Anyone but Lee - Page 2

The incumbent is falling fast in the polls, and it's actually possible for Avalos to win
Down he goes.

The Leland Yee campaign has taken direct advantage of that perception, releasing a parody of the hagiographic Lee biography written by political consultant Enrique Pearce. "The Real Ed Lee story," which repeatedly talks of his connections to unethical power brokers, hit the streets this past weekend.

Lee also sided with the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce over a coalition of labor and consumer groups with his veto of legislation by Sup. David Campos that would have prevented employers from draining $50 million per year from health savings accounts set up to comply with city law. Many restaurants even tack a 3-5 percent surcharge onto customers' bills, making it essentially consumer fraud.

"It's important for us to take a stance on the issue and say that what the mayor did was wrong," Campos told us. "It's a defining issue for us in City Hall."

Then there's OccupySF. Nobody knows for sure, but it's likely that a majority of San Franciscans are at least somewhat sympathetic to the group's message. And Lee has so far avoided the public relations disaster of Oakland's crackdown.

But the left is unhappy with Lee's constant threats to clear out the encampment, and the right is unhappy that he hasn't sent in the cops already — and even the San Francisco Chronicle has denounced his lack of decisiveness.

Lee put the police on high alert and had them moving around in buses, ready to move in — than at the last minute changed his mind. "What this shows," said former Supervisor Aaron Peskin, "is that we don't have a mayor with a firm hand on the tiller."

Most observers expected that the Chronicle would join the San Francisco Examiner and endorse Lee. But the paper came down on the side of Supervisor David Chiu. Chiu is still running well behind in the polls, and not that many voters follow the Chron's advice, but the endorsement was a huge boost to his campaign.

"Ed Lee's had a bad couple of weeks, and some of the others have had a good couple of weeks," Cooks said.



Ranked-choice voting puts an interesting twist into all of this. Several consultants and election experts I talked to this week said that Lee would be far more vulnerable in a traditional election. "He would lose a runoff against almost any of the top challengers," one person said.

But every poll that's tested the ranked-choice scenario — even recent polls that show Lee faltering — still put him on top after the votes are all tallied and allocated. That's in part because supporters of candidates who are lower in the pack — Chiu, for example — tend to put Lee as a second or third choice. The Bay Citizen/USF poll showed that when Chiu was eliminated, most of his votes wound up going to Lee.

"Ranked-choice voting clearly favors incumbents," Cook told me.

And, people walking precincts say, there are still some Herrera and even Avalos voters who put Lee second or third. And the only way Avalos -- or anyone other than Lee -- can win the election is if progressive and independent voters stick to a clear "anyone but Lee" voting strategy.

Avalos is doing well in recent polls; in fact, one shows him ahead of Herrera in first-place votes. Herrera does better when seconds and thirds are counted. Michela Alioto-Pier gets a fair number of first-place votes, which isn't surprising since she's one of only three women in the race, the only woman with citywide name recognition — and the only real credible conservative.

Yee and Chiu are both in the running, and Yee has come out strong attacking Lee and is running hard for progressive votes. He showed up at OccupySF the night a police raid was threatened and has been the leading critic of the alleged voter fraud.

Cook says a scenario where somebody beats Lee is still "an inside straight" — but it's not at all impossible.


Regardless of the credibility of the poll (though the article did mention something similar to what they said w/out citing just like they did)

The main point made to chicken john; is why waste your opportunity to use RCV. RCV allows you to vote for the guy you like. allows you to vote for your principles without being concerned about their actual chances because your vote will not go uncounted.

if you rank Avalos 3rd though he is your favorite pick, you are ensuring that he doesn't have a chance, whereas if you rank him 1st and it turns out that he doesn't have a chance, you don't lose anyway, because your 2nd choice vote gets counted instead. So where is the logic of ranking your favorite pick 3rd just because you think he has no chance. Ranking him 1st gives your candidate a much better chance.

basically it's not logical to spread the idea to not vote for your favorite pick 1st if you think they don't have a chance because RCV makes up for that by letting your vote not go to waste in the end.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 6:25 pm

Send this lying scumbag back into the hole he crawled out of.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 08, 2011 @ 9:17 am

Where's my ironic trucker hat?

