Mark Leno conceded a hard-fought San Francisco mayor's race on Wednesday, saying that he called London Breed to offer congratulations on her new job as mayor.
Despite a compelling personal story that showed her as an underdog, Breed was the favorite of the business and political establishment communities going into the contest.
Breed raised the most money of the three leading candidates with the help of big contributions from big backers, at least $2.3 million to her political campaign committee and two other committees that supported her.
She faced spirited opposition from Leno and Supervisor Jane Kim, who said that Breed represented the status quo that had made San Francisco so inequitable.
I say this as a friend. The tinfoil hat is a bit tight and it’s not a good look.
Because you'd have to be mentally ill to think that unlimited, unregulated spending by financial speculators could have any impact on an election.
Or how about election fraud - digital votes are easy to change and democracy is an illusion.
I figured as much. Just goes to show how much the once-left-leaning city of SF has drifted to the right. Of course, that will happen when all of those left-leaning folks have been priced out in a case of class warfare and replaced with right-wing libertarian techies.
So glad I'll be leaving this cesspool soon.
"Right-wing libertarian". That's ... something. Good riddance, dude. Enjoy your poutine and moose wrestling.
Whatever your thought on traditional left-right politics and the Nolan Chart are, IMO the core philosophy of "the left" is "we should look out for and take care of each other". Economic and social policies generally derive from this core idea. Whereas the fundamental philosophy of libertarianism seems to be "we should be selfish and trust the Invisible Hand to sort it all out. p.s. I got mine, fuck you!" with economic and social policies being seen as getting in the way of being selfish and doing whatever the fuck you want.
It's true that libertarians don't see eye-to-eye with "the right" on things like sex and... well, sex. They don't want the state getting in the way of people getting abortions if they want them, but they're also not interested in making sure that people have access to abortions if they need them. If you end up with an unwanted pregnancy but the nearest doctor who will perform an abortion is a couple of hundred miles away and you don't own a car, well, I guess your demand was not enough to convince the market to supply your need in a more available fashion, so all you get from the invisible hand is the finger. Which doesn't look awfully different from a misogynist religious asshole giving you the finger, if you need an abortion and can't get one.
So, yeah, while the actual policies of "the right" and "libertarians" can differ by quite a bit, the fundamental opposition between the philosophies of "the left" and "libertarians" can make libertarians look a lot like the right in a surprisingly large number of lighting conditions. Doubly so if you're actually standing on the left yourself.
Also, who has anything bad to say about poutine?
740 calories and 41 grams of fat. Good gravy.
Wow, that "left core philosophy" is cute.
Wow, that snark is content-free.
I've left one cesspool for another, recently. Apart from self-preservatory 'going away so you can come back again', the cess is flowing into the pool everywhere and the pool has an ongoing need to be controlled and cleaned up, and the cess redirected.
I hope your move brings you happiness; I need -- we all need -- your presence making a difference.
The walk-back of the Seattle head-tax really says all you need to know. If you actually want to get people out of tents and get the shit off the sidewalk you need subsidized housing, and how are you going to pay for that housing? Stomping through human excrement is no fun, but god forbid my employer should have to pay give a human beings places to live. Besides, it's more fun to fantasize about how a zoning-free libertarian paradise would solve everything because that doesn't cost me anything.
No one wants to say it outright, but the Breed election confirms that the mainstream has decided that the solution is for everyone who doesn't belong in the West urban tech-corridor to leave, and if they can't or won't leave then the cops will make them leave. I visit family in SF and it's a human catastrophe zone but have fun guys, hope your employers take as good care of you as they did the precision machinists at the tool and die shops of the Northeast (circa 1960).
On Monday I spoke to an SF resident who said they only vote presidential elections and don't bother voting on any of the local issues because "those don't really matter". Part of me died.
See, there's your problem. You should have made sure part of them died.
That could be arranged... (heh)
Seriously, it's appalling that people don't get that not voting is voting, more often than not for things you don't or won't like.
As a wise man once said, "If you think not voting makes you righteous rather than lazy and fuckwitted, you are probably great at arguing with your cat."
I also just learned that my 20 year old Amazon addicted co-worker isn't even registered to vote because "It's too much trouble." We're all pretty much fucked.
I talked to another SF resident once who told me "yeah I just vote no on all the ballot measures because that's what we elect people to decide."
And I just stared at him with this vacant look. There's certainly merit in such a system, and it's deeply frustrating how often our lawmakers dump measures on the ballot (or worse, put measures on the ballot to act as poison pills for initiatives on the ballot), but that's not the system we have. And for every person who votes no out of spite for the existence of propositions, they're just making it that much harder for the rest of us who want schools to be able to afford toilet paper.
I've always wondered how many people do that.
Wow. I wonder if people who do that just go ahead and choose "C" on all multiple choice questions as well?
I mostly agree with you that "always vote no" is a pretty bad strategy. But ... maybe not, if you think that a gridlocked, accomplish-nothing government is the best that you can hope for? Which given recent national antics is not an entirely unsupportable position.
But "vote no on ballot measures if you haven't taken the time to understand them" probably is for the best.
I'm always frustrated when I hear people preaching, "VOTE! Just vote! It doesn't matter what you vote for, just vote!" Well, no. It damned well does matter what you vote for. Voting for voting's sake is stupid. If someone is going to vote out of blind ignorance without taking the time to have an informed opinion first -- or at the least, "I'm gonna ask my Smart Friend and do what they say" -- then we're probably better off if they don't. Especially when it comes to ballot measures, which, by design, short-circuit the legislative process in favor of direct democracy ("So you vote for television, and everyone else, as far as your eye can see, votes to fuck you with switchblades").
...super hoping I don't have to stick with that name.
When buying the vote in SFO:
Ya peeps should be steering your looks with more leeway to sample all the local capabilities rather than rolling 40% Timothy Leary 60% bloviated former Conservative TV host, if steering at all to learn from Phil Showrunner's mistakes.
Make friends with new ideas.
Change tanks if people recognize you by your flotation/isolation tank.
Yeah you saved a ten-bagger picking SFO over LA there.