Sponsored link
Saturday, October 16, 2021

Sponsored link

UncategorizedIs the tech-mogul attack on Campos backfiring?

Is the tech-mogul attack on Campos backfiring?

A protest by DV survivors and their allies outside of Chiu headquarters
A protest by DV survivors and their allies outside of Chiu headquarters

By Tim Redmond

OCTOBER 21, 2014 — I always suspected that the independent expenditure attack on David Campos would start to backfire. For one thing, been there done that: The same allegations (Campos voted against the mayor’s effort to oust elected Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi) were spread all over the city in the spring primary. You can only say the same thing so many times before people stop paying attention.

For another, Campos has a lot of women supporting him, and a lot of people are getting sick of the idea that Reed Hoffman and Ron Conway can use their tech money to buy an election.

So now there’s a Facebook page and a twitter hashtag called Shameonyoudavidchiu – and it’s got the names of a long list of women who think Chiu’s allies are exploiting the very serious domestic violence issue for political gain.

Chiu has every right to make the Mirkarimi vote an issue in the race: He voted one way, Campos voted the other. In a contest where the Chronicle, buying into a ridiculous narrative, says the candidates aren’t very different, every vote where they disagreed is relevant.

But while Chiu has made it clear that he and Campos were not on the same side on this one, his campaign – the campaign he is accountable for – is not the one doing the dirty work.

That’s the independent expenditure committee funded entirely, to the tune of $600,000, but the two tech titans – one of whom would have been taken a serious financial hit if Campos had succeeded in forcing Airbnb to pay its back taxes.

We’ve been over and over the Mirkarimi vote. You can argue that the supervisors who refused to go along with the mayor were allowing a guy who pleaded guilty to a crime that stemmed from a domestic violence incident to go on serving in law enforcement. You can argue that what Mirkarimi did was inexcusable – but under the City Charter, his conduct (which happened before he became sheriff) wasn’t “official misconduct.” That’s what Sup. Jane Kim said – and Chiu has endorsed her re-election. Conway and Hoffman haven’t put a penny into opposing her.

You can also argue that the City Charter provision that gives the mayor the right to unilaterally suspend from office another elected official on any grounds he or she finds relevant creates an immense imbalance of power – the supervisors can’t suspend or impeach the mayor, no matter how awful the person holding that office is – and that removing an elected official ought to be the business of the voters, which is why the state Constitution contains the right of recall.

Can you imagine what Willie Brown could have done with this power, which wasn’t in the Charter when he took office?

(BTW: If the mayor, instead of suspending Mirkarimi, had asked his tech buddies to fund a recall election, Mirkarimi might well have lost. At that point the sheriff’s approval ratings were terrible. Now, he’s reunited with his family, doing what many would consider a good job, and running for re-election.)

That’s what Campos was getting at with his vote: The voters elected this person, and it ought to be up to the voters, not the mayor, to remove him – except under the most extraordinary circumstances.

Those are all legit positions. You don’t have to be an Ed Lee acolyte to say Mirkarimi behaved horribly; you don’t have to be soft on domestic violence to say this law wasn’t properly applied.

But those are subtleties that don’t play well in political campaigns. And frankly, if you want to do a hit on Campos, the pickings are pretty slim; the guy has lived a clean life and has an impressive story.

So Conway and Hofman have tried to tar Campos by sending out fliers suggesting that he condones domestic violence.

Here’s the thing, though: When the state tried to cut spending on DV programs, Reed Hoffman and Ron Conway were not there. “Mr. Hoffman, where have you been on stopping cuts to domestic violence services, fighting for women’s equality and justice, aiding tech women and their families who have been harassed from their homes,” asked Patty Bellasalma, president of California NOW. “The answer is nowhere.”

In fact, I don’t think either of these guys has ever tried to save any social program – they’re all about tax breaks for tech, allowing the Google buses to park in Muni stops. … that sort of thing.

