Oh good, an easy one.
Here’s who’s running:
Elena L. Ostby (Incumbent)
Seamus R. Mahoney
Calandra Revering
I see no particular reason to get rid of Ostby. Mahoney’s web page is his attorney web site, with nothing explaining his interest in or qualifications for a judgeship. Calandra Revering apparently had her license to practice law suspended at some point. (You can read a little bit more about her here.)
Anyway, I’m going to vote for Ostby.
Will Tell Stories For Food 
Calandra Revering was suspended from practice May 14, 2009, and re-admitted March 8, 2011. This appears to be the order suspending her, under the name Calandra Faye Harris:
Click to access ORA081525-0514.pdf
This appears to be the order reinstating her to practice, under the same name, and placing her on probation for two years thereafter:
Click to access ORA091498-0308.pdf
Mahoney’s professional website tells one virtually nothing about him. His Facebook campaign page offers no information other than the fact he is running. He has been licensed for 20 years and operates as a sole practitioner representing criminal defendants, with an apparent focus on DUI My attempt to locate appellate opinions found no significant decisions in which he was involved and none in which his client was successful. (That does not mean there have been none.)
Ostby has been on the bench for 14 years. In my time as a lawyer, I can recall hearing nothing about her that would disqualify her. An attorney I know and respect supports her.
I think you need to look more closely at this one. Attorneys tend to be supporters for a variety of reasons that have little to do with what they think of the judge and more to do with the level of organization of the campaign. None of us wants to have to say no to a sitting judge – or her committee.
I see literally nothing from either challenger to recommend them. One got suspended from practice, the other hasn’t actually set up a campaign site. Incumbent it is!