Ed Lee is going to run

|
(79)

We might as well get used to it: Mayor Ed Lee is going to run in November.

It's not just about getting his old job back. It's about the fact that he's starting to really like being mayor -- and that his closest allies have made it clear to him that the choice is either him or State Sen. Leland Yee, and that they find Yee unacceptable.

Lee has been talking to all the people you would expect him to talk to over the past few days, my sources tell me, letting them know that he's seriously considering it and looking for support. It's a little late to be lining up big endorsements; a lot of people have already signed on with one of the other candidates. But he'll be happy with co-endorsements and second-place endorsements -- and given his connections, he'll be able to raise substantial amounts of money quickly.

Oddly enough, if he gets in, the big loser won't be Yee, who will go out and try to run a campaign as an independent outsider against the old machine (and who doens't have to worry about offending Lee's supporters, who dislike him anyway). And John Avalos will be running to the left of both of them. 

Comments

If Ed Lee runs he will be lying because of a rose......pak Willie.

Posted by Guest adee angeles on Jul. 26, 2011 @ 2:02 pm

If Ed Lee lies on a sidewalk, then we can bust him as per the will of the voters.

Posted by marcos on Jul. 26, 2011 @ 2:17 pm

According to Matier and Ross in the Chon, Sen. Dianne Feinstein has publicly called on Ed Lee to run for mayor. So the likelihood of his running is increasing.

By the way, Chris Daly recently said on Facebook that progressives knew from the get-go that Ed Lee would eventually decide to run.

So why didn't they come up with a strategy to deal with this contingency? What have they been waiting for?

Maybe they should think twice about holding their strategy meetings at Daly's medical alcohol dispensary on Market Street.

Getting drunk and rhetorical is no way to affect the course of events. Although does create some entertaining posts here on this website.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 26, 2011 @ 10:11 pm

Ayatollah Arthur Evans, I read your comment. My comments follow:

Why is it important to you what the progressive strategy is or isn't?

Ayatollah Evans, you have displayed no interest in progressives other than to taunt and make fun of progressives at every opportunity. It's a silly hobby of yours; nothing constructive comes from it. You are nothing close to being a progressive. Again, your comment is about immature taunting. Is that reasonable and intelligent and intellectual? As an analogy, I couldn't care less what the right-wing strategy is, so I would not spend hours on said message forums taunting people there like an out-of-control child and asking, "what is the right-wing strategy with this contingency?"

Ayatollah Evans, do you find your dysfunctional and taunting nature reasonable, civil, intellectual, kind, good-natured and sensible? I should think not to any sensible and reasonable person with intellect.

The truth is that you, Ayatollah Evans, have no interest in progressive strategy anywhere. Your words are about making fun of others, including Chris Daly (he's not in office now, in case you hadn't heard). I couldn't care less what Dianne Feinstein thinks. She doesn't live here most of the time I suspect. But anyone she endorses I would not be voting for since I can't stand her.

Let's be reasonable, Ayatollah Evans. It is not civil to keep up the practices of a taunting child as you do. It is not intelligent or sensible. It is also not honest because your premise questions are not based on honesty. It based on immature taunting. In person, it would be no different than someone right in another person's face trying to inflame them for a reaction? Is that good behavior? I should think not.

Let's be civil, sensible, cogent, coherent, mature, adult, intellectual, intelligent and reasonable.

Let's be adult and mature.

Posted by Artor Evons on Jul. 26, 2011 @ 10:59 pm

First, the biggest loser is David Chiu who brokered the deal with Ed Lee not to run nor use his appointment to run with his own campaign strategy of "the Mayor and I" instead of what I would do if elected as Mayor as the main reason to elect him. Watching Supervisor Chiu at forums is like watching someone who has used his smooth relationship with Ed as one of the main reasons why he should be Mayor but that will change once Lee declares. Why pick Chiu when you could have Ed?

Second. Most citizens are not focused on the Mayors race and are more concerned about the Fact that next week we could default on our credit. Yes, there will be a big spot light on Ed Lee with all the media attention, like the the grand opening of a Mega store no doubt ginned up by big money in attendance heralding the nice guy image of our current Mayor as the best alternative to our current crop of 37 candidates.

But, the race will be one by the candidate who can best articulates a better vision for SF, forms alliances with other candidates most like them, thoughtfully makes decisions even when portrayed as changing positions, can reach beyond their districts and lastly, can be seen as an independent of downtown insiders who make decisions for the candidate and will do so when elected Mayor. Experience in the hard messy work of governing rather than a few months on the job may also play well for voters who want someone able to listen and in the end advocate for them.