And they like David Chiu.

So who likes David Campos? Here’s a list. Many of these women were victims themselves of domestic violence.

They’ve sent an open letter to Chiu.

We are writing to call upon you, David Chiu, to stop playing politics with domestic violence. We are survivors of domestic violence who are offended by the smear campaign that you and your supporters have launched against David Campos.

If you really cared about us, about this extremely difficult and complicated issue that touches so many people’s lives, then you would stop using us to win votes. You would tell your billionaire friends to take the $600,000 they have spent on vicious ads filled with hyperbole and lies and instead use that money to directly help domestic violence survivors like us. We need more shelter beds, culturally appropriate crisis intervention lines, and support services to heal the trauma experienced and rebuild our lives.

We deserve respect and dignity and instead you and your supporters are using us for your own political ends that have nothing to do with domestic violence. You are hurting us and you need to stop.

Trisha Fogelman, a DV survivor, told me that she was upset in the spring when the first ads arrived. “I felt like they had photoshopped bruises onto women,” she said. “It took me back to a very dark place.”

This this fall the barrage started again. “When the two candidates had a debate on KQED, I called in and asked Chiu about it and he ignored me,” she said. “The whole think kind of makes me sick to my stomach.”

Fogelman, who doesn’t work for the Campos campaign and hasn’t donated to either candidate, started the Facebook page and it’s taken off.

Of course, Chiu can’t even acknowledge that he knows that Hoffman and Conway are doing: By law, that campaign has to be entirely independent of the official Chiu for Assembly effort. He could, though, ask his supporters to quit sensationalizing DV for their own purposes, and that would at least send a message. So far, he hasn’t.

Chiu isn’t talking to me, which is silly, so I can’t offer his response – which wouldn’t matter much, since he legally can’t have any control over these attacks. Some labor groups, including SEIU Local 1000, are also doing an IE, on behalf of Campos, attacking Chiu. Their pitch: Chiu founded a company called Grassroots Enterprises, which helps political campaigns with data management, and the company contracted with some nasty Republican groups. Chiu, the argument goes, was willing to sell out his principles to make money off the GOP.

Again, Chiu isn’t talking to me (which is silly) but in the past he has said that it wasn’t his decision to contact with Republicans and he opposed it, but he didn’t completely control the company. And, clearly, he didn’t want to leave a business he had just helped to start.

The labor message: you can’t trust Chiu’s integrity. The tech mogul message: Campos doesn’t care about women who are victims of domestic violence. The way the voters respond ought to be at least a bit influenced by how consistent those messages are with the records of the two candidates.

In the meantime, there are plenty of other issues, ones that impact the lives of thousands of low-income San Franciscans, small businesses, and nonprofits that might be more immediately relevant to the voters.

Chiu supported the Twitter tax break, which brought tech companies and tech jobs to mid-Market – but also helped drive up housing prices and rents for nonprofits.

Chiu pushed a bill to legalize Airbnb, with some regulations. Campos agreed that legalization was a good idea – but only if the $10 billion company paid the $25 million or so in back taxes that it owes the city of San Francisco.

Chiu voted against that part. The back-tax mandate died by one vote.

We’re talking lots of money here, money that the tech firms that got the tax breaks can well afford to pay. (I actually had this conversation with an executive at Zendesk, which has done a lot more than most mid-Market companies to help the community. “Did you really need the payroll tax break to come here?” I asked. “Not at all,” he said. “We would have moved here anyway.”)

Money that could have gone to city services (including DV prevention.)

Oh, and Chiu’s campaign strategist, Nichole Derse, is a partner in a firm hired by Airbnb to turn people out at hearings on the Chiu billfs.

Maybe, in the last few weeks before Election Day, that’s what the debate should be about.


