By Andrew Hong, special for CHS
Despite a close primary contest, Joy Hollingsworth won the November general election for Seattle City Council District 3 by a 6-point margin against Alex Hudson. Her victory marks the first time a moderate, Seattle Times-endorsed candidate will represent District 3, which comprises Capitol Hill, the Central District, Madison Park, Montlake, and Eastlake.
Her victory is notable because she had one of the widest margins of victory in the city despite District 3 being the most progressive district in Seattle-wide elections (ex: 2021 Mayoral Election). Furthermore, she flipped this seat from Kshama Sawant, the most left-wing Seattle City Councilmember who held the seat for a decade before deciding to step aside this year to shift her focus to the creation of a new national political party.
Hollingsworth’s win is a part of what can be seen as an ideological shift in Seattle City Hall, represented by a shift from the previous 6-3 left-leaning majority to a new, veto-proof 7-2 moderate majority on the council with vacating Councilmember Teresa Mosqueda’s likely-moderate appointed replacement set to join the new group early next year.
2023 ELECTION
- Hollingsworth declares victory, says ready to build on family legacy of three generations in the Central District by giving ‘everyone a voice’
- Capitol Hill Community Post | Thank you Seattle – District 3
- A by-the-map look at how the Hollingsworth vs. Hudson District 3 race for the Seattle City Council could play out
- Mapping the Hollingsworth-Hudson primary victories in a less polarized District 3
So, how did the relative moderate and business-backed Hollingsworth win the most progressive district in Washington’s most progressive city?
Precinct-level maps showing results and turnout for the neighborhoods of District 3 reveal the results of a friendlier citywide political environment, lower turnout in progressive areas of the city, and crucially, large gains in the historically-Black Central District were at the core of her victory.
A more moderate political environment
First, Seattle voters across the city were in a more moderate mood in 2023 than they were four years ago. Moderates won 53-47% across all seven districts in 2023, up 16% from 45-55% in 2019. That 16-point swing alone would’ve reversed the outcome in District 3, as well as Districts 1, 4, and 7—this would’ve led to a likely 7-2 progressive majority.
| 2023 | 2019 | Change | |
| District 3 Results | 53-47% Moderate | 52-48% Progressive | +10% Moderate |
| Seattle Results | 53-47% Moderate | 55-45% Progressive | +16% Moderate |
What caused this 8-point rightward shift in Seattle is more of a mystery. Four years ago, Amazon flooded the council races with $1.5 million that caused national media attention and backlash against Amazon and their moderate beneficiaries days before Election Day—that did not happen in 2023. Seattle voters had a much less favorable view of moderate Mayor Jenny Durkan in 2019 than they do of moderate Mayor Bruce Harrell in 2023. Turnout decreased nearly 10% since 2019, which usually hurts progressives. Voters cared way more about crime in 2023, and want to hire more police—an issue moderates championed this year.
Whatever the reason was, Hollingsworth’s victory was a part of a more moderate political environment across the whole city.
Lower (progressive) turnout
Secondly, the 2023 electorate was smaller and less progressive than the 2019 electorate. Turnout decreased across the board in 2023, which typically means the younger, more progressive voters stayed home. Indeed, turnout decreased slightly more in Capitol Hill—the youngest, most progressive neighborhood in District 3. Decreased turnout was more concentrated in District 3: turnout decreased 12% in District 3, but only 9% in Seattle.
| 2023 | 2019 | Change | |
| District 3 Turnout | 48% | 60% | -12% |
| Seattle Turnout | 47% | 55% | -9%* |
| District 3 Turnout Change from Primary | +10% | +13% | -2%* |
| Seattle Turnout Change from Primary | +10% | +12% | -2% |
*rounding errors
What was more striking, though, was that the typical turnout bump from the August Primary to the November General was also smaller in 2023. More people vote in the General Election, and this happened in 2023, too. However while turnout jumped 12.7% in 2019, it only increased by 10.4% in 2023. Additionally, the largest increase in turnout occurred in moderate neighborhoods like Montlake, while the progressive Central District and Capitol Hill had little turnout increase.
Furthermore, when we look at the 2019-2023 change in this August-to-November turnout bump by neighborhood, we see the turnout bump decreased especially in progressive Capitol Hill while moderate Madison Park and Broadmoor actually had a greater turnout increase in 2023. Put differently, while the November 2019 electorate got more progressive after the August 2019 Primary, the November 2023 electorate got more moderate after the August 2023 Primary. This helps explain why a relatively strong primary showing for Hudson didn’t carry into November as much as it did for Sawant in 2019.
