The 2025 contest for Mayor of Seattle is looking quite competitive out of the gate, with first-term incumbent Mayor Bruce Harrell vulnerable to a challenge from Katie Wilson of the Transit Riders Union, a new Civic Heartbeat survey conducted last week by Change Research for the Northwest Progressive Institute shows.
Asked who they would choose in the mayoral race if the general election were being now and the top two candidates were Bruce Harrell and Katie Wilson, 36% said Wilson in the aggregate, while 33% said Harrell and 30% were not sure. 522 likely November 2025 Seattle voters were interviewed, all online between May 10th and May 14th, 2025.
Wilson’s three-point lead is within our survey’s modeled margin of error, so we and our pollster consider this result to be a statistical tie and her advantage to be symbolic. With three out of every ten respondents still undecided in the aggregate, this race appears fluid and unsettled. At this juncture, considering these survey results and Seattle’s electoral history, multiple outcomes look plausible.
The case can be made for the scenario in which Mayor Harrell secures a second term, and the case can be made for the scenario which Katie Wilson ousts him to become the city’s new leader. Other outcomes are also possible, but unlikely… none of the other six candidates running have raised any significant resources for their campaigns.
As of press time, here’s how much each candidate had raised, according to the latest available data from the PDC and the Seattle Ethics and Elections Commission:
* Bruce Harrell: $390,585
* Katie Wilson: $256,318
* Ry Armstrong: $84,853
* Joe Molloy: $5,075
* Thaddeus Whelan: $1,511
* Clinton Bliss: $0
* Joe Mallahan: $0
* Isaiah Willoughby: $0
With Wilson and Harrell the clear frontrunners, we decided for this month’s Civic Heartbeat survey to simulate a general election matchup between the two. We asked our sample of general election voters who’d they’d support. Those who said they weren’t sure (which turned out to be a majority of respondents) were then asked a follow-up question, which included two prominent paragraphs of about equal length taken directly from the campaign websites of Bruce Harrell and Katie Wilson, and also links to both websites so that respondents could examine the candidates’ websites for themselves.
Harrell was favored in the initial responses; Wilson was favored among the not sure voters who picked a candidate after being presented with a second opportunity in the survey to make a choice. About half of the not sure voters said they were still not sure.
We also found that Mayor Harrell continues to have a negative job performance rating, as he has in our last two surveys of Seattle voters that fielded in the autumn of last year and in January of this year. He also continues to have a negative favorability rating.
45% of our respondents said they disapproved of the mayor’s job performance, while 42% said they had an unfavorable opinion of him — both pluralities. 37% approved of his job performance and 32% expressed a favorable opinion of him. 27% were neutral.
Each campaign received an opportunity to review this data at an NPI-hosted advance briefing yesterday evening, and each campaign took advantage.
Here are the questions we asked and the responses:
> **QUESTION** : Please indicate whether you approve or disapprove of the following city elected officials’ job performance.
>
> **RESPONSES FOR MAYOR BRUCE HARRELL** :
>
> * Approve: 37%
> * Disapprove: 45%
> * Not sure: 18%
>
>
> Net performance rating: ‑8%
>
> **QUESTION** : Looking ahead to this year’s August and November city elections, please indicate how favorably you view each of the following incumbent elected officials seeking reelection.
>
> **RESPONSES FOR MAYOR BRUCE HARRELL** :
>
> * Favorable: 32%
> * Very favorable: 9%
> * Somewhat favorable: 23%
> * Neutral: 27%
> * Unfavorable: 42%
> * Somewhat unfavorable: 13%
> * Very unfavorable: 29%
>
>
> Net favorability rating: ‑10%
>
> **QUESTION** : If the 2025 general election for Mayor of Seattle were being held today, and the candidates were the following, who would you vote for?
>
> _Note: Candidates’ names were rotated._
>
> **RESPONSES** :
>
> * Bruce Harrell: 25%
> * Katie Wilson: 18%
> * Not sure: 56%
>
>
> **FOLLOW-UP QUESTION ASKED OF UNDECIDED VOTERS ONLY:** Here are two statements from these mayoral candidates about their priorities and vision for Seattle. Please read each carefully. Then, if you had to choose, who would you vote for?
