Ahhh, election season. The days grow shorter and so do the tempers of political consultants. Dramas over stolen campaign signs, accusations that incumbents are responsible for all the world’s ills and TV ads that use half-truths to cast aspersions on candidates.

Usually, that kind of tripe is directed between opposing candidates, but recently U.S. Senate candidate Tiffany Smiley exploited an invitation from The (Everett) Herald editorial board to make a campaign splash on Twitter, in news releases and media interviews.

Now, before we get to that, Smiley was right on one point. Sen. Patty Murray seemed like she was dragging her feet in committing to one-on-one debates with Smiley. On Friday, the Washington State Debate Coalition announced a proposed lineup that included two meetings between the two for Oct. 23 at Gonzaga University in Spokane and Oct. 25 at Seattle University. But they are not yet buttoned down, according to the Murray campaign. This is getting down to the wire. State ballots will be mailed out in about a month.

Now back to the endorsement drama. The Herald invited both Smiley and incumbent Murray to an interview, but Murray’s camp declined a joint interview, according to Editorial Page Editor Jon Bauer. So, in the interest of ensuring candidates are heard, Bauer, who has the task of inviting 32 candidates in before the general, set up two separate interviews.

Smiley pitched a fit in the Zoom interview because Murray was not present, reading a 2-1/2-minute statement denouncing journalists as corporate shills carrying water for Sen. Murray. Then she hung up, not even wanting to discuss her comments or Washington state issues. She recorded the meeting and then plastered the video on social media.

An amateurish ambush. Nevertheless, she got a lot of back-patting and huzzahs from her followers. And, heck, maybe she raised some money.

Newspaper editorial boards have been endorsing candidates for years. The Times board offers ours as recommendations, expecting they will be only part of voters’ own homework. The editorial board meetings are not for the candidates — which is why Smiley’s stunt is so disappointing.

In July, we interviewed Smiley and Murray separately to endorse before the primary. We did not even try to have them in together, although we do prefer joint interviews in lower profile races, such as state representatives. In higher-profile contests, we know more about the candidates and have specific questions for each.

Sen. Murray drew 17 challengers. No way could we interview all of them. So, we do as we often do: study the candidates’ positions, evaluate their campaigns’ breadth and weed out those who are not serious. In the case of the Senate race, clearly Smiley was the lone standout among the challengers. She had a compelling story and a credible record of activism on behalf of veterans.

Out of respect for all of that, we invited her to meet with editorial board members as we formulated our endorsement. She was credible, discussing issues in an engaging way. She fell short, however, on issues she had no experience in such as the economy and trade. She leaned on talking points and blamed the incumbent for everything in ways that don’t hold up. Significantly, she is anti-choice, a problem for The Times editorial board, especially given the Senate’s role in confirming Supreme Court justices.

On July 14, we strongly endorsed Murray for her leadership and accomplishments, including her record of working across the aisle with Republicans. Here’s what we said: “Smiley faults Murray for not doing more for vets, for spending too much, for not securing the southern border. Her criticisms largely fail to hit the mark. Capable and energetic, (Smiley) should remain engaged with civic affairs on the local level.”

When Murray ran for office, she had been a state lawmaker and Shoreline School Board member. Smiley has not served in elective office. Her interaction with The Herald shows that inexperience.

Smiley will get her chance to debate Murray, the senator’s campaign promises. And, when they do, voters should watch closely and listen for the quality and depth of the answers.

The Times editorial board is busy interviewing candidates for our general election endorsements, already publishing a few. For the King County Prosecutor’s race, don’t miss Seattle Times Opinion columnist Alex Fryer’s take on the role and legacy of that office. He also invited the two candidates for the open seat to answer four questions about their approach to the job. We are sharing those today and Monday.

Fall is in the air, and that knock on your door might be a campaign worker, or even a candidate. Answer the door, take the brochure and ask your own questions.

Happy homework. And be sure to vote.

Editor’s note: This column was corrected. The Seattle City Club’s press release listed proposed debates. They had not been fully confirmed.

The opinions expressed in reader comments are those of the author only and do not reflect the opinions of The Seattle Times.