D5 shakeups flip the dynamics of that wild race

There's a resurgence of progressive support for Christina Olague after the Mirkarimi vote and Davis meltdown.

[UPDATED AND CORRECTED] Wild and unsettling political dynamics have rocked the District 5 supervisorial race, with three major candidates having prominent endorsements withdrawn, the most significant being this week's mass exodus of support from the campaign of Julian Davis following his bad handling of allegations that he has mistreated women.

Those withdrawing their endorsements of Davis since Saturday include Sups. John Avalos, David Campos, and Jane Kim, Assembly member Tom Ammiano, the Bay Guardian, the Examiner, and the League of Pissed-Off Voters. The Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club has scheduled a vote for Monday on whether to withdraw its sole endorsement of Davis.

Avalos gave his endorsement to Sup. Christina Olague over the weekend, and she seems to be getting more progressive support in the wake of Davis' flame-out and her Oct. 9 vote in favor of reinstating Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi. That vote triggered a strong backlash against Olague from Mayor Ed Lee and his allies, with San Francisco Police Officers Association withdrawing its endorsement.

But former Mayor Art Agnos reached out to Olague – who he didn't know previously – after the Mirkarimi vote and is rumored to be considering offering her his endorsement and support. Agnos didn't confirm or deny the rumor, but he did tell us, “I was very impressed by her commitment to the progressive issues we share.”

Olague has a long history of progressive activism and was a consistently good vote during her tenure on the Planning Commission, but many progressives were concerned by her early support for Lee, who then appointed her to the District 5 seat vacated by Mirkarimi's election as sheriff, and by some of her votes and behaviors since then.

But now that she's been viciously attacked by Lee's staffers and allies over the Mirkarimi vote – and iced out by Lee himself, who she says won't return her calls and who bailed out on a planned campaign appearance – Olague seems to have a newfound independence. “At the end of the day, we serve constituents and the city, and that's who we should answer to,” Olague told us, agreeing that she feels freed up by recent developments, as difficult as they've been. “You don't become an indentured servant.”

She told us that her decision last year to co-chair the “Run, Ed, Run” campaign to convince Lee to break his promise and run for a full term to the office he'd been appointed to was based on her belief that “we'd see an infusion of new energy and some more diversity” of both ideology and demographics in the Mayor's Office.

“Sadly, I'm not seeing those changes happening really. I didn't sign up for another four years of Gavin Newsom and those thugs, and I've seen a lot of that same behavior,” she said. “People who played prominent roles in the Newsom administration continue to play prominent roles in this administration.”

Olague said the schism with the administration began this summer when she supported Avalos in trying to bring in new revenue as part of the business tax reform measure that became Prop. E, which Lee had insisted be revenue neutral before compromising with progressives. That was when Olague said she got her first nasty message from Tony Winnicker, the former Newsom press secretary who now works for Lee and wrote Olague a text during the Mirkarimi hearing telling her “you disgust me and I will work night and day to defeat you.”

Some prominent progressives privately worried that schism was an election ploy designed to help Olague win the race for this progressive district given that Davis had captured most of the influential progressive endorsements. But with Lee and his allies continuing to be openly livid over the Mirkarimi vote – and with solid progressive John Rizzo running a lackluster campaign that has less than $5,000 in the bank – there is growing progressive support for Olague.

The big fear among many progressives is that London Breed will win the race, a concern that has been exacerbated by the support that Breed has been receiving from real estate and development interests, both directly and in independent expenditures by the Association of Realtors, which has spent more than $225,000 in this election cycle hoping to knock out progressives in Districts 1 and 5 and tip the balance of power on the board.

Breed told us that she doesn't know the Realtors or why they're offering such strong support, pledging to be an independent vote. “I've never made any promises to anyone that I would help anyone or that I would be this way or that,” she told us. “I'm not here to do anyone's bidding, whether it's Aaron Peskin or Willie Brown or anyone else.”

Brown helped launch Breed's political career by [CORRECTED recommending then-Mayor Gavin Newsom] appoint her to the Redevelopment Commission, where Breed supported Lennar and other big developers, but she had a falling out with him earlier this year and made impolitic comments about him to the Fog City Journal, causing US Sen. Dianne Feinstein to withdraw her endorsement of Breed.

Brown, Lee, and Chinatown power broker Rose Pak helped raise money for Olague, who has received the maximum $500 donation from such powerful inside players as venture capitalist Ron Conway (and his wife, Gayle), Michael Cohen, Victor Makras, Lawrence Nibbi, Mark Mosher, and John Whitehurst.

But that was before the Mirkarimi vote, which Lee's allies seem to see as a litmus test on Olague's loyalty to them. As Tenderloin Housing Clinic director Randy Shaw, who helped engineer the progressive split that brought Lee to power, put it on his Beyond Chron blog, “Olague’s vote was an act of profound disloyalty not only to the mayor who appointed her, but also to those who pushed the mayor to do so.”