Full disclosure note: While I try to raise enough money for 48hills to actually pay myself a living wage, I’m taking on outside work. I am a guest lecturer at City College, teach at San Francisco’s State’s Osher Institute of Lifelong Learning, and recently did a class at USF. I have been paid the princely sum of $50 to speak at a friend’s journalism classes at the Academy of Art University.

As a freelancer, I am helping edit the member newsletter of SEIU Local 1021, a union that strongly supports Campos (although as far as I know, 1021 is not involved in the anti-Chiu IE.) I am also on the board of Legal Assistance to the Elderly, which is losing its office space in mid-Market because of tech-driven rent increases; I get paid nothing for my board service. I am volunteering to help the Bernal Heights Neighborhood center restart its bimonthly newspaper, The New Bernal Journal.

I will continue to update any future conflicts in the unlikely event that anyone else out there offers to pay me for anything.

Tim Redmond
Tim Redmond has been a political and investigative reporter in San Francisco for more than 30 years. He spent much of that time as executive editor of the Bay Guardian. He is the founder of 48hills.
Sponsored link


  1. Whom be next Mayor of Gentrification for benefit of renters…San Francisco 2020? David Chui,London Breed,Scott Wiener,Kamla Harris and Bevan Dufty so called Democratic party empowered eviction renters where Long Bench and Long Beach awaiting success abolish “Ellis Act” on the ballots 2016 fight prevent victory being overturned liberty and equality now!

  2. Just did, and I disagree with your characterization. She seems to be a prolific twitteratti, tweeting on a variety of subjects like criticism of Oscar Pistorius’s light sentence, cheerleading for the Giants, a nod to Oscar de la Renta (she seems to be in the makeup biz), a bunch of pro-Fleet Week stuff, props to Malala for winning the Nobel Prize, and yes a handful posts about David Chiu. But I didn’t see anything “threatening” in there. One post even suggested that his mailer exploiting the DV issue for political gain is just making voters like her angry at him, which of course is a bad idea when you’re running for office.

    You make it sound like she’s obsessed with David Chiu, like a certain troll is obsessed with this blog. I don’t see that at all. She just seems like a politically active person who takes the issue of DV seriously and doesn’t appreciate it being exploited for political gain.

  3. If you perform a quick google search of the woman you quoted, Trisha Fogleman, you’ll see via her Twitter that she’s spent the last few weeks threatening and berating Chiu. Funny to see her playing the victim here. I would ignore you too if you tweeted me daily saying “bad idea to make me mad” and repeatedly called me names. Is her revenge this less-than-popular facebook page and Twitter hashtag that has a whole two tweets? If there was a valid argument being made, this killed it. Pathetic.

  4. Kristin, I don’t think you know David Campos. I hear you about not idolizing politicians, but this is a person who came to this country as a refugee fleeing civil war. He had to learn English at 14. He overcame barriers including growing up poor, gay, and undocumented, and somehow managed to graduate Harvard Law. You can’t just pick some random person off the street and find that kind of a story. I know what you said was just an off-the-cuff comment about politicians who are too often mediocre at best, but I wouldn’t lump Campos in there. If you knew the guy, you’d know that no one works harder or is more genuine.

  5. “SF is not the liberal backwater it once was & I’m glad actually”

    The conservatives/libertarians/right-wing (whatever they call themselves, a.k.a. the Greed-At-All-Costs crowd) are having their wet dream come true for this city. They now love this city that they—not that long ago—despised and hated on at every opportunity. They prefer for this city to be a conservative (but they’ll hide behind the “moderate” label) backwater cesspool.

    I have a conservative, wealthy relative in Marin and she doesn’t agree with what’s happening over here. She says it’s a shame what they’re doing to the city. She says they’re ruining it using immense corruption and corporate/techie greed (at any costs). That’s one of the only times I’ve ever agreed with her on anything.

  6. “GO GIANTS”


    I really don’t understand the obsession with cheering over a wealthy corporate sports team where most or none of the players even live in the city. They don’t even live here. Their luxury homes during “the season” are in Berkeley. I read last week that one of the players either just bought or is selling (I forget which) his luxury home in Los Ángeles.