The reason this occurred may, again, be related with the fact the media focus right before the November 2019 election was on Amazon’s influence in city politics. This media narrative did not take shape ahead of November 2023 — though CHS did report on surging spending by smaller independent expenditure committees in the D3 race.
But another reason progressive enthusiasm didn’t match 2019 could be due to Kshama Sawant’s masterful campaigning. Sawant raised nearly $600,000 in 2019 while Hudson raised less than $200,000; Sawant also had a massive volunteer army of socialist activists and organizations knocking doors for her at a scale even mayoral campaigns can’t compete with. It’s very likely Sawant’s campaign operations turned out more infrequent (progressive) voters that Hudson’s campaign simply could not replicate.
The end result is progressive voters—particularly in District 3—were disproportionately less excited to turn out in 2023 than they were in 2019. This helped Hollingsworth win.
Hollingsworth gained in the Central District
Thirdly, and most importantly, Hollingsworth’s victory ran through the Black communities of the Central District. Progressive candidates typically win this part of the district by up to 40%, and progressive Hudson did win the Central District overall.
However, Hudson’s margins there were far smaller than progressive Kshama Sawant’s were in her victorious 2019 race. Hollingsworth improved upon 2019 moderate Egan Orion’s margins in some precincts by over 15%, even outright winning many Central District precincts. She racked up gains in nearly every precinct south of Madison.
Hollingsworth is the daughter of a longtime Black family in the Central District, and earned the endorsements of several respected Black leaders. This undoubtedly played a role in her gains in the Central District, especially given her 2019 counterpart was a white guy from Capitol Hill. In local politics, race and community connections matter especially in communities of color; Hollingsworth was simply a strong candidate for the Central District.
Everywhere else, though, the 2023 election looked a lot like the 2019 election—with one exception. There were slight leftward shifts in the wealthiest, whitest, most moderate parts of the district—Madison Park, Denny Blaine, and Montlake—despite the district (and entire city) shifting right overall. The moderate candidate in 2019 was white while the progressive was a person of color; in contrast, the 2023 progressive was white while the moderate candidate was a person of color.
Taken together, this election saw a less polarized District 3 with the most progressive neighborhoods shifting right and the most conservative neighborhoods shifting left. However Hollingsworth got the edge because she pushed the typically-progressive Central District further right than Hudson inched the moderate Madison Park left.
In conclusion, a perfect combination of lower turnout, a moderate political environment, and a candidate with deep ties to an important neighborhood helped flip District 3 from being represented by a nationally famous socialist to now one of the most moderate members on the new Seattle City Council. Hollingsworth will undoubtedly be one of the most vulnerable incumbents in 2027 as a Times-endorsee in a progressive, and increasingly gentrifying, District 3; but there are four long years of legislating for Hollingsworth between now and then.
Andrew Hong is a data science student at Stanford University and lifelong Seattleite. He has worked as a campaign consultant, community organizer, and is currently a research data analyst at the Washington Community Alliance Data Hub, an organization using data to help dozens of civic and progressive organizations across Washington.
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 as little as $5 a month.
The SE chunk of the map that went from 70+% turnout to <30% turnout was Sawants “army” who were “mobilized” to vote for her through means that were somewhat controversial. Wonder if that was the deciding factor, all ele considered.
This sounds like you don’t like when a certain class of people vote… hmm. Why the suppression coded language?
What a silly thing to say.
No, it’s clearly what he’s saying. He doesn’t like a certain demographic of voters. You decide who that is.
Turns out, Sawant’s army won’t vote unless you hand them a pre-printed ballot and register them on the spot. Go figure.
QAnon level conspiracy crap here
Huh? Where are you getting “suppression coded language” in the OP’s comment? Sounds to me like they are just wondering if a lack of Sawant’s “get out the vote” style of canvassing led to Hudson’s defeat.
But I guess if you’re trained to fear any opinion that isn’t in lock-step with the Socialist Alternative’s version of the world as “suppression” then your comment makes sense.
More QAnon stuff here. “Trained” what? Did you know it’s possible to support Sawant based on her policy? Or is everything tinfoil and conspiracy with you?