>
> “We’ve delivered public safety solutions, kept parks and sidewalks open and accessible while moving people into shelter and housing with services, made historic investments in affordable housing, prioritized a transportation system focused on safety, and passed nation-leading climate legislation,” Bruce Harrell’s website says. “But there is more work to do – this is the time for proven leadership to stand up for our values and keep Seattle moving forward as a city that is welcoming, affordable, and safe.”
>
> “The incumbent mayor has been a fixture in city hall since 2008. More people are sleeping unsheltered on our streets than ever before. Working families are struggling to stay afloat. We can do so much better. And as we face unprecedented national threats, we must do better,” Katie Wilson’s website says. “When I step into the mayor’s office, I’ll be working for you. I love this city, and I know that we can solve our most pressing problems and accomplish great things together.”
>
> If you had to choose, who would you vote for?
>
> _Note: Candidates’ names were rotated. Links to the candidates’ campaign websites were included in the prompt shown to survey respondents._
>
> **RESPONSES** :
>
> * Katie Wilson: 34%
> * Bruce Harrell: 15%
> * Not sure: 51%
>
>
> **COMBINED ANSWERS (AGGREGATE), ALL QUESTIONS:**
>
> * Katie Wilson: 36%
> * Bruce Harrell: 33%
> * Not sure: 30%
>
Our survey of 522 likely November 2025 Seattle general election voters was in the field from Saturday, May 10th to Wednesday, May 14th, 2025.
The poll was conducted entirely online for the Northwest Progressive Institute by Change Research and has a modeled margin of error of 4.4%.
We asked respondents who initially expressed a preference for either Harrell or Wilson to tell us why they felt that way. Over two hundred respondents provided comments.
Harrell’s supporters said he had governed well and earned a second term.
“Bruce Harrell’s policies are more pragmatic and are starting to show benefits. Katie Wilson would be a step backwards towards the extreme policies that damaged Seattle and will make the city less competitive nationally and less livable for all,” said a male Asian or Pacific Islander voter between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four.
“We really need a two-term mayor. And he has no good opposition. Katie Wilson does not reflect the city,” said a white female voter between the ages of thirty-five to forty-nine.
“He’s okay; don’t see a reason to vote for a different candidate with marginally different platform that is very idealistic, perhaps not feasible given current conditions in the city and country,” said a Hispanic male voter between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four.
“I trust him, and as a retiree and relative newcomer to this area (eighteen years now) I haven’t been familiar with historical Seattle politics, but I did immediately notice Harrell and have followed him to a degree. I just think he really cares and tries to stay balanced — that’s important in this uber-divisive political climate,” said a white female voter age who is at least age sixty-five or older.
“At least visually, he has made a difference on crime and homelessness in the Seattle community,” said a white female voter voter between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four.
A few respondents simply said “His experience” or “I’m aligned with his positions.”
Wilson’s supporters said Seattle needs new pro-worker leadership.
“Wilson would benefit the economy of Seattle more than Harrell,” said a Hispanic female voter between the ages of thirty-five and forty-nine.
“I support cleaning house… dump them all… somebody has to do a better job than these existing council and mayor. Stop trying to be a liberal bastion… and make it livable. Don’t cater to dangerous and crazy people,” said a white male voter who is at least age sixty-five or older. “Enforce laws on the books so law abiding citizens can have a good place to live.”
“I love her pieces in The Stranger and she seems great at organizing. She supports working people and wants to actually serve her city,” said a white female voter between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four.
“Katie is a real person and not a corporate plant. She can clearly articulate the issues Seattle faces. She can clearly articulate solutions. And she’s proven she can deliver those solutions,” said a white male voter between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four.
“She holds a complex understanding of what would make this city thrive and a care and concern for our most marginalized residents who need the most help — and concrete plans for how to help them,” said a white female voter between the ages of thirty-five and forty-nine.
Around ten respondents wrote simply “She’s not Bruce” or “She’s not Harrell.”