    Just because the name “San Francisco” is attached to a wealthy corporate sports team is a reason to say “Go Giants?” I don’t understand that.

    Wouldn’t it be better to cheer for a local neighborhood sports team (non-corporate) in a neighborhood game where the players live in the city and around the neighborhood?

  7. I just wish that Ross Mirkarimi, David Chiu and David Campos would go away. Seriously, is this the best that San Francisco can do? Any one of these women – the survivors of domestic violence – who are protesting would make a better candidate than either of the Davids. Why do we try to make superstars of the same handful of people … why can’t we be open-minded enough to know that there are others out there would would probably work harder and are more genuine.

  8. Ron Conartist and his little ugly trolls will fail,and die alone and angry,sad but fitting.Yes on H,G,E,J. CAMPOS. GO GIANTS

  9. I do not support Campos in any way or how but I am voting for him. Only to get him out of D9, where, he’s done just about nothing for the district besides naming a historical district that is fraught with crime and quality of life problems.

  10. I never said that there weren’t any. I said I couldn’t think of any. Big difference.

    And yet immaterial because of the existence an even bigger extremist in some basketcase town like Oakland (worst murder rate in CA) or Richmond (under Chapter 9 BK) does not debunk the premise that he is still a basket case and unsuitable for office

  11. So there are politicians further “to the left” than Campos, you are wrong and are changing the subject to cover your error.

  12. The point was that Campos is a left-wing extremists and not that someone somewhere might be even more extreme.

    I imagine that taking everyone and everything way too literally is not a useful life skill.

  13. ” I cannot think of a single elected politician in the US who is more left-wing. Can you?”

    I just did, you are wrong as usual, and as predicted, you’ve tried to move the goalposts to forestall that humiliation.

  14. OK, I missed that post, sorry. There is a letter signed by about 100 people.

    But still, it is hardly Tahir Square. The page had 230 Likes before your article and now it is up an additional 34 to 264. The #Shameonyoudavidchiu hashtag has been used 3 times.

  15. The point is that Campos is in the leftmost percentile of elected officials in this nation and, as such, is unsuitable to serve in any capacity where he has to represent a broad diversity of people.

    If you do not think he is a left-wing extremist, then that tells readers far more about your extremism than it does about Campos.

    I think there will be a late surge for Chiu if voters fear that an extremist might actually win. Either way, an easy victory for Chiu is on the cards.

    Although I’ll admit there is a part of me that would love to see Lee appoint a moderate Supes for D9 if Campos wins.

    So I guess I win either way!

  16. Bernie Sanders, half of the Oakland City Council and Richmond’s Gail McLaughlin are further “to the left” than Campos. Campos is only left wing to the neolibertarians as represented by Willie Brown in the Chronicle.

    Are those goalposts I see being moved? Let me guess, you’ll come at us with something along the lines of “those citations are not really valid because those jurisdictions are insignificant.”

  17. Greg, if you admit that you do not want Campos to compromise with his political opponents, then you are essentially agreeing with me that he will struggle more than Chiu will do in Sac, because Chiu has a more flexible and pragmatic approach.

    What you are really saying is that you do not want Campos to compromise on his “values” and that means that he will find few friends in a forum where he is easily the most left-wing member.

    Ammiano had inter-personal skills and a pragmatic approach which Campos clearly lacks.

    Ironically you could say that Campos will effectively be trolling the CA Assembly

  18. Since you said you don’t want to debate this, I will limit myself to simply stating that every sentence in your post is false.

  19. Campos is an extremist in the sense that I cannot think of a single elected politician in the US who is more left-wing. Can you?

    Anyone who thinks Campos isn’t extreme is themselves extreme.

  20. Sam: You contradict your own statement that most people in SF are not for Campos, by writing that Chiu would would be left-wing by other places than SF!! OK, we now know that you are not for Campos – I personally am getting tired of your rants!

