I've always found it strange that some of the county races like this and others (assessor, sheriff) are partisan but that city of Spokane races are not (council, mayor).
When I've mentioned this in endorsement interviews, the candidates all say it is strange that the prosecutor race is partisan. Ideology goes out the window when prosecuting, they say. So here we are after the primary and there is a Republican (Tucker) and a Democrat (Malone). Not just any Republican, but one who was bluntly attacked by fellow Republicans for not being up to the task.
Now those attackers are endorsing him. The Democrats are also lining up behind their guy. But why is it important for an R to hold that job over a D and vice-versa? It is just a simple matter of producing a better political scoreboard? Or is there something in the respective viewpoints that lend themselves to better prosecuting? If so, why do candidates pretend otherwise?
If you vote straight ticket, I get it. Well, I don't get it, but I understand that it happens. But for more discerning voters, does any of this make sense to you?