### The electoral history supports the view that Mayor Harrell is vulnerable to a challenge
At NPI, we have a standard set of caveats about polls that we like to share when publishing findings like this. Polls are snapshots in time — they are **not** predictive. At best, they can only suggest what _might_ be happening as of when they finished fielding. With Harrell and Wilson statistically tied in this survey, we appear to have a competitive race that could go either way. Seattle’s electoral history is also suggestive: While incumbency is usually a weighty advantage, mayors of Seattle haven’t been able to take advantage of it for a long time. Going back to the mid-nineties, only one mayor has won reelection, and that was Greg Nickels in 2005. Every other mayor has been a one-termer:
* Paul Schell was elected in 1997 and defeated for reelection in 2001.
* His successor, Greg Nickels, was elected in 2001 and reelected in 2005, but voters ousted him when he sought a third term in 2009.
* Nickels’ successor Mike McGinn was elected in 2009. He served a single term, failing to win reelection in 2013.
* McGinn’s successor Ed Murray resigned in disgrace without completing his one and only term, resulting in Bruce Harrell temporarily becoming mayor.
* Murray’s eventual successor Jenny Durkan was elected in 2017. She served a single term, became very unpopular, and opted against seeking another term in 2021.
In total, that’s _**four**_ one-term mayors over the last quarter-century plus and a single two-term mayor (Nickels), who many observers might recall didn’t draw a credible, well-funded challenger in 2005 when he sought his second term.
This inverse incumbency dynamic is a Seattle-specific phenomenon: it’s not something we have seen at the county or state level, or in other cities. In NPI’s hometown of Redmond, for example, across Lake Washington from Seattle, we have been easily reelecting our mayors for the better part of half a century. Rosemarie Ives served four terms, John Marchione three, and current Mayor Angela Birney is in her second term.
Seattle, of course, is the region’s largest city and governing it is a very demanding job. Paul Schell had to deal with the fallout from a WTO meeting that was fiercely protested, the 2001 Nisqually earthquake, and Mardi Gras riots.
Greg Nickels fell out of favor in his second term after the city struggled to respond to an epic snowstorm in 2008 and let the “Oklahoma City Raiders” take the SuperSonics (Seattle’s former NBA franchise) away. Mike McGinn alienated voters with his strident opposition to replacing the SR 99 viaduct with a tunnel.
Allegations of sexual abuse put an end to Ed Murray’s mayoralty, and Jenny Durkan opted not to run again after struggling to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and the social justice protests that followed the horrific murders of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, Manny Ellis, and many other Black people by the police.
Harrell will be facing an electorate worried about a lack of attainable and affordable housing, cost of living increases, and stubbornly persistent public safety concerns.
Wilson is running on building more housing and reducing homelessness. She was inspired to run after the success of Proposition 1A in the February 2025 special election, where voters spurned the business-backed Proposition 1B alternative backed by Mayor Harrell and the Council. Wilson has been working very hard to build a strong campaign that will be able to compete in the election.
You can see from SEEC data that she has been recruiting a lot of grassroots supporters to donate through democracy vouchers. She has earned many endorsements from local Democratic Party organizations based in the city, which have spurned Harrell, and she has been working to build a strong field program.
Harrell, meanwhile, has lined up a list of endorsements from elected officials that’s so long it could fill a directory. The mayor was also able to garner an endorsement from MLK Labor this week at a special meeting held on Monday evening.
Our assessment is that Harrell is better positioned to get a second term than any of his recent predecessors. But this data demonstrates that his reelection is no slam dunk. Wilson has emerged as a viable challenger. It’s not just left-leaning voters who are interested in her candidacy right now: we found that we found that in the aggregate, a plurality of independent voters favored Wilson, as did a _big_ chunk of voters who identify as Republican. Voters who identify as Democratic, meanwhile, look pretty split.
The biggest divide we saw in the crosstabs was by age.
Younger voters preferred Wilson, while older voters preferred Harrell. 52% of the youngest voters (ages 18–34) backed Wilson in the aggregate and 20% backed Harrell, while 46% of the oldest voters (ages 65+) backed Harrell and 24% backed Wilson.