  21. I don’t want someone who’s going to compromise their principles and sell out to big business and landlord lobbyists. We have enough of that in Sac. I want someone who can effectively push the envelope on progressive legislation and move the debate -like Ammiano has done.

    If compromises need to be made, they should be made in a way that preserves progressive values. I’ve seen him in action, and Campos has proven he can do that.

    Farrell endorsed him because Campos has built a good working relationship, not based on Farrell needing his vote, but based on Campos’s ability to craft true win-win compromises, like the compromise on Laura’s Law that preserved the rights of homeless people. From what I’ve seen of Campos, the guy is sharp. I think he’ll be even better than Ammiano, and I don’t think we have to worry about him selling out to the highest bidder.

  22. Sir: In my opinion, you characterize Campos as an “extremist” because you don’t agree with his positions. We need someone in Sacramento in the tradition of Tom Ammiano, who, no doubt, you consider him extreme, as well.

  23. Sam, it’s pretty clear to anyone who spends more than 5 minutes here that your behavior constitutes the classic definition of trolling. Why you do it is not as relevant; the effect is the same.

    But for what it’s worth, I can think of only two main reasons why someone would go on a blog or discussion board populated with ideas they hate, and post obsessively. Either they’re paid, which does happen; or, it’s done out of a personal hatred that so obsessive, that you can’t help but conclude the person isn’t all there mentally.

    That’s all I’m going to say. I’ll let you get the last word… because I’m just not that obsessed about it.

  24. Greg, can you give me some examples of occasions when Campos has listened carefully to, say, big business or landlords, and then changed his thinking as a result?

    My point is that Chiu would be left-wing by almost any standard outside of SF. And, because he is more moderate, he can talk to all parties and not just his constituency.

    I just don’t see Campos being able to pull that off because of his identity politics.

    (I don’t understand Farrell’s endorsement of Campos, but sometimes moderates fall out with each other too, and that might be the fallout from that. Kinda like when the progressive Supes could not agree on a replacement mayor and instead stabbed each other in the back, letting Chiu broker Ed Lee.)

  25. AFAIK, the most conservative Democrats in Sac are about where Mark Farrell is, who Campos has managed to work well with, without compromising his own principles. Farrell even endorsed him.

    The only thing Chiu has done is position himself as a swing vote, something he won’t be able to do in Sac. Campos, by contrast, actually builds relationships, something Chiu isn’t capable of doing.

  26. My point was that if Ross were a Republican, you’d be baying for him to be fired, to resign, to be impeached or to lose the re-election.

    But because Ross happens to be a lefty, you pardon his crimes. My point isn’t about Ross at all, but with the hypocrisy of people like Campos and you who support a DV perp only because he is also a lefty.

  27. It’s high school stuff. Here is an example:

    Mike handed me a note saying “I am dying, Sam”, and then Mike died.

    The first comma is correctly placed within the quotes because it is a part of the actual phrase being quoted..

    The second comma sits outside the quotes because it is a part of the main sentence structure which, without the quote, would simply be: “Mike handed me a note, and then died”.

    Comma’n (sic) sense, really.

  28. I don’t understand all the emotion over H and I which, as far as I can see, are about the playing surfaces for a few soccer pitches. Does any other city on the planet let the voters decide on something as mundane and technical as that?

    But for the record I am Yes on I and No on H. In fact I am NO on all the city/county props except for F, I and L.

    SAM says YES on FIL and NO on the rest.

  29. I didn’t say you shouldn’t vote for the candidate you favor. My point was that Campos is not the safe choice, and for the reason that he is a partisan extremist ideologue while Chiu is a centrist who can build consensus and drive compromise.

    Chiu will achieve more of your policy goals in Sac than Campos will, because Chiu plays well with others.

  30. Hours? do you really think that it takes me more than a few minutes to post here? I’m just keeping you honest, and helping you with your spelling.