Um, what?
“ like you don’t like when a certain class of people vote”
You mean Pastry Arts majors from Seattle Community College using printers to make ballots?
I printed out my ballot (was lost in the mail). Did I do something illegal?
Not at all..
Otoh, if you printed one for someone else, at your campaign poster plastered booth, while wearing your vote for Sawant tee, pressuring them to vote for her and then escorted them to the nearby ballot box to make sure they dropped the ballot in, then yes, you were electioneering.
Somewhat… I thought her methods were likely illegal. Setting up stations to help people print ballots is one thing, but when you start campaigning at the same table, have clearly partisan people walking voters through the filling out of ballots and escorting them to drop boxes, all of which, I believe her minions were observed to have been doing, it becomes coercive. I have zero desire to backtrack from all mail in votes, I think our system is great, but the behavior of her election staff would never have been acceptable that close to an polling station and shouldn’t have been tolerated under these new circumstances either. All partisan activities should have been kept at least 100 feet away from any spot providing instant registrations, printing ballots and providing space to fill them out – so no slogans, no posters, no tee shirts with candidates no talking up candidates period – just technical assistance where necessary and a private place to fill thing out.
I think her aggressive street corner efforts as seen above were the only reason she squeaked through her recall… that other candidates have not tried the same tactics is a good thing.
Nothing illegal about it. You just didn’t like the results. Whomp Whomp
Actually yes there is… https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=29A.84.520
It simply hasn’t been tested in court yet, because it was, to my knowledge a novel situation. Had it been, I’ve little doubt that the decision would be that it was electioneering.
I would have felt no different had it been the recall folks acting in this manner. Wrong is wrong.
The code section you cited applies to election officers, not campaign volunteers. Nice try though.
The code section you were probably looking for (29A.84.510) limits campaign activities to 25 feet from ballot drop boxes, which is actually pretty close.
She didn’t do anything illegal.
Even if there was “nothing illegal about it,” Dear Leader very narrowly avoided a recall and then chose not to run for re-election.
Anyone with a brain knew her explanation for not seeking a third term was BS. She clearly knew that if she ran again she would get crushed so she concocted some story about working on behalf of The Socialist Alternative in DC. I’m sure that’ll go great for her.
But by all means, gloat about a the results of a now meaningless recall result two years ago.
Pathetic.
Narrow? The turnout was a joke and still defeated it.
Love how you care about legality of poor people voting but not Hollingsworth PAC influence
Electioneering near a polling place is a crime. Sawant’s army of left wing zealots figured out a loophole. Kudos to them. They knew how to cheat.
And now they’re gone. Bye, Felicia. And Seattle exhales as the army of Sawant’s Angry Socialists is gone hopefully for good.
Lots of luck with .. checks notes .. forming that new political party. New grift is more like it. New way to scam the gullible out of their rent money.
Also…never happened. Nothing illegal. You’re allowed to canvas. And have tables. Both candidates in this race did.
When I saw Sawant’s tabletop voting campaign, it felt so much like the 1830s where votes were traded for food and drink with a wink and a nod. Mail-in balloting is better than poll stations, but voter registration should be closed 30 days before the election. That leaves plenty of time for people to get ballots from their previous voting address.
Or these were marginalized people needing representation in local government. Not everyone is bought!
Baristas are marginalized?
How Joy won: Hudson having a lousy campaign. I voted Hudson but she wasn’t doing the hard work to fight the Conservative PAC-backed Hollingsworth mailers the way Sawant, the GOAT, did.
Conservative PAC? I think the bubble you’re living in is running out of air.
Did I stutter?
To a Socialist, anyone that isn’t one of their cabal is therefore an enemy and a right winger. To a Socialist, there’s no difference between a normal Democrat and a Republican.
Thankfully we can stop needing to think about most of this junk, because it turns out, being a full time Socialist is hard work. It appears much of D3 didn’t have the belly to keep fighting like Dear Leader of Our Revolution inspired them to fight. Oh well.
Meanwhile the enemies you made in D3 will last you a lifetime. A bunch of formerly disengaged moderates is now ready and willing to vote against the Socialist / Progressive for the foreseeable future. We likely wouldn’t have been this motivated had not we been momentarily conquered by Kshama Sawant and her army of left wing robots and trolls.
