In a city that is 85 percent Democrat, where do you hear conservative pitches? How about this, from a propaganda card I received in the mail:

3 things you should know about
the proposed tunnel megaproject.

1. It will cost $4.2 billion, requiring the largest tax increase in Seattle history.

3. Seattle taxpayers are liable for all cost overruns—which could be in the billions.

No. 1 is an argument that the tunnel will raise taxes; No. 2 is an argument that the tunnel will ineffectively serve people in cars and trucks; No. 3 is the anti-tax argument again. These are conservative arguments. So is the headline on the other half of the card, which says:

Only one candidate for mayor will stop the largest tax increase in Seattle history.

That being Mike McGinn, former president of the Sierra Club's Cascade Chapter. He's no conservative, and he doesn't claim to be one. The card he sends out doesn't say he's one, either. In arguing against the tunnel, he's staking out a position of Seattle's progressive-left--an argument that the Viaduct should be taken down and replaced with better bus service, street improvements and widening of I-5. But it just so happens that his arguments against the tunnel appeal directly to conservatives, too.

That is an interesting thing about much of Seattle's left. Nick Licata is considered the lefty on the Seattle City Council. For what? Among other things, for opposing the various Alaskan Way tunnel proposals as too costly; for opposing the $200 million Mercer Street makeover as too costly; for opposing the South Lake Union Tram as too costly, and for opposing the idea of spending city money to refurbish Key Arena for the Sonics. In Seattle, these have all become "left-wing" positions--but they might also be thought of as "right-wing" positions. They appeal to both "wings" against the center.