Progressives can win if real citizen groups emerge to articulate such a strategy
To win in November.
Otherwise we repeat the failed campaigns go the past where hurt feelings, party loyalties driven by big egos trumped winning strategdies and worse, stopped the progressive movement from going forward in articulating a better vision than the same

to
take room 200 in November. Otherwise, we replay failed elections where hurt feelings and party loyalties as well as.big egos trumped sensible

Posted by Guest lucretiamott on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 6:47 am

The nonprofits situated close to where capital seeks rent making entitlements from local government and organized labor will not tolerate any sort of citizen, progressive or popular challenge to their dominance and control of all non-corporate, economically left of center political power.

Nonprofits/Labor:citizens::Corporations:nonprofit/labor

You and I are on the bottom, under a pile of unaccountable, cooptable corporate and union power.

-marc

Posted by marcos on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 8:17 am

"the race will be one by the candidate who can best articulates a better vision for SF, forms alliances with other candidates most like them"

- Lucretiamott

You expect a progressive candidate to articulate a better vision for SF? Which progressive, exactly, will do that?

John Avalos? Look at how he handled his relationship with the city's gay community. He let loose David Campos with his "Queers for Avalos." Some vision there, huh?

You expect progressives to build broad alliances with others? Look at their level of social skills on this chatboard and elsewhere. You might as well expect marc salomon to be elected Miss Congeniality at next year's Miss America pageant.

Our local progressive sect has lost both vision and social skills. It will face a devastating rout in November.

The answer is for the sect to undergo a Reformation. Who will instigate it?

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 9:53 am

Tim, instead hand-wringing so much at the thought of Ed Lee running for mayor, wouldn't it be better if you reflected on why The Guardian is sinking as a newspaper?

Would you like to hear some reasons why?

Click here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/cityinsider/detail?entry_id=94114&tsp=1

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 9:27 pm

Oooo! Tim! Tim!
Did you hear what the chronicle said?
I'm important, too, Tim!

Posted by Guest on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 10:08 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Chronicle#Challenges

Circulation has fallen precipitously since the heyday of the dot-com boom from 1997 to 2001. The Chronicle's circulation dropped by 16.6% between 2004 and 2005 to 400,906;[12] in 2006, daily circulation dropped to 373,805.[13] In response, the newspaper has cut back on local news coverage and takes many national and international stories from the Associated Press instead of relying on Chronicle correspondents.[citation needed] There have also been major cutbacks in staff, with one fourth of the newsroom being let go in 2007.[14]

...

On October 26, 2009, the Audit Bureau of Circulations reported that the Chronicle had suffered a 25.8% drop in circulation for the six-month period ending September 2009, to 251,782 subscribers, the largest percentage drop in circulation of any major newspaper in the United States.[17]

That's a near 40% decline in readership in just a decade.

Posted by Greg on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 10:15 pm

Neither paper is what it used to be. Both are second-rate versions of their earlier better selves.

It's too bad because the Bay Area has a large number of intelligent people who appreciate quality news-writing and cultural reviews. But they're hard to find now.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 10:27 pm

Troll pretends to "appreciate quality news-writing and cultural reviews" between bouts of repetitious judgments and infantile name calling.
See above.

Posted by Guest on Jul. 27, 2011 @ 11:33 pm

This morning's Chron implies that Ed Lee is getting ready to announce his run for mayor (link below).

This move means that the era of good feeling of City Hall is over. Too bad. It was a nice respite from the usual childishness and churlishness that prevail there.

Lee will win overwhelmingly. The second and third choices of voters will never come into play.

Our local progressive sect will wring their hands, bite their nails, and lob ad hominem attacks on anybody who points to their own ineptitude in dealing with a potential run by Lee.

These tantrums will do them no good. They have been outfoxed once again. You can't win elections by being stoned and stupid.

The big losers are Leland Yee and John Avalos. Yee hoped to convince enough progressives that he would be a stealth progressive, and add their support to his moderate base on the West Side.

But it doesn't matter now what Yee does or doesn't do. The Asian American vote will go overwhelmingly to Lee, along with the rest of the city.

The progressives will be left bearing bumper stickers for John Avalos. They will do them no good.

Avalos' campaign was a rocket that ran out of fuel shortly after it was launched. The debacle of "Queers for Avalos," spurred by David Campos, became a metaphor for the ineptitude of Avalos' campaign in general. He wasn't ready for prime time, and everybody knows it.

The Guardian will continue to rant and pout, as its readership declines and its clout dissipates. The paper needs to reinvent itself. But that will never happen. It's locked into backward-looking dogmas that have frozen it in a time warp from the past.

Ed Lee will likely be okay as mayor but not stellar. In other words, a continuation of the style of mayors for the past 30 years or so.

Click here:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2011/07/28/MNVN1KFTN...

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 6:37 am

We need a competant administrator who gets down to the serious business of running an enterprise with hopefully as little drama and politics as possible.

Lee looks like the guy. He largely keeps out of the news and, while nobody loves him, it's much more important that nobody hates him that much either. A "Mayor you don't notice too much" but who is willing to make tough decisions is exactly what we need.