Did I stutter? Your influence is gone, your hand overplayed, your victories fleeting but your losses now permanent, your reward bitter just like your world views. Time to hop on the anti-Israeli horse and go smash more windows, chasing forever the spirit of 2020 that will never return.
Now take your bag of poop and get out of my yard.
Signed, the rest of D3.
Technically it sounded more like a fart since your general tone here is that of an *sshole
OK. That’s enough, kids.
Or his diaper is full.
Hudson was a lousy campaigner and a middling candidate. She failed to meaningfully differentiate herself from Joy EVEN AFTER SOMEBODY ASKED HER HOW SHE WAS DIFFERENT THAN JOY.
It was literally impossible to say “Vote for Alex because she believes in X,Y, and Z approaches which will be different than Joy’s A, B, and C approaches.”
I voted for Alex but very begrudgingly. I had actually voted for the other pot guy because he had a point of view and would have been a stronger campaigner even if he would have been a weaker wonk.
Hollingsworth “conservative”… you Sawanties really are hysterical. Just because your choice is Marxism – as extreme to the left as the political spectrum gets before total chaos – that doesn’t make a slightly more moderate person anything like conservative.
The Conservative PACs backed mailers attacking Hudson. Where’s the lie my dude?
I don’t tend to give any credence or time to political mailers.. they go directly into my recycle bin, in favor of forming my own opinions from more reliable sources, but anyway – So… all that may mean is that the found her to be the less desirable of two undesirable candidates… even as a voter I’ve had to hold my nose and cast a vote for a candidate I don’t exactly support, because the alternatives are even more odious…
Cope and seethe. This is the same twisted logic you used to torpedo Egan Orion, a 30 year community organizer with deep roots in D3’s LGB community … because Amazon wrote him a check and he was unfortunately not smart enough to return it.
Guilt by association and reductionist logic is how you people thrive. We see you.
Egan Orion torpedoed himself, even by your statement. He took a big check from Amazon. No one forced it on him, and he was exactly the kind of wishy washy, nice guy type of candidate Amazon loves to buy to do their bidding.
Orion was an Unlce Ike business guy who didn’t even stand up for renters’ rights. He’s a joke.
My dude? Really?
The political scientist emeritus has spoken. Everyone can go home now.
Sawant the LOSER that failed to run again because she knew she cheated to beat the recall – barely – and that there was no such magic waiting. Her opponents – normal D3 residents, people you call “nazis and Trumpists” probably – were primed and ready to shove Dear Leader of Our Revolution out the door and slam it in her face. She was too scared to run again after how close the recall was. She knew she cheated it to win.
Good luck on that whole “start a political party” thing, Socialists. I bet you will do great.
Sawant has never lost. Keep coping.
The author’s assumption that Hollingsworth will
“undoubtedly be one of the most vulnerable incumbents in 2027” is completely without basis. She won D3 with one of the larger margins among the Council races this year and penetrated areas traditionally supportive of progressives in these races. If she does her job the way she said she would, emphasizing the basics, being responsive to constituents and district concerns, and working with others to get things done, she could be a formidable incumbent candidate in four years. That outcome is at least as likely as the scenario envisioned by the author here.
Agreed. The key will being who I think she really is. As opposed to who she was painted as.
“Flipped” kind of oversimplifies the candidates. Joy is not a right-wing candidate. Was Hudson a Socialist Alternative candidate?
Hudson’s platform was squarely in the DSA / Progressive side of the aisle. Perhaps not SA; but very few are SA outside of Sawant and some bozos in Europe.
People were tired of all the progressive agendas that haven’t accomplished anything lately and the city is a mess
That is exactly the case, in a nutshell.
Sadly, I’m witnessing the same disrespect from Hudson’s camp as I did with Sawant’s. Leaving multiple posters on telephone poles for others to remove is frustrating.
Progressives *never* clean up after themselves. Whether it’s broken windows at Starbucks or broken promises at City Council – it’s always someone else that has to come along and clean up the mess they left.
Joy’s posters are STILL all over the place what are you talking about
Nah. As I walk around Capitol Hill, I see (and remove) many Hudson posters, but ZERO Hollingsworth posters.
Would love to wear the blinders you wear. Walk around Chuck’s hop shop and Union. Still Joy posters all over.
Same was true vicinity of 23rd and Union
Sawant is gone, Hudson lost, Ms. Hollingsworth is our new representative.
