While Mark Leno is getting a lot of press attention for his campaign, and a growing number of organizations are doing a ranked-choice strategy of dual-endorsements, the three politicians who have actually run for mayor as progressives in the past 20 years are endorsing Sup. Jane Kim.
Tom Ammiano, John Avalos, and Matt Gonzalez have all sided with Kim:
As a former teacher and education advocate throughout my career, I feel strongly that our next Mayor must be a person who doesn’t just pay lip service to education but actually delivers meaningful results that improve kids’ lives,” said Ammiano. “With her experience as School Board President and as the Supervisor who spearheaded the groundbreaking Free City College program, Jane Kim has shown she is the only candidate we can count on to be San Francisco’s education champion as Mayor. I am proud to endorse her.”
“I am endorsing Jane Kim for mayor because she is the most progressive candidate in the field and shares my commitment to economic justice and neighborhood empowerment,” said Gonzalez.”
“Jane Kim has devoted her career to fighting for all San Francisco residents – to make our diverse city more equitable so that everyone can share in its wealth,” said Avalos.
Kim is clearly working to solidify support on the left – and at the same time, Sup. London Breed seems to be making a move to the pro-law-enforcement side.
Breed recently announced that she supports arming the SF cops with Tasers – a move that has not impressed the police union, which claims it’s just a political effort to reach out to more moderate voters.
Breed, in her comments on the issue, said she wants Tasers because she doesn’t like guns – which is an odd statement, because the evidence shows that Tasers don’t replace guns or reduce police shootings:
The leading manufacturer of CEWs specifically states in its training materials, “CEWs do NOT replace deadly-force options.” Most departments that have CEWs instruct officers NOT to use them in deadly force situations because they cannot be relied upon to stop a threat.
Instead, cop use Tasers for suspects who are “resisting arrest” or engaging in other behavior that can often be resolved through the type of de-escalation techniques the city was starting to adopt.
So the choice isn’t guns or Tasers (unless Breed wants the police to give up their firearms, which doesn’t seem likely). The choice is Tasers or de-escalation and other less-violent techniques.
So that’s an issue that clearly separates the candidates – Breed and Angela Alioto want Tasers. Kim and Leno don’t.
Meanwhile, the Police Officers Association hasn’t endorsed anyone which is probably good for most of the candidates. At one time, the POA made a candidate appear to be a friend of law enforcement, but that organization has gone so far around the bend that at this point, it’s endorsement is probably a net negative.
As Sup. Aaron Peskin put it, “I can’t remember the POA supporting me in any election that I’ve won – and I can’t remember any election that I’ve lost.”
The Democratic Party meets in San Diego this weekend, and could potentially endorse candidates for statewide office. If Antonio Villaraigosa can’t block an endorsement for Lite Guv Gavin Newsom, it would be a blow to his campaign.
It will be another month before the local Democratic Party weighs in on the June ballot, but already the jockeying is underway: The party endorsement, which includes placement on a slate card that goes to all the city’s registered Dems, is highly coveted.
Here’s the interesting challenge:
Leno and Kim together may have enough support to keep Breed from winning. But the Democratic County Central Committee, under its current rules, can’t do a dual endorsement. The candidates have to be ranked, 1-2-3.
That means if Leno and Kim want the top two slots, one of them will have to agree to be Number Two. If that doesn’t work, the DCCC probably won’t be able to endorse anyone.
The polls are supposedly all over the map at this point; the Chamber of Commerce had Breed far ahead, but a more recent poll has Leno in the lead. None of the polls have Angela Alioto anywhere in range of a victory.
But again, the RCV comes into play here. If Kim and Leno do, indeed, manage to run a campaign where they and their allies work together, and the polls stay consistent, then as long as it’s close at the top, one of those two could win. If a significant number of Leno or Kim supporters put Breed as a second choice, and she comes in first, then she could go over the top.
Given three leading candidates, the odds that Alioto, or Amy Farah Weiss, or anyone else will be a factor looks pretty slim.
At this point.
I want to help Jane secure the win. I don’t see it advantageous to bring Weiss into the equation. My prediction:
Mark Leno will be eliminated in the 6th round. Jane will pick up transfer votes at a 3:1 clip. Jane wins by 4 points.
Angela Alioto is great. I heard her speak at UCSC to our women’s studies class years ago, but at <7% she has no chance of winning. Perhaps you would consider this:
1. Jane Kim
2. Angela Alioto
3. Mark Leno
1. Jane Kim
2. Amy Farah Weiss
3. Mark Leno
This is my personal strategy because Mark Leno is too far behind in order to win, but he could keep Jane Kim and progressives from winning if he doesn’t throw his support behind Jane. London Breed cannot be allowed to ruin SF with billionaire developers in her camp. Plus, unfortunately Jane has endorsed Mark, but Mark hasn’t endorsed Jane. Please call his office. How he handles this defeat will go down in history. I hope he does the right thing. Latest polls: London Breed 44%, Jane Kim 42% with +or- 4%, so it’s a tie for first.