Posted by matlock on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:50 am


Posted by guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:03 pm

At least he has the balls to take it outside, rather than calling himself some variation of matlock or anonymous or guest, and hiding behind a keyboard every day.

What was your pansy ass excuse again for being too afraid to debate Tim Redmond in person?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:29 pm

May 'The City Family' go down in flames.
Yes on D.
No on C.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 3:02 am

Progressive Avalos to moderate-conservative Adachi with Hall to the far right. Throw in a Libertarian Socialist and you've got it covered.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:45 pm
Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 10:08 am

Wow. This reads like a progressive affirmation chant. If Daly, Peskin, Jones and Redmond keep saying the same thing over and over, it will come to be. Good luck with that. I know a lot of folks who plan their jackpot spending when buying their lotto tix. Same idea, same results.

Sure, if Lee only gets 20% of the 1sts, he has a steeper hill to climb. Sure, there's been some rough headlines the past two weeks. Sure, the Guardian's favorite candidates would benefit if everyone teamed up on the mayor.

But Lee's really popular and had approval points to burn. Hence the hold the hill strategy instead of the street fight. Besides, there's been absolutely no data suggesting that the successive rounds won't break his way or even follow the general trajectory of the overall ballots. That it won't is just wishful thinking that contradicts common sense and the history of most elections. And don't point to Perata because he was well known, not liked, subject to years of FBI investigations and there were fewer serious candidates in that race. If Perata's loss had applicable lessons, one assumes Herrera would be doing better because Whitehurst managed both campaigns.

In terms of the press, after months and months of lefties and rival campaigns calling him corrupt, voters still aren't buying it and are now largely immune to these kinds of charges. Part of the problem are the messengers are the candidates/campaigns themselves instead of prominent "validators". Fact is, people know but don't like, trust or believe Leland Yee and Herrera has demonstrated a great willingness to abandon long-held positions for political gain. Their claims of fraud and malfeasance haven't really gone very far and certainly don't seem to be penetrating very far into the general voting population. Good campaign press is a mix of timing, truth, tone and authenticity. These two have confused those qualities for feigned outrage and over-the-top aggressiveness. Well, nobody's buying cookies from these angry bakers.

Yee, Herrera and Avalos would have benefited if Avalos had gone nasty and negative too. But has anyone ever seen Avalos go for the jugular? I haven't. What I have seen is him squirm uncomfortably when going against people or stating a difficult position. He's a nice guy and true believer but not someone who is going to take your eye out with a fork. I can only imagine that it's driving Daly and Peskin nuts (which is funny in itself because they are poised to hold their slots as the prominent loyal opposition since Campos can't seem to move anything significant at the Board and Avalos has shown himself to be more soldier than general - the Halloween bus photos on Fog City are just kinda embarrassing).

"This is the biggest political fumble in the history of progressive politics in San Francisco." Ah, the SF moderate's affirmation mantra.

Two more things, the Chinese vote is being turned out this election for the mayoral race but may have down ticket impacts, prodded by Rose, CAVEC, Lee, Chiu and even Yee. In a funny twist, one of Yee's greatest strength - Stearns field and GOTV program - will likely turn out a number of Chinese voters who will cast their second/third place ballots for Chiu or Lee. So at the end of the day, Yee may end up indirectly putting Lee over the top.

What will be very interesting is to see the reaction of conservative westside Chinese voters to the competing pension reform measures. Will they back one, the other or both? With labor polling showing both measures going down, one has to wonder if/how the labor polling accounted for the likely larger Chinese voter turnout driven by the mayoral campaign. In my experience, pollsters base their surveys on the most recent election with similar anticipated turnout. So for a race in a presidential year, you look at the last prez turnout or a similarly high turnout race and so on.