The second-youngest group (ages 35–49) preferred Wilson by a smaller margin in the aggregate: 42% were for Wilson and 29% were for Harrell.
The second-oldest group (ages 50–64) preferred Harrell by a smaller margin in the aggregate: 38% were for Harrell, 28% were for Wilson.
### Job performance and favorability trends
This is the fifth consecutive citywide poll of Seattle we’ve commissioned in which we have asked voters about the job performance of city-wide and city-level elected officials, and second consecutive survey in which we have asked about candidate favorability.
Our previous research shows that as recently as early 2023, Mayor Harrell had a stellar approval rating, with 61% of a sample of special election voters expressing approval before the last local election cycle we had really got going. But between the winter of 2023 and the spring of 2024, there was a substantial shift. The mayor’s approval rating declined sharply. It declined again between April 2024 and last autumn, when it crossed into negative territory. Since then, there hasn’t been much change. Three consecutive polls have found more respondents disapproving than approving.
The percentage disapproving does appear to have plateaued, which the mayor’s team can take solace in. Here’s a visualization of our job performance polling:
Meanwhile, with respect to favorability, the mayor’s standing has improved a little.
In January, 50% expressed an unfavorable view of Harrell, while in this survey, only 42% expressed an unfavorable view. 36% expressed a favorable view in January; 32% expressed a favorable view in this survey. The mayor has thus gone from a net of negative fourteen points to a net of negative ten points.
### Our track record
If you are not a longtime reader or familiar with NPI’s research, you might be wondering, _what’s our track record_? Well, in a word, it’s excellent. Election results have consistently corroborated our findings at every level — state, congressional, local. We are sticklers for the scientific method. That means asking neutral questions of representative samples. We are subjective in our advocacy while being objective in our research.
This is the eighth Seattle poll that we’ve done with Change Research. We began surveying the Emerald City four years ago when we expanded our polling to the local level. Our research has consistently been on the mark:
* In July of 2021, we found Bruce Harrell and Lorena Gonzalez likely to prevail in the August Top Two election for Mayor of Seattle, in the open seat race to choose a successor to outgoing Mayor Jenny Durkan. Each advanced.
* In October of 2021, we found Bruce Harrell with a sixteen-point lead over Lorena Gonzalez as voting was beginning in the general election. Harrell went on to win by a comfortable margin. That same survey also found leads for the six other victors in the 2021 citywide elections in Seattle.
* In 2023, our poll of Seattle City Council District #3 found Joy Hollingsworth ahead of Alex Hudson. Hollingsworth’s strong base of support carried her to victory, with not sure voters gravitating to Hudson en masse and making the race closer.
* In 2024, our autumn Seattle survey indicated that Alexis Mercedes Rinck would defeat Tanya Woo for Seattle City Council Position #8. The survey also found the city’s transportation levy likely to pass. That’s what we saw in the election.
* In January of this year, we found Proposition 1A and 1B (social housing) in a statistical tie, with 1A symbolically ahead by just a few percentage points. We assessed that with a strong closing argument, 1A could win — and that’s exactly what we saw when the February special election results rolled in.
### NPI polls in the public interest, not for candidates or IEs
It’s also important to be aware that unlike many other advocacy organizations, NPI’s polling (including our Civic Heartbeat research) is done in the public interest.
We don’t work for candidates or independent expenditures. We are a strategy center, not a consulting practice. We do not endorse candidates and we do not participate in efforts to urge voters to vote any particular way in any candidate election.
Accordingly, we have no horse in this race or in any race for public office in Seattle or elsewhere. Our role is observatory: we cover and analyze candidate elections and provide credible data to help people understand what could be going on.
### Additional Civic Heartbeat poll results are available
If you found this data and analysis useful, you may want to take a look at the results of our January Civic Heartbeat survey, which are available at civicheartbeat.org.
### Help bring future research to fruition
The polling we do in the public interest is a major financial undertaking, and it’s made possible in part by Cascadia Advocate readers. If you’d like to see more Civic Heartbeat polls in the future, please consider donating or becoming a member of NPI.