    It was Russo who tipped me off about this blog. So blame him if you don’t like to read different opinions here.

  31. I never said he was. In fact, the idea is laughable.

    My point was to show his extremism, and why that will leave him isolated and frustrated in Sac. Heck, most of the Democrats in Sac are more right-wing than anyone he has encountered in SF. He would be a fish out of water, thrashing about achieving nothing and shunned by all.

  32. Ugh. Sorry about the above video being incorrect. I copied the correct link but that’s not the correct video for some reason.

    If this link doesn’t work, just search the title of it:


    The Secret Life of Gov. Paid Trolls
    “They receive their marching orders from faceless social scientists who are using the web as their own playground. You have probably encountered a GPT or two while surfing the web. This video will show you the techniques they use and provide some solutions to fight back.”
    The video is 16.35 long.

  33. >>>Greg, it is “reach across the aisle”, <<<


    It's "aisle," Sam.

    Just so you know. If you're going to lecture others on their spelling at least know some basic grammar rules.

    Regarding quotation marks:

    "Rule 3a. Periods and commas always go inside quotation marks."

  34. Thank goodness there’s a competitive race to give all the pundits and press folks something to write about and cover with just over two weeks to go before Election Day.

  35. The Campos-Chou race is depressing. i like both of these guys, and here they are slinging mud at one another.

    I got a call from SEIU last night pleading for a Campos vote. I said, yes, I might indeed vote for him. But this politics of negative ads is done only to build pay-to-play points for future legislation.

    Meaning: Conway will get what he wants from Chou (more legislation), and the SEIU will get what it wants from Campos (no discussion of much-needed pension reform). I told that to the SEIU guy on the phone. He hung up on me.

  36. “And Tim is a great guy but he is not a player any more. Nobody needs to return his calls.”

    LOL! And yet here you are, spending hours on his blog!

    I don’t want to engage in back-and forth with you, because you need the last word on everything, but this was just too delicious to pass up!

  37. Meritocracy… it’s how guys like Phil Ginsburg get their 6-digit salary positions. They’re just the most qualified for the job.

    And guys like Gavin Newsom… meritocracy is totally the way he got rich in the private sector. Even though he never managed more than a C-average in a third rate college, Gordon Getty (another man who owes his fortune to capitalism’s peculiar definition of meritocracy) clearly saw that his was a brilliant mind, so he let Gavin manage his money.

  38. Loretta, I don’t think anyone takes anything Sam says seriously. He’ll write things to disagree with every post ad nauseum. There’s a name for folks like that, but you know… civility and all.

  39. Two-minute response time. Really, Sam-John do you have a troll app?

    Campos isn’t running for POTUS, now is he?

  40. I find your statement absurd. I vote with my conscience, Do you take a poll and vote for the majority? Besides, how do you know what “most” San Franciscans think, anyway?

  41. Campos the “political extremist,” eh, Sam-John? Weak! Campos is running to replace Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, his political ally who has held that office for SIX YEARS before term-out, thanks to voter popularity. And he’s endorsed by same. What city do you imagine you live in, Sam-John?

  42. Loretta, so you want someone who agrees with you and not someone who agrees with most San Franciscans? Is that it?

  43. Greg, it is “reach across the aisle”, just so you know. And Campos really hasn’t made any effort – when was the last time he talked to a landlord group? Airbnb? The Chamber of Commerce.

    The real issue is that Campos will be ignored in Sac. His polarizing, divisive identity politics will not work there. Why would you want someone who is ineffectual there?

    And Tim is a great guy but he is not a player any more. Nobody needs to return his calls.

  44. Greg, it’s been time for you to leave for a long, long time. anyone who eulogizes Cuba and Venezuela cannot be possibly be happy in a meritocracy like San Francisco.

    Maybe you were born too late?