The challenge is that those models can't always predict which demographic group is going to bump turnout in a particular election because there are simply too many factors to game - key issues, identity politics, past decisions, other ballot measures, the overall economy, etc... Can't help but wonder if labor is properly accounting for a heavy turnout in conservative Chinese precincts. We should get a clue early on E-day night, when the first round of absentee tallies are released. Given what appears to be a number of absentee GOTV efforts in the Chinese community, I'll bet that the pension measures start off very strong and then quickly lose trajectory as the evening wears on. It will be a game of attrition and, at the end of the day, the pension measures are going to be closer than expected.

Posted by BeckyBayside on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 10:10 am

actually uses facts and logical argument to make their point effectively, rather than just shout "ra-ra for our side".

I share your view that Lee looks like a shoo-in, and in fact I haven't seen any polls showing him at 20% - 30%-35% has been the consistent norm, and incumbents tend to do well with the undecided's in the last few days.

Moreover, there is a real cloud of doubt over all the challengers (except for Avalos, who can't win and hasn't even really tried). Yee, Herrera, Adachi, Chui are all hated by parts of the elft for injustices and vacillations, real or imagined.

Even under IRV, the anti-frontrunner vote can be split and that looks like the case here, especially as Dufty, Ting, Hall etc. will all pick up a few percent here and there.

I'd guess that only Lee, Herrera or Adachi can win, and I'd give Lee's chances as well over 90%.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 10:27 am

Adachi is behind Avalos in every poll I've seen. You can tell he's running scared when he goes so far as to attack Avalos in that sleazy Gonzalez ad. With Lee, Yee and Herrera smearing each other on a regular basis, the voters are starting to get turned off. Then when you look at the day-to-day revelations about Lee's electioneering violations, coming thick and fast... campaign

Avalos is starting to look like the most decent guy around.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:58 pm

in months.

I tried to level with the progressive cheerleading squad a little last night, looks like it didn't work out. At this point, the strategy seems to be repeating what they all want to happen, in an attempt to keep hope alive until election day brings the inevitable.

None of the progressives seem to be asking *why* they are losing power (with the exception of Marcos) - instead just opting for the delusional echo chamber.

It's weird.

PS - For the record, my prediction is Lee, slight possibility of Herrera (about 10%) and a very outside chance of Chiu (<5%).

Posted by Longtime Lurker on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:16 am

rather than the desperate daydreams of a left that have been losing credibility and power for a few eyars now.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:31 am


Why do you want to help the progressives with your valuable advice?

Posted by matlock on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 1:06 pm

Thanks for this article. It seemed that the race was all but in the bag a few weeks ago, and I like that you've wiped aside that depressing conclusion. The big problem, as I see it, is that people are simply overwhelmed with the choices and the ranking, so will vote mainly based on visibility and name recognition (i.e. how much their campaigns have spent) or won't vote at all., a new experiment in improving democracy through relying more on our community, seeks to change that.
By looking to those more informed among us, we can make better voting choices and make it a social endeavor, ultimately limiting the power of money in politics.

Check it out today:

Posted by Hunter Meyer on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 10:30 am

is any more "open" than it was a few weeks ago. I've seen no polls suporting that view - indeed they corroberate the exact opposite view.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 10:54 am

Tim makes the point that the election IS still open, and that the only way to defeat Lee is with a massive, last minute get out the vote drive. That's a big part of the reason I made, where you can make up your own mind, share your views on the candidates and get out the vote of your Facebook friends.

Posted by Jesse Sanford on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:02 am

He claims to have seen a "secret" poll that shows that. Well guess what, I have a secret poll that shows the opposite.

Isn't this fun!

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:15 am

The reason we have seen no polls of any kind recently is that Lee is badly losing ground and doesn't want that to become public information.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:15 am

It's the exact opposite - if there really were polls showing Lee polling under one third, you can bet his opponents would have published them.

We need evidence to change our minds from the previous polls. Not speculation and hope.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:30 am

Because no campaign wants to release a poll that doesn't show itself leading.