Lee has my vote already.

Posted by Walter on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 7:21 am

Ranked choice voting helped build popular momentum for the "Run, Ed, Run" campaign. Voters were concerned about an unpredictable outcome with 36 candidates running for mayor and no runoff election.

Ed Lee came across as predictable and reliable. A run by Lee for mayor came to be seen as a protection from the uncertain consequences of ranked choice voting.

This situation is ironic. The proponents of ranked choice voting originally pushed it with an eye to giving lesser candidates a greater clout in the election process. But in this case, it worked to their detriment.

Our local progressive sect will be scratching their heads on how to outmaneuver Lee somehow with a strategy based on ranked choice voting.

That's a waste of time. Second and third choices in the mayor's race will be of no account if Lee runs as expected.

Lee will win handily. The clout of the progressive sect will decline farther at the board of supes. The sect will continue to lack first-rate thinkers and a credible news medium. All they will have will be divisive, self-marginalizing ideologues like marc salomon.

Chris Daly will likely emerge at some point and start channeling his inner Godzilla. Aaron Peskin will strut about for a while at the DCCC.

But to no avail. They're just ex-supes now. And nothing is more useless than an ex-supe.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 8:32 am

"nothing is more useless than an ex-supe."
Are you sure, Arthur?
Would you find them more useful if they spent their entire lives online, tirelessly attacking and criticizing people on blogs?
Is that "useful" Arthur?

Posted by Guest on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 12:08 pm

The political strategy of pretending not to want the office is older than cave painting.

Posted by Guest on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 11:40 am

Wow,

Al Gore just took out papers to run for Mayor.

h.

Posted by Guest h. brown on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 2:05 pm

1986? About when he invented the internet, which naturally would have given him a populist boost.

Posted by Guest on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 2:23 pm

Im voting for the Republican.
Hey, with ranked choice voting he/she could win.

LOL

Posted by Guest on Jul. 28, 2011 @ 5:55 pm

The opponents of Ed Lee are scrambling, trying to figure out a strategy, now that he appears likely to run for mayor.

My guess is that they will fail to come up positive messages to the voters and instead try to discredit Lee by attacking some of his backers.

This is a counterproductive strategy. It will only reinforce the voters' impression of the opponents as typical scheming politicians.

Lee, for his part, will continue to govern in a practical, low-key way. He will present a positive alternative to all the negativity of the opposition.

Lee is lucky, in that the forces that might support the opposition are now mostly weak.

The Guardian is going down the tubes, unable to reinvent itself while the city passes it by.

The unions are on the defensive. The nonprofit political complex is running out of donations. The Milk Clubbers have turned into a parody of their former selves.

The Greens have imploded. The ex-Greens are self-marginalizing.

Only the cannabis capitalists are thriving. They won't be enough to save either John Avalos or Leland Yee.

Yee will coast to victory and serve in office for eight years, while his opponents continue to shoot themselves in the foot and feel self-righteous about it.

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 29, 2011 @ 8:23 am

if you remove the accomplishments and fame, he fits right in....
Arthur is more of a shabby and crazy little tenderloin munchkin who won't leave you alone at the bus stop because he thinks himself witty and entertaining...

Posted by Guest on Jul. 29, 2011 @ 10:29 am

Arthur is clearly more of an oompa loompa than a munchkin.
He even seems to have borrowed from their theme song.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNUXXCwlm-s

Posted by Guest on Jul. 29, 2011 @ 10:40 am

Let's step back.

Let's be reasonable, sensible and intellectual.

Vagabond & Ayatollah Arthur Evans uses "Munchkins" because it's outdated. It's from the 1900 novel "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz." He often employs other outdated comparisons to use to discredit and taunt others in his juvenile manner with whom he disagrees.

It would seem reasonable, sensible, intellectual and intelligent to use more current and up to date comparisons to give some appearance (since he is all about appearance over substance) that he's living in these times, and not 100 years ago.

He's insanely too busy on his road to Oz. One would think he would be more intelligent. intellectual and strive for a semblance of sanity and use contemporary comparison.

Let's be reasonable and current.

Posted by Artor Evons on Jul. 29, 2011 @ 2:15 pm

So far, Ed Lee's opponents have been carping about his decision to run. They're entitled to express their frustrations.

But to beat Ed Lee, they will have to come up with a positive message to voters.

What is it?

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 29, 2011 @ 1:18 pm

Now we know who the unions are backing. Questions still remain about who the nonprofit political complex and the cannabis capitalists will back.

Once all these facts are in, it will be clear who is "the progressive alternative in this race."

Inspiring, huh?

http://www.sfexaminer.com/blogs/under-dome/2011/07/union-backed-committe...

Posted by Arthur Evans on Jul. 30, 2011 @ 8:50 am