  45. Ross has zero chance of being re-elected. He is a pariah.

    But of course he is running again because – what else is he going to do?

    Ross is toxic and, if he were a right-winger, you’d be saying that.

  46. ” I’m glad to hear that Mirk is running again, and we’re all certainly voting for Campos.”

    Me too. And I think Ross will pull through. When people said he’d be removed, I said nope. When long time political consultants told me that even if he survived, he’d be recalled or have to resign, I said nope. They said that no matter what, he’s finished. I said it before, and I’ll say it again -watch him get re-elected.

    You heard it here… first.

    Incidentally… I remember Nicole Derse from when she ran the field operation for Ross’s campaign. Too bad she’s sold her out her values working for a weasel like Chiu.

  47. In response to the post favoring Chiu “to play it safe:” I want to play it safe by voting for someone whose ethics and positions I respect – David Campos.

  48. Maybe. It’ll take work, and money. But I’m actually more optimistic about this race than anything else. The rest… alas, locally, for the first time in all the years I’ve been here, I’m predicting that everything I care about is going to go the opposite way of how I vote. Perhaps it really is time to leave.

    And that includes H and I. H should be an issue that reaches across the ideological spectrum. Indeed, at a recent ballot forum on the west side, packed with westside center-right senior citizens (but generally politically aware ones), the Yes on I/no on H guy got his head handed to him. When the Yes on H guy asserted that Park and Rec was putting in environmentally unsafe and toxic astroturf (citing evidence), because the city is getting a kickback from the company, he asked the room rhetorically, “C’mon, do you really think the city would put in toxic astroturf because of a kickback?” To my pleasant surprise, the entire roomful of very NON-progressive folks erupted in a loud chorus of “YES!!!” They know what’s up.

    Unfortunately, I don’t think anyone on the east side is paying attention, and you’ll have a lot of otherwise progressive east-siders voting no on H because they’re getting craploads of mail, including from orgs they trust, telling them to vote that way. And the Yes on H campaign has no money to respond.

    I don’t mean to sound such a pessimistic note, and I hope I’m wrong, but I’ve always called them as I see them. And yes, I’ve contributed to Yes on H, Yes on G… and Campos, among others.

  49. There is such a thing as too much attack money. There came a point in the last D1 supe race where most people realized that this David Lee guy was just trying to purchase the election (or someone working on his behalf). And an election that was supposed to be close turned into a blowout for Mar.

    So it is with this race, IMO. I think Chiu and Derse made a tactical error in holding their fire till the end (and yes, they know about and approve of the IE. Who are we kidding?). They have enough money to send two mailers a day at this point. But that kind of saturation starts to backfire, particularly when their opponent is squeaky clean, and nobody really cares about the one thing they’re attacking him for.

    Right after the election, I would’ve agreed with our resident troll, and said that this would be an uphill climb for Campos because the Republican votes would go to Chiu. However, Campos has made that climb by working hard and showing that he can produce results. He’s reached “across the isle,” even working with people like Farrell on issues they can compromise on. But he’s done it in a way that doesn’t compromise his values. I think people respect that.

    Chiu meanwhile… Chiu looks like a schmuck when he does things like refusing to talk to Tim Redmond. That kind of behavior shows he’s not ready for prime time. It’s one thing to position yourself as a swing vote on a board of 11 just because you sit on the fence about everything. It’s quite another when you’re one of 80 and nobody gives a shit about you if you don’t have the skills to build relationships based on something other than being a swing vote. If Chiu gets in, he’ll be a backbencher for the next 6 years.

    Ironically, what could actually turn this around for Chiu, is if he came out strongly and publicly and denounced Ron Conway by name. That would show character. But character is something Chiu sorely lacks.

    This will still be close. But as of right now, I think Chiu is on a downhill trajectory. But if the trolls want to pop the champagne on the basis of their back-of-the-napkin calculations of the primary vote, as if it were frozen in time… well, hey, more power to them.