Olague says she's disturbed by that viewpoint, and by those so blinded by their efforts to demonize Mirkarimi “and exploit and politicize issues around domestic violence” that they have failed to consider the price he has already paid for his actions or the legal standards for removing an elected official. “On something like this, it's not a question of loyalty. It's about principles,” she said.

Breed says that she has seen an increase in support since the Mirkarimi vote and the Davis meltdown, but she said that she doesn't want to talk about those cases or exploit them politically. “I don't take pleasure in the misery of someone else,” she said, adding her hope that the furor about Mirkarimi will die down. “The decision has been made and it's time for the city to come together.”

Progressive leaders have made similar calls, but Mirkarimi's critics are showing no signs of letting the issue go. San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee members Zoe Dunning and Matt Dorsey have put forward a resolution condemning the reinstatement vote and calling for Mirkarimi's ouster, which the DCCC will consider on Wednesday evening, Oct. 24.

[CORRECTED At that meeting, the DCCC will also consider a motion] to reopen the D5 endorsement process, hoping to change the DCCC's previous “no endorsement” vote, and sources tell us there is currently a strong backroom effort to give the endorsement to Breed. That vote will be a big test for progressives, which lost their majority control over the DCCC in the June elections.

Meanwhile, D5 candidate Thea Selby – who snagged one of the three endorsements by both the Guardian and the Examiner – continues to run a strong and well-funded campaign that has avoided the carnage taking place in the other campaigns. “I feel like I'm in the middle watching out for flying beams,” she told us, adding that both she and Rizzo have been “the grown-ups in the room, so there's an opportunity there and I'm hopeful.”

But unlike Rizzo, who has seems strangely absent and didn't return Guardian phone calls [see UPDATE below], Selby has plenty of money in the bank – nearly $60,000 as of the last official report two weeks ago – and could benefit from voter disgust with the ugly politics at play. “It's my experience that is driving this,” says this small-businessperson, “and not my lifelong desire to be a politician, and that may ring some bells.”

How the ranked-choice voting system will play out in this mess is anyone's guess, and even Davis seems to be hoping that he still has a shot, resisting calls by the Guardian and others to withdraw from the race. Poorly funded candidates Andrew Resignato and Hope Johnson this week announced they were joining forces for the “People's Ticket” after being excluded from a University of San Francisco candidates forum.

But most political observers seem to think this race will come down to a two-person contest between Breed and Olague – who each have more than $45,000 in the bank with which to make a strong final push – and the distinctions between them are becoming clearer as more progressives get behind Olague and the moderates and monied interests get behind Breed.

Olague said she's still “willing to work with anybody,” but that, “I'm worried that moderate forces will seize this moment to try to destroy us.”

UPDATE 4:45: Rizzo just got back to us and said he's been actively campaigning and feeling good about his chances. "We have a great team and we'll have enough resources to reach voters," Rizzo said. He said that he's had a stong fundraising push in the last couple weeks since the last campaign financing statement was released, and he noted his endorsements and active support by influential progressives including Ammiano, Campos, and Carole Migden. "We're doing a lot of retail campaigning, meeting voters and getting the message out."


So, Olague goes along with the Ed Lee crowd and pulls in all their money only to break ranks on the Mirkarimi vote as Julian Davis falls from grace (did she know that was going to happen?)...so she can then tell the progressives: "hey, I'm with you now and, oh, btw, I've got a ton a money so you should support me over the one progressive that has never let you down." Wow.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 3:28 pm

A white woman make an unsubstantiated claim against a black man and everyone jumps to condemn the black man.

Racist history repeats again.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 3:58 pm

A white woman make an unsubstantiated claim against a black man and everyone jumps to condemn the black man.

Racist history repeats again.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 4:03 pm

"Dunning is also proposing at that meeting to reopen the D5 endorsement process, hoping to change the DCCC's previous “no endorsement” vote, "

No I am not. You may want to try contacting me first to confirm before you report misinformation.

Posted by Guest Zoe on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 4:43 pm

"Dunning is also proposing at that meeting to reopen the D5 endorsement process, hoping to change the DCCC's previous “no endorsement” vote, "

No I am not. You may want to try contacting me first to confirm before you report misinformation.

Posted by Guest Zoe on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 4:45 pm

So you're on record that you'll vote "No" on any attempt to reopen the endorsements and vote "No" on endorsing London Breed?

Well that's good to know. Hopefully we can take you at your word.

Posted by Greg on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 5:17 pm

Sorry about that, Zoe, I'll correct it.

