@LWVWA@SpokesmanReview@GonzagaU 1. There was one moderator, @LaurelDemkovich. Having one moderator is simpler. Large panels of moderators have been seen in past #wasen debates. But as we saw tonight, having one moderator works well.
2. Rebuttal time was provided. It's really important in a debate to offer time for rebuttals and the organizers did so.
3. There were follow-up questions. It can be very useful for the moderator to follow up, especially if both of the candidates ignore the premise of a question.
4. Gimmicks that might sound attractive to an organizer but rarely work well in practice (such as letting the candidates ask each other a question) were avoided.
5. A range of issues were covered and important issues that have been ignored in the past were thankfully not ignored this time. There was actually a climate question this time around, which wasn't the case in 2018 in Tacoma with Cantwell and Hutchison.
6. The mics were inactivated when the candidates weren't speaking. This kept the debate on track and prevented anyone from pulling a Trump. Tiffany Smiley tried interrupting Murray several times but couldn't talk over her effectively due to the inactivation of her mic.
7. Time limits were enforced gracefully. The moderator spoke up when the candidates ran over but didn't totally shut them down as they tried to finish. That's important because trying to articulate one's thoughts in a thirty-second stretch can be tough. Some flexibility helps.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
NPI emphatically disagrees with this group of House progressives. This letter is an unforced error. Past attempts to negotiate have failed. The Russians don't honor what they agree to. This is, we'll note, what Vladimir Putin has been holding out for: a weakening of U.S. resolve.
It is noble for progressives to want world peace. Unfortunately, not every conflict or situation can be resolved with diplomacy, as we saw in the 1930s. Appeasement of Hitler did not prevent WWII. Instead, it made the war that the Allies eventually had to fight harder to win.
We've already tried negotiating with the Kremlin regarding the invasion of Ukraine (for those unaware, the invasion began years ago). For example, the 2014-2015 era Minsk Agreement was flagrantly violated by Russia. Background: editorials.voa.gov/a/violations-o…
@seattletimes, @TheStranger, @PubliColaNews endorsed a "no" vote on 2022 Seattle Proposition 1, though for different reasons. The ST has no recommendation for Part B. The Stranger and PublicCola back 1B.
NPI recommends voting "yes" and then 1B. npi.li/3m1
Early this morning, the @seattletimes published a piece by Jason Mercier of the right wing Washington Policy Center. That's not unusual. What is noteworthy is that they gave it top billing... it got put above the digital fold, as you can see from this screenshot:
@seattletimes Typically, stories written by the Times' journalists (or its columnists, like Danny Westneat) get these spots. Not "op-eds." But @seatimesopinion really, really wanted eyeballs for Mercier's piece, so the Times did Mercier a favor and made his submission as prominent as possible.
@seattletimes@SeaTimesOpinion Presently, as of this thread, the piece still has the top spot under Opinion, above a Horsey cartoon and an editorial from the Times' own staff, as you can see from this second screenshot:
Essentially, Reagan is admitting his opposition to our charter amendment is based on his belief that more voters participating in county elections — and a more diverse electorate — will make it harder for Republicans like him to win. They insist on a rigged playing field. #waelex
It is important to remember that King County elections are officially “nonpartisan.” No party labels on the ballot. Why is that? Well, a few years back, *Republicans* orchestrated a charter change to remove party labels, hoping it would make them more competitive. It didn’t work.
King County Council currently taking up our proposal to move elections for twelve county offices to #evenyears. #walex@KCCKohlWelles is speaking in favor, saying she strongly supports it.
Now, @KccClaudia is explaining how we will see better and more diverse turnout for our county-level offices if we adopt this charter amendment. #walex
Councilmember @reagandunn calls the proposal “thoughtful” and “well-intentioned” but argues that having more people voting doesn’t necessarily mean we have a more “informed” electorate. 🙁 We disagree: A smaller electorate doesn’t equal a more informed electorate.