Hence, nobody is releasing polls, and the race is too close to call.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:38 am

You are insane.

This is just embarrassing to watch. The lengths you are going to in order to convince yourself it's all going to work out are just wild.

So you're telling me Team Herrera wouldn't want to release a poll showing itself now just 8% behind Lee. Or Avalos has no interest in invigorating his base showing that he's gone from 7% to 15% - "our numbers have doubled in just two weeks!"...

And just so you don't cling on to these - because it seriously seems like something you would do - I just made those figures up.

Total nutball. Unreal, lol...

Posted by Guesty on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 11:50 am

I don't believe they would. This is not a winner take all race. If I were on a campaign in a ranked choice election I would not want to release a poll that gave any credibility to the 'anyone but' candidate by showing him in the lead.

I would instead focus on getting positive press for my candidate and putting feet on the ground for voter turnout.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:10 pm

and yet you have no idea whether they exist or not?

Do you ever think before you write?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:22 pm

Of course I'm speculating genius. Because no polls have recently been released. So the only way to analyze what new polls might say, is to speculate.

But to imagine that there are no new polls is what would be far fetched.

There are of -course- some new polls. What I am speculating about, is why none of them have been released to the media.

What is your take on that curious fact.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 7:44 pm

there is no basis on which to believe they will be any different than the previous one. If any of Lee's rivials could prove they were catching up, they'd publish.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2011 @ 4:06 pm

With all of the powerful new attacks on him in the media, if Lee had a poll showing that he is still leading, he'd release it to the press to diminish those attacks. He hasn't. This must mean that the new polls he is taking show he is losing ground.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 04, 2011 @ 10:15 am

If his opponents had polls showing Lee was weakening, they would definitely release them. They have not.

Posted by Anonymous on Nov. 04, 2011 @ 11:41 am

Lee undoubtedly has his own new poll numbers. Why hasn't he released them?

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 04, 2011 @ 2:53 pm

@Becky, appreciate your comments, though after over 50 years of fighting in the trenches for civil rights, justice and equality, I sure ain't gonna quit now. Do take some exception to your comment that Avalos won't 'go for the jugular', Ed Lee would be significantly more passive, more than he is already, I personally would prefer someone with strong principles and beliefs who will listen to and get to work for all of us, even though they may be 'lower key'. Wasn't that touted as one of Mr Ed's attributes before he got shangaied and went back on his word. He would be little more than a conduit for the policies of the puppet-masters. I'm getting real tired of 'politicians' gouging out eyes with a fork, about time they started wiping away people's tears.
Mr Ed is just carrying on on an old 'family' tradition; Feinstein>Brown>Newsom>..., or as Paul Currier calls the 'the criminal enterprise that controls San Francisco'.
For those 'new' to the ugly underbelly of nepotism and corruption that infects our city politic, who may be in denial, or who may have forgotten or become complicit; I suggest the following article as a primer and reminder.
Just my 2c.

Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:11 pm

The election is coming in less than a week. Have you checked for your polling place and information about the contests on your ballot? San Franciscans looking for comprehensive and nonpartisan information about the candidates and proposition can check the League of Women Voters' Smart Voter website It provides with balanced information to help you make an informed decision. Make sure to check this out.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:30 pm

The election is coming in less than a week. Have you checked for your polling place and information about the contests on your ballot? San Franciscans looking for comprehensive and nonpartisan information about the candidates and proposition can check the League of Women Voters' Smart Voter website . It provides with balanced information to help you make an informed decision. Make sure to check this out:

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 12:34 pm

What a nut- can't even believe he's taken seriously/talking up a City income tax in the midst of a severe recession...

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 1:07 pm

All SF can do is fiddle with the payroll tax, driving out jobs.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 1:18 pm

Can't find anything about Herrera supporting a city income tax. All I see is that he wants to reform the payroll tax. He's been an extremely progressive City Attorney, and would be tolerable as mayor.




Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 2:33 pm
Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2011 @ 2:50 pm

I'm sticking with Adachi, Dufty and Chui.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2011 @ 3:03 pm

Herrera screwed thousands of tenants in Parkmerced out of secure homes on behalf of the Wall Street developer Fortress.

Herrera screwed 33,000 Bayview voters out of their right to put a measure on the ballot to stop another Wall Street developer (Lennar corporation) from destroying their neighborhood and making thousands of them deadly ill with cancer, mesothelioma, asthma, and other diseases.

Herrera tried to force the Bayview to accept a polluting fossil fuel power plant in their neighborhood so that he could get rid of a polluting plant in his -own- neighborhood, and thereby -further- enrich real estate developers who wanted to cash in by doubling the value of their properties in Potrero Hill and Pier 70.

And Herrera has spent his entire tenure as City Attorney making a big public show of how he supposedly fights PG&E, when in reality he has done absolutely nothing real whatsoever to stop PG&E from taking the City to the cleaners.

There is nothing 'progressive' about Dennis Herrera.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Nov. 04, 2011 @ 10:29 am

Thank goodness the Anyone But Lee movement is gaining some
traction. I don't know why it had to wait for not one, but two money
laundering investigations. I cannot think of a more unprogressive vote
than a vote for Ed Lee. Let's kick him out while we still have the
chance. Herrera, Avalos, and Yee. In any order.

Posted by vannabanana2 on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 4:18 pm

No October surprise. What about Go Lorries? What about Archway?
What about Dwayne Jones paying cash to canvassers in Bay View? It's
horrible that Ed Lee is still in the running after all this. How can
you possibly support him? I don't care who wins as long as it isn't

Posted by Eva Long on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 4:19 pm

Ranked choice voting is hurting the progressives in this race.
Enough people dislike Ed Lee (especially now that the dirt is
beginning to get uncovered) that if it were just Ed Lee vs. Herrera or
Yee, Ed would get slaughtered. But too many people still think Ed Lee
is a good guy. I only hope those undecideds out there read up on all
the Ed Lee scandals before they go to the polls next week.

Posted by Maria Madara on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 4:43 pm

Ranked choice voting is hurting the progressives in this race.
Enough people dislike Ed Lee (especially now that the dirt is
beginning to get uncovered) that if it were just Ed Lee vs. Herrera or
Yee, Ed would get slaughtered. But too many people still think Ed Lee
is a good guy. I only hope those undecideds out there read up on all
the Ed Lee scandals before they go to the polls next week.

Posted by Maria Madara on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 4:48 pm
Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 4:54 pm

Next week as soon as the votes are counted, Ed Lee is going to move
into Occupy full force. He's backed by the 1% as is seen by the
millions raised by his campaign and his independent expenditure
committees in just a few months. We need someone who truly represents
the 99%. that's why I've voted for Yee as my #1. He's been at occupy
everyday, not even campaigning. Just talking to voters. That's what SF

Posted by Lauren Grace Gonzales on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 4:56 pm


Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 02, 2011 @ 5:09 pm

I heard there is approximately 20,000 tampered votes already sent in for ED Lee as absentee ballots ( thanks to CCDS and Rose Pak's Chinatown group ). You guys need to go out there to vote Anybody But Lee to neutralize those tampered votes on Tuesday.

Posted by Guest edlee on Nov. 03, 2011 @ 9:21 pm

I heard Ed Lee is actually an alien from outer-space and has had sexual relations with a number of anumals.

Wow, isn't this fun?

Posted by Anonymous on Nov. 04, 2011 @ 9:39 am
Posted by Patrick Monk. RN on Nov. 03, 2011 @ 1:14 pm

i've worked on lots of elections, mostly in contentious places (swing states). Adachi is tough and will articulate sf values in situations where he'd be speaking to the broader media re the city. (since so much of the media and country constantly criticize sf and try to make it look like a joke for being the rare smart place to have real policies on environment etc).

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2011 @ 2:15 pm

And I'm going with Chui and Dufty as backup picks.

They are all capable of bridging the gap between liberals and moderates.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2011 @ 2:31 pm