Posted by steven on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 9:10 am

Matt stand by Julian. He understands that anyone making allegations of sexual harassment six years after the so-called "fact", but 3 weeks before an election...

...might be doing it based on political motivations?

Right? Isn't that obvious?

You feel me?

Posted by Guest on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 4:48 pm

How endorsements are so important to people who self identify as people who don't need endorsements.

"we free of group think types need endorsements to tell our other anti group thinkers how to think."

So bizarre. claiming to be part of a group of people too smart too be duped by the 01% while spinning out marching orders for the self identified?

Posted by matlock on Oct. 19, 2012 @ 6:19 pm

matlock, there are so many things wrong with the "progressive" vs. "machine" thing, but primarily it's the implication that "progressives" eschew machine politics.

Posted by Hortencia on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 9:15 am

About that "newfound independence." Rose Pak's kids are out in D5 again this morning in their Olague shirts bringing us more doorhangers. Just what we needed! What does that tell you about the supposed rift with the Mayor? Who are you going to trust? Me or your lying eyes? Does not returning a phone call trump actual logistical support?

Posted by Gust on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 9:47 am
Posted by Guest on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 10:30 am

They might very well be Walter Wong's.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 10:43 am

during elections I've seen packs of asian teens campaigning for various other asians, Jane Kim was the last time, I rode around SOMA the wekend before the election and saw half a dozen groups.

Our people just assuming these groups are Rose Pak flunkies?

Posted by matlock on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 12:00 pm

Hope Johnson and Andrew Resignato are having an event on Wednesday the 24th at Madrone. I encourage you to go and talk to them and help fund their campaigns. The supervisors made a huge mistake voting in the interim mayor. Do not make the same mistake by voting in the interim supervisor.

Posted by Mike on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 10:23 am

"Wild and unsettling political dynamics have rocked the District 5 supervisorial race, with three major candidates having prominent endorsements withdrawn, the most significant being this week's mass exodus of support from the campaign of Julian Davis following his bad handling of allegations that he has mistreated women."
-- Not only did the SFBG throw Davis under the bus, you SteveJones backed the bus over Davis then ran over him again, " friend" -- wow I would hate to have you as an enemy!

Posted by Guest on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 10:56 am

It's about winning.

After the Mirkirimi deal the Guardian and other apologists are probably pretty shy when it comes to these issues.

Posted by matlock on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 12:02 pm

It's odd that in the third week of October endorsements for a district supervisor are in play, but in 2012 endorsements have shifted all over the place in D5 which was true even before Kay Vasilyeva's allegation surfaced in the SF Weekly.

The progressive community has been done a disservice here. This is an attempt to grease the skids so this paper, the Milk Club and others will support Olague. Here is the narrative: there is nothing more to the Davis story that might cast doubt on Eskenazi's story, Rizzo is anemic so progressives have no other choice but to support Olague to block the demonic London Breed. So swallow and support an appointed incumbent that backed 8 Washington after being a member of MAC, never removed her name from Mark Farrell's measure to gut RCV and hand citywide elections to downtown cash forever after being a Green, and teamed up with Scott Wiener to eviscerate historical preservation laws after taking an appointment from Aaron Peskin. For old timers with memories this is the same LGBT "leader" who dropped Roberta Achtenberg for Willie Brown in the 1995 Mayor's race. People do change over time, they may run left to right which has happened to many 68ers or right to left but grounded individuals don't flip and flop like this. Opportunists do.

Jones' logic here is progressives should hold their nose and support Olague so they can continue to delude themselves they have access and may be tossed a few crumbs. Telephones calls to this paper may be returned now when they were not in the Spring. What anchors all this is her Mirkarimi vote. The SFBG literally bet the house on his career. Few progressive activists or any of his former Board colleagues will ever get their heads around this reality but it is what it is.

Despite a one sentence disclaimer, this analysis also assumes the Mayor's office is not capable of doublespeak, or that the art of deception is often a critical resource in political fights. Ed Lee is Mayor because deception works. This paper more than any other has run stories claiming Lee did not tell the whole truth while on the Ethics witness stand on June 29th so why would anyone expect the Lee administration to play like boy scouts now? OK, Tony Winnicker launched a vicious missive towards Olague but he's known for being a pitbull, and that's not a strong fact to rest such an analysis upon. None of either the Pak or Brown donors to Olague have asked for a penny back. They're savvy political actors and they know how to play the political game. Say what needs to be said to win an election, and afterwards there is 4 years to take care of business. As 8 Washington showed, a single vote can net a developer up to $200 million.