How do we move on, let go of our tribalism, and clearly ask for what we need?
I am hopeful that we might have someone who will truly ‘represent’ us. Let’s start off by assuming trust and good intent. We’ll see.
And i know you don’t get anything by complaining right off the bat, but by clearing stating, through logic, what you need.
I want to try to make what we have, politically, work before i start bitching and moaning.
Absolutely loving the fact that without Sawant handing them a ballot pre-selected with Socialist candidates, D3’s ultra-left wing didn’t bother to vote. I believe the Progressives call this “voter suppression.” Whereas normal people just refer to it as “getting out the vote even if you don’t have a national election on the same day.”
Meanwhile those of us that just endured 12 years of Sawant and 4 years of Progressive mistakes and disaster in running the Council were primed and ready to send a message, and rip control of the Council from the primarily newer-arrival, primarily younger Socialist voter. And we did. Because we actually live here and give more of a crap about SEATTLE AND D3, and not just national grandstanding and the hot cause of the month.
And now, Council: Hear the voting majority. Hire more police. Follow Harrell’s and Sara Nelson’s lead on public safety. GET THE KNOWN REPEAT FELONS OFF THE STREETS. And fix the damage Sawant and the Progressives caused Seattle 2019-2023.
It was simply one thing. Alex is not a strong campaigner. Joy was clearly the more savvy politician.
Not canvasing Capitol Hill was a boneheaded amature move.
She’s just a business owner who will do what Harrell says. “Savvy” no. Just a useful puppet for King Harrell.
This author in his pieces on this blog continually oversimplifies and seems to think each person is either a monolithic “progressive” or “moderate” and must always vote the same way. Some of us don’t subscribe to labels like that and vote for the person we think, amongst the choices on the ballot, will do the best job in the moment. I have sometimes voted for “progressive” candidates and sometimes for “moderate” candidates. I consider things like integrity and ability to work with others on the council, not just policy positions. This author really needs to realize he doesn’t know everything and just step down a smidge from the very high horse he is on.
This article has some problems.
1) The maps are great, but they should be accompanied by a map with streets, so the reader can get a better sense of the district. It’s minor, but it would help a lot.
2) Reduce the comparisons of Hollingsworth and Hudson as being on a linear political spectrum with Hudson as more progressive and Hollingsworth as more conservative. They are both very very progressive candidates, and their minor differences are in no way indicative of some sort of shift in the overall “progressiveness” of the district.
3) That said, this line right here: “What caused this 8-point rightward shift in Seattle is more of a mystery.” It’s no mystery. It’s obvious. The failure to write about it directly is a failure of journalism, just as Hudson’s failure to address it directly was a failure of politics. Don’t ignore inconvenient truths. Look up. One of our progressive candidates was willing to do that, and the other wasn’t, and that explains who won and who lost..
And no, talking about Amazon money first, and lower voter turnout, and then mentioning that voters “cared way more about crime” is insufficient. Dig deeper. WHY did voters care more about crime? Did some significant event happen in the last four years? Did something change in the neighborhood? What made voters who care about crime decide to vote for one progressive over another? If your assumption is that people who are more progressive care less about crime, come out and say it; even if you can’t back it up with data, maybe someone else will, or maybe someone else will produce data that argues against it. Either way, that’s what journalism is about.
It doesn’t seem like a coincidence that the city was redistricted and the next election ushered in a slate of moderate/conservative candidates. I was redistricted out of 3 (where I voted extremely progressive) and into 2. I don’t see coincidence here.
Redistricting is a standard part of District based seats. Trying to figure out who moves where was a long process with tons of public comment. D3 had to give up some space to D2 because the district populations had changed and they have to be largely the same at the end of redistricting. It was not a conspiracy.
Well, Tammy Morales needed your vote since her race was very close. Much closer than her first race in 2019. Did the redistricting make District 2 more conservative as well? Must of moved those progressive voters somewhere where their votes showed up. Or is it really just that moderates showed up and voted more than the progressives this time?
Sawant was flat out printing ballots.
Zero proof of this, QAnon
Wait, you mean printing ballots for actual registered voters. Not illegal! In fact should be encouraged.
No problem at all with it IF it is non-partisan. Even printing provisional ballots is fine, but- No campaign materials, no campaign talk, no “advice” on how to vote. That is not what was happening…