London Breed can campaign there if she wants. She has millions of dollars now, three offices and dozens of paid staff. She doesn’t have street credibility though because Jane Kim was an activist and community organizer in Chinatown long before she took public office. London Breed has unfortunately never worked well with any local communities, except Cole and Divisadero. I wish her the best, but Jane Kim and London Breed are tied for first now.
Actually, Jane’s hundreds of volunteers have been scouring the Sunset and Richmond. Jane has been out in West Portal twice. I’ve been doing work in Cole Valley and Inner Sunset for weeks.
You can pick up fliers and window signs at the Jane Kim office in the Mission, 2640 Mission Street! Thanks so much for helping progressives make SF better for all of us. You may want to put Amy Farah Weiss as #3, in the very unlikely event that there is a statistical tie and we have to do a run-off anyway. You need to have filled all the spots in order to participate in the run off. 🙂 Or Amy Farah Weiss second and Mark Leno #3 if you want to help Jane secure the win.
still on about the twitter tax break? It more than paid for itself, did it not?
Holding grudges a fun past time?
Funny no Breed, nuff said!
Sanchez,
I’m voting for …
1. Alioto
2. Jane Kim
3. Mark Leno
Rafael Mandelman in District 8
Go Giants!
h.
‘Rainforest’,
Did the City finally privatize the Arboretum?
As they are moving to privatize the tennis courts.
As they did the Zoo.
And, Harding Golf Course.
And the Civic Center Auditorium.
And, all soccer fields in the City which they recovered with poisonous plastic grass and put under the control of the Fisher boys.
Hey, like her ex-roomie, David Chiu …
Jane is an oligarch in waiting.
Leno invented, “off-site inclusionary housing” which shows what he thinks of living in the same building with poor people.
Only Alioto is pure of heart and really loves the City and its residents.
And, Tim Redmond cannot pass up a chance to insult the Queen Bee.
Alioto for Mayor!
Go Giants!
h.
But Redmond is using one month old data. ? Who does that.
You get it Redmond doesn’t.
Funny he’s been around a long time too.
I’m swamped. But here is the Facebook page for the March 24 “March For Our Lives” rally at SF civic center at 1pm.
https://www.facebook.com/events/1593912047359305/
And here is the March For Our Lives main FB page, showing all of the marches/rallies planned for March 24th:
https://www.facebook.com/pg/marchforourlives/events/
The recommendation would be, leave Breed off. Unless you want more of Brown-Newsom-Lee.
Write the story. Tim might publish you .. he did me.
The what side of town?
I want to thank 48 Hills for covering any local efforts to show solidarity with the students in Florida.
But I can’t.
Generally, your fav-though-less-likely (dark horse) should be #1. Then a major candidate that you like. Then someone else you like if #2 should fail.
If you don’t vote for one of the majors, you vote probably won’t count and you’ll be SOL.
If y ou really like San Francisco and want to vote for Jane Kim, you should go to the polling place on Wednesday (;-) )
Quite the embellishment considering Ammiano was a teacher on the ‘west side.’ You must be neighbors with Joel Engardio.
Interesting coincidence that London Breed has been spending a lot of time in Chinatown since Ed Lee died after practically never setting foot there. Isn’t she pretty in red?
I’m going with the Matt Gonzalez recommendation.
Divisadero St. for Jane Kim. I need some flyers.
1. Jane Kim
2. Mark Leno
3. (blank)
1. Jane Kim
2. Mark Leno
3. (leave this rank blank)
Interesting coincidence, but none of these three endorsers have ever campaigned west of Stanyan Street. I’m not sure they have even been on the west side of town.
Now I’m confused, what is the recommendation for the RCV positions? Would #1 Kim, #2 Breed, #3 Leno be the right strategy?
We need look no farther than the Twitter tax break, her sellout on the 5M project, her votes to permanently privatize Strybing Arboretum and in favor or other corrupt “nonprofit” and her abandonment of the Green Party to see why she will be a disaster.
Better than Breed? Definitely!
Less worse than Leno?
Maybe but probably not.
Gonzalez has done zip for this city (other than his important job) since he was defeated for Mayor.
John Avalos’s main achievement was to sleep with his aide!
Kim’s “free City College” may well be temporary, as there is no source of funding.
Kim has systematically voted for regressive taxation, including the increase in the hotel tax.