chHill

Jibe. Jive is jargon associated with swing music.

chHill
chHill
7 months ago
Reply to  d4l3d

Alright man I’m hep to your gibe. But the great thing about language is, it’s first and foremost about communication of ideas…and jibe or jive, we can all agree she’s jeff.

Boris
Boris
7 months ago
Reply to  chHill

she lost two elections in a row, so no, I don’t think we can assume that she was popular

chHill
chHill
7 months ago
Reply to  Boris

Weird…I remember seeing so many comments on prior stories on here in support of Woo, but maybe it was just a figment of my imagination. Haven’t heard from many of them since…

Popular
Popular
7 months ago
Reply to  chHill

Trump won the popular vote, making assumptions that somehow people who voted for Scott and Rink made their decisions more intelligently than all those “other people”?”

Dubious at best.

These maps distort the relationship between physical location, and sizing, vs population/percentage.

Seward Park, despite the fact that no one lives there, does not have the significance that the map expresses.

CD Resident
CD Resident
7 months ago
Reply to  Popular

Trump won the popular vote largely because people who voted for Biden did not for Harris in several key states, while Trump’s turnout was relatively static.

Off Broadway
Off Broadway
7 months ago

Congratulations to Andrea Suarez on her upcoming Fox News sinecure. I can’t wait for hits like “Housing First made me beat my ex” and “the woke Democrats kicked me out just for doing campaign events with a 2020 election truther.” Happy trails!!

Boris
Boris
7 months ago

I know everyone wants to fit this into progressive vs conservative or something, but to me it was really that Woo just seemed completely incompetent in nine months of work and Rinck seemed competent in her published website and speaking engagements.

Gem
Gem
7 months ago
Reply to  Boris

I think a lot of people were just annoyed at the principle–that someone could lose an election but still get put on the council, and then campaign on basically the same exact thing as last time despite losing AND having little to show for her time there.

Glenn
Glenn
7 months ago
Reply to  Gem

That principle was violated before when progressives placed Able Pacheco on the Council after he finished third in the primary. But that issue aside, I do not have a problem with another progressive voice on Counciľ. Two seems just about the right numbeř

Matt
Matt
7 months ago
Reply to  Glenn

Except his failed run was in 2015, his appointment was in 2019, and he announced that he wouldn’t run for reelection once he was nominated for that caretaker position… So nope, not really a similar situation where someone uses their appointment to launch their campaign for that same position 🙄

Glenn
Glenn
7 months ago
Reply to  Matt

Previous examples do not have to be exactly like current circumstances in order to have precedential value Matt. The fact is, Council has appointed recently defeated candidates to Council seats in the recent past. That is precedent, and it is what I was pointing out. Nothing new there. As for Tonya Woo, some have complained she was rejected by the voters so shouldn’t have been appointed. She lost election for a District Council seat with a limited number of voters. She was appointed to a citywide seat, so it was not as though the voters she would be representing in her citywide seat had rejected her. She also very nearly won her District race, as she was narrowly defeated by the popular Ms, Morales. Progressives just didn’t like it because Council chose more moderately than they would have liked.

Matt
Matt
7 months ago
Reply to  Glenn

They have to be somewhat similar to be of value… Woo lost and then was appointed to a seat vacated by a council member that won another race in that same election. Woo danced around questions about running for reelection while running for the appointment but then made moves quite quickly to start up a campaign for this election.

Pacheco ran unsuccessfully in the 2015 primary, and was unsuccessful in running for an appointment in 2017, then ran successfully for an appointment in 2019 with part of his campaign promise being that he wouldn’t run for reelection.

They are wildly different scenarios that only share vague similarities if you squint really hard. You’re reaching real hard to make a point that’s just not there…

Boris
Boris
7 months ago
Reply to  Gem

Yes, 100% agree.

Tiffany
Tiffany
7 months ago
Reply to  Boris

Yea it’s not that deep. Woo was an awful candidate, clueless on policy and everything else. She’s just a rubber stamp for what some would term “business interests” on the council.

Rinck is a career activist / pol which whatever, that’s the ecosystem that puts a lot of candidates on the ballot here. I’m not a fan of her record or policy but she appears competent and engaged, which woo does not.

Stumpy
Stumpy
7 months ago
Reply to  Tiffany

Woo WAS an awful candidate. As was Suarez. But our given choices were also awful. Scott vs Suarez? Terrible choices. Woo vs Mercedes Rinck? Eh. All you have to do is show up “progressive ” and you got it in the bag, unless BSC like NTK and Nikita Oliver. This does not help us as a city.

Let's talk
Let's talk
7 months ago
Reply to  Stumpy

Agreed

Tim
Tim
7 months ago
Reply to  Boris

You see here people. Boris’ comment reads well because it highlights two screaming faults in either candidate with out being overtly hilarious. You know, like British comedy. Nice comment Boris’
…speaking engagements.

NinaS
NinaS
7 months ago

I think some of us voted for Alexis Mercedes Rinck and Shaun Scott because they came across as competent with a broad grasp of the challenges as compared to their opponents.

While I suspect Shaun Scott is further left than I am, I was struck by his work in Olympia and his endorsement by Chopp, who was an effective leader. I’m very tired of people at both ends of the spectrum striking poses and only making noise. I want to elect people who will look at the problems and take concrete actions to solve them.

Stumpycleaer
Stumpycleaer
7 months ago
Reply to  NinaS

Honestly I can only laugh at this. Scott made it clear that we somehow “owed” him elective office. And Frank Chopp? Ever present but can someone tell what Frank Chopp has done for us in so many years? And he gets to anointing Scott? Guess so.

Progressive Leftist
Progressive Leftist
7 months ago
Reply to  Stumpycleaer

Your reply is weird

Stumpyclaer
Stumpyclaer
7 months ago

Well that was enlightening. Anything else to add?