This is not all that surprising, but disappointing nevertheless. The Times often goes both ways on its endorsements, but in key races like this it tends to lean to the right and lean toward incumbants (as long as they haven't totally screwed up).
This particular editorial is pretty nasty. If you watched the debate you can see the moderator, Jim Vesley was condescending to Darcy, calling her "Ms. Bruner" a number of times. He's the final arbiter on the Seattle Times editorial board. He seems like the type who doesn't like uppity women.
Anyway, here's the full opinion piece. A few more comments are below the fold.
It's particularly galling that they repeat the Reichert talking point that Darcy missed voting a few times a few years ago. When they first made that charge some weeks ago, Darcy told me that some of those elections were Redmond City elections that she couldn't vote in because she lived outside the city line. I don't know if these are included in the "four" the Times cites. Some of you NW bloggers may know a little more of the detail here. Darcy gave birth to her son almost 4 years ago (late 2002 or early 2003), which may have caused a miss. Also, earlier her job at Microsoft surely required some travel, which could have caused a miss, too.