  50. When you consider that the page for Hold Campos Accountable has only 128 likes, I think it’s doing fairly well in the few days it has been up. But keep discounting us, just like Mr Chiu has. We are used to it.

  51. That’s my linking problem. The open letter to Chiu, with all the names, is on the Facebook page. You just have to scroll down. I thought it would make the post unreadable if I listed them all, but I can do that if you want.

  52. Every progressive in town was terribly upset by the disappearance of the Bay Guardian, but it’s not like it came as a surprise. That’s why your blog is so important to progressives, and this was a very good one, highlighting what Reed Hoffman and Ron Conway are trying to do, which to to buy an election for David Chiu. Those ads equating Campos and Mirkarimi with domestic violence homicides are despicable. I’m in the San Francisco County Jails almost every day with my job as a court appointed investigator, and I’ve seen the good job that Mirkarimi is doing, carrying on with his predecessor’s policies, which were progressive, and looking for more ways to improve. I’m glad to hear that Mirk is running again, and we’re all certainly voting for Campos.

  53. Re: “So now there’s a Facebook page and a twitter hashtag called Shameonyoudavidchiu – and it’s got the names of a long list of women who think Chiu’s allies are exploiting the very serious domestic violence issue for political gain.”

    Actually the Facebook page has no such list. It does have about 230 likes which is not exactly Justin Bieber territory. Most of them came in the first 2 days and they have now pretty much stopped. You can see for yourself at: https://www.facebook.com/Shameonyoudavidchiu/likes

    Tim was accurate when he said that there was a Twiter hashtag #shameonyoudavidchiu.

    But according to search.twitter.com it has been used 3 times so far:


    Just…checking….you know…reality…

  54. Tim, I kinda agree with you on this, but for different reasons. Chiu won by a handy few percent in June and will presumably get most, if not all, of the 10% of voters in June who voted GOP. So he is the favorite to win and doesn’t really need to engage in any sleazy campaigning, while there is always a risk that might backfore on him.

    Now, I think that Campos’ vote to reinstate Mirk was a bad vote. Not on principle because I admired Kim’s position at the time, who voted to keep Mirk on technical and legal grounds, while saying that she would vote to impeach Mirk because of his acts. But rather because I felt that Campos was simply voting on solidarity grounds i.e. Mirk is a leftie, Campos is a leftie, and so Campos supports Mirk without regard to the facts.

    That is where Campos is vulnerable here, in the sense that all political extremists are vulnerable. They vote their ideology rather than a balanced pragmatic consideration of the issues. And that is what Chiu should expose – that Campos is an extremist, an identity politician and a player of the victim, envy, race and class cards. While Chiu is a can-do consensus-driven centrist who can work with everyone and not just a favored skewed constituency.

    Chiu only has to appear statesman-like to win this election, which he does naturally. Why take risks?

Comments are closed.

Sponsored link

Top reads

Landlords seek to evict longtime housing activists

Family with many residential properties claims need for an owner move-in; community organizes to fight back.

Welcome to BEST OF THE BAY 2021!

Our 46th annual Readers' Poll winners are here, from Best Burrito and Best Politician to Best Sweets Shop and Best Bike Store.

Best of the Bay 2021: Arts + Nightlife winners

READERS' POLL: Best Nightclub, Best Art Gallery, Best Drag Queen, Best Live Venue, Best Band, more

More by this author

Again, the Chron blames Boudin for a terrible situation that wasn’t his fault

The case of two bicycle hit-and-runs is a lot more complicated than Heather Knight's column suggests.

The profound importance of a new Housing Plan for San Francisco

The Agenda: City planners admit the 'Jobs Economy' was a disaster. Will they really take another path this time?

In a direct assault on planning policy, supes reject Tenderloin tech dorms

Board makes clear, for perhaps the first time ever, that developer profits should not be a deciding factor in city housing decisions.
Sponsored link

You might also likeRELATED