Rantz: Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell doesn’t deserve to win re-election

Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell does not deserve to win re-election.

To be clear, Harrell’s opponent, Katie Wilson, would be a disaster for Seattle. She’s an extremist in the mold of Zohran Mamdani, pushing aggressively progressive policies that should set off alarm bells for anyone who values pragmatic governance and remembers how badly the city fared from 2020 to 2023. But that doesn’t let Harrell off the hook for his own failures.

Incumbency isn’t a lifeguard on duty — it doesn’t guarantee rescue. And Harrell’s re-election campaign, like his time as mayor, has been nothing short of lazy.

Bruce Harrell suffered humiliating loss, and history isn’t on his side

The numbers tell the story.

Wilson crushed Harrell in the August 5 primary, taking over 50 percent of the vote—a commanding majority that political pros warn is almost impossible to overcome in a general election. In earlier tallies, Wilson led 46.2 to 44.9 percent, but the gap only widened with further counting. Late-arriving Seattle ballots—usually favoring progressives—cemented her win. It was a landslide.

This isn’t just bad luck for Harrell; it’s a preview of November. Since Greg Nickels in 2005, no Seattle mayor has won a second term. Nearly two decades of history say Harrell is expendable. And he did this to himself.

Harrell has been lazy since day one

Since taking office in 2022, Harrell has shown a glaring lack of urgency.

The homeless crisis still devastates neighborhoods, and any progress happened in spite of Harrell—or thanks to Major League Baseball, one of the few things that got him to act. Housing remains out of reach for too many. Crime? He claims it’s down after four homicides, while open-air drug use and sales are rampant downtown. Business? He’s about to crush them with a new tax.

His campaign messaging has been thin—bragging about anti-Trump lawsuits, recycling “not going backwards” rhetoric, and showing no willingness to roll up his sleeves. Expect more empty talking points, including anti-Trump smears, as if someone motivated solely by Trump hatred will suddenly pick Harrell over Wilson.

Meanwhile, Wilson has campaigned with zeal and focus. She’s organized from the ground up, offering bold, populist ideas and energizing a restless progressive base. Harrell, by contrast, has coasted on name recognition and vague promises that Seattle can muddle through under his watch.

Voters want a mayor who will fight for the city, but Harrell is all bark, no bite

Seattle is desperate for progress—or at least a mayor willing to fight for it. Incumbency isn’t a free ride. Harrell has had the chance to lead, and yet here we are, watching momentum slip through his fingers.

Harrell’s failures go beyond disinterest. He’s surrounded himself with a weak, ill-equipped staff. Deputy Mayor Tim Burgess is a control freak running City Hall like he’s the mayor, and Harrell lets him. Harrell likes the title more than the work. The Seattle Department of Transportation keeps tearing up roads for bike lanes no one uses. The Seattle Police Department? The Mayor’s Office micromanages what should be left to capable Command Staff, and Harrell’s big hire is a man so tone-deaf he took $2,000 in hiring referral bonuses after appointing the staff himself.

Even communications are a mess.

His flack, Jamie Housen, is a petty, vindictive operative with no confidence Harrell can handle tough questions. It’s why you’ll only see him do friendly interviews. When bad news is coming, Housen goes dark and shuts out the press. (Full disclosure: I learned two years ago that Housen told staff not to respond to my comment requests, though some still did the right thing.) When there’s good news, Housen can’t craft a narrative—or doesn’t trust Harrell to own it—relying instead on friendly reporters to rewrite press releases and slap on the “One Seattle” brand that no one can define. Reporters have played along—until now. With Harrell on the ropes, that goodwill is evaporating.

I’ve talked to plenty of people who know Wilson would be bad for Seattle, but still won’t back Harrell. They see him as all talk, no action—a stiff politician convinced he’s charismatic. I’m a Seattle voter. I won’t vote for Wilson, and while a lazy, disinterested Harrell might be marginally better for the city, I don’t know if I can give him my vote. I certainly don’t want to. And one of his problems? He doesn’t want my vote.

What will voters decide?

Here’s the paradox: even though Katie Wilson may represent the kind of ideological shift I despise, Bruce Harrell still deserves to lose. His lack of energy, uninspired leadership, and complacency have been laid bare by the voters’ primary response.

Seattle needs a mayor who’s fully engaged and ready to work, not someone coasting on legacy or hiding in safe centrism. Wilson is that leader—even if she’s leading us straight back into the 2020–2023 hellscape. Harrell’s performance has been indefensible.

I obviously have no idea how this election plays out. Maybe Harrell wins, but he hasn’t come close to earning it. In the end, voters may decide that change, even with its risks, is better than stagnant leadership.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3 p.m. – 7 p.m. on Seattle Red on 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the podcast here. Follow Jason Rantz on X, Instagram, YouTube, and Facebook.

Follow @https://twitter.com/jasonrantz