Race turns into flippin' contest

"When a fellow's turning flip-flops up among the clouds, he's naturally going to have the farmers gaping at him."

That was the oldest yet best description I could find of the sudden reversal known as the political "flip-flop." It dates from the Saturday Evening Post, in 1902, and captures exactly the attitudinal somersaults in the fog that have become our Seattle mayor's race.

We citizens can't do much but gape as our two newbie candidates take one head-scratching U-turn after another through the issues of the day.

This week saw the floppiest flip yet, when Mike McGinn, he of the "insurgent," anti-establishment campaign, said "never mind" to his central rebel yell — that he would try to stop the $4.2 billion waterfront tunnel project.

"It is not the Mayor's job to withhold the cooperation of city government in executing this (tunnel) agreement," he backpedaled on Monday.

On my desk is a mailing I got from McGinn a little more than two months ago. It shows a photo with a defiant McGinn holding up a sign that says "NO" while eight other lemminglike politicians hold up "YES."

"Only one candidate for Mayor will stop the largest tax increase in Seattle history," the mailing says categorically, referring to the local costs for the tunnel.

"As Mayor, I will not authorize the use of city tax dollars for the tunnel," it says, still, on McGinn's campaign Web site. The project is referred to there as the "Deep Boring Boondoggle."

Now, though? Shrug. He was standing up against it. Now he's sitting down.

I don't usually berate politicians for flip-flopping. Consistency is important in meringues, not leaders. Because circumstances can change. So maybe McGinn is evolving based on new information?

That's the trouble. Nothing has changed.

McGinn pointed to a Seattle City Council vote Monday, in which it passed an ordinance supporting the tunnel. This development was a surprise to no one, as the city has long been on record supporting a tunnel (in fact this is the third ordinance it has passed in four years endorsing one waterfront tunnel or another.)

"It's not binding, and it's not a contract," Councilman Nick Licata explained to me after the vote. "It doesn't obligate us to pay for anything, and there's no financing attached. It's simply a statement to move ahead."

Stop the campaigns! Start the earth-boring machines!

Seriously, none of the previous tunnels city leaders endorsed like this ended up built (not the original six lane one circa 2006 nor the desperate 'Tunnel Lite' of 2007.) Like those, this third tunnel will have its accountability moment eventually — like when they tell us what it's really going to cost (in 2010 or 2011 or maybe when they've got it dug halfway.)

So what is McGinn doing here? Trying to win, I guess. But it certainly takes the urgent right out of insurgent. As Seattle Times reporter Jim Brunner jokingly tweeted: "Biggest remaining issue in mayor's race: (Joe) Mallahan shaves. McGinn pro-beard, but may reconsider if City Council demands."

Now Mallahan has also been flopping around like a docked halibut. He was against the $191 million "Mercer Mess" project until he suddenly was for it. He's now for extending streetcar lines but last month was against them. There's more, but often his positions are so murky there's no baseline from which to later flip or flop.

I've got to hand it to Joe, though: On the biggest issue of all, it was McGinn, not Mallahan, who retreated (though there's plenty of time for more wishy-washying before Election Day.)

Most campaigns crystallize over time. This one gets curiously mushier. The good news is these both are well-meaning, good-hearted guys. I think. But the more they say, the blurrier they seem.

I don't know what to add to you gaping farmers except: Do you miss Greg Nickels yet?

Danny Westneat's column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com.