If progressives should swallow this particular poison, and double down on a broken down endorsement process devoid of ideals then at least ask Olague for an on the record interview covering issues that will come up before the next Board of Supervisors. Get it all on the record. Olague has refused to answer such questions from other journalists and publications in this campaign. With a political actor like Olague, on the record interviews are all you've got to evaluate the possible future.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 1:38 pm

One side is playing for keeps and our side keeps on playing to lose.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 1:58 pm

Great comment, Guest and I agree, get Olague on the record. SFBG should stop greasing the skids for her. Pin her down as a service to the voters and your readers.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 4:25 pm

Straight jacket our progressive candidates and then forcibly 'retire' them if they step even a millimeter out of line. We need to mimic our fellow right-wing ideologues on this issue. Adherence to the movement is key here - it's the only thing which matters.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 5:15 pm

When asked about a suprious hearsay allegation from Debra Walker she honestly responded that she had no recollection of that during her conversation with Lee. Lee confirms that account and there was nobody else present at the time. End of story.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 5:20 am

"bet the house on his career"

And the fallout is just beginning.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 10:21 am

Excellent post. Certainly the parts about Olague and the Mayor are 100% spot on.

I consider myself a fairly trusting person, but I'm pretty shocked at how naive the Guardian seems to be here. It's a neat trick for someone like Olague with such a rich history of betrayal and deception to constantly find folks aching to give her another chance. Aching! We do deserve better. If we back Olague now we will deserve everything that will surely come our way. Olague will have four years to pay back those big debts--and incur some new ones along the way. Sure, she will throw progressives a bone here and there, where it doesn't matter and where money isn't changing hands.

Why in the midst of a contested election should so many think about settling for something less than what they believe in?

One bright spot: Reading through the comments here I don't detect any popular groundswell for Olague. Maybe the Guardian will go ahead and put Olague in the #1 endorsement spot--as the grapevine has had it for days. But assuming a fairly clean election (I know), the voters will have the final word. That's where my hope lies.

Posted by Gust on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 8:41 am

Kay Vasilyeva is Disaster Mitigation and Recovery Planner for the Dept. of Emergency Management (DEM). She is not a public safety employee working out of DEM at 1011 Turk Street, but rather has worked out of the City Administrator's office inside City Hall. One of her office colleagues Bill Barnes, who also surfaced on FogCityJournal this week, works in the City Administrator's office as a Project Manager. Under the Charter, the Mayor chooses the City Administrator with Board confirmation. Naomi Kelly is now the City Administrator. The department head at DEM is now Anne Kronenberg.

For those new to City Hall and its ways remember what office Mayor Ed Lee came from? The City Administrator's office.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 12:02 pm

Steven, how many progressives do you know who got hired into nice city jobs over the past 15 years without political connections to grease the skids?

Posted by marcos on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 1:30 pm

I'm sure Kay has stellar credentials in emergency management. I'm sure she took the civil service exam, did really well on it, beat out other less qualified applicants for the job, and probably had to wait a few years for an opening at such a time when the city isn't hiring many people.

If that's how she got the job, then I don't think folks are fair to be skeptical about her motives.

That *IS* how she got the job, isn't it Steven?


Posted by Greg on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 2:13 pm

When avenues of inquiry are closed off and not explored, then we know that the truth lies somewhere in that direction.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 7:35 am

besmirch Kay's motives rather than confer upon her the sympathy that all victims of sexual and domestic abuse deserve.

But the danger here is that if the SFBG gets behind a sexual abuser as much as they have just done for a physical and verbal abuser, they might start looking like they will overlook any human failing, as long as the perp is a lefty. And that doesn't help the cause at all.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 7:53 am

Yeah, all women are weak and vulnerable and require the intervention of paternalistic conservative alpha males to protect them from the legion of impending threats that are used as herding tools to corral scared women into the voting booth to vote for those whose long game has proven to undermine women in the aggregate.

Women, at least those who enjoy the presumption of Victorian honor, are exempted from accountability because the paternalistic men have likewise deemed that a misogynist attack, this coming from those who celebrate the Prince of the Bimbo Eruptions and had no problem promoting Gavin Newsom after he fucked employee Ruby Tourke who was married to his best friend, also an employee, and broke up their family.

Tourke ended up with a line on lucrative corporate consulting contracts, Vasilyeva apparently got hired on by Ed Lee and is apparently now paying back her end of the deal. Daly, for his part, needs to remain on good terms with the new regime given SEIU's precarious perch.

You all could give a fuck about the women, it is all about the money.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 8:28 am

...Mr. Economics-Is-All. Who doesn't give a fuck about women, supporter-of-spousal-abuser-Mirkarimi?

Posted by Hortencia on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 9:18 am

I've not got the power such that my preference for economics over identity politics means shit. Ed Lee does have that power, so when he pretends to care for one woman by attempting to destroy her family, his actions are eminently consequential. Not only does his fake pretend to care bullshit attack a women under the guise of saving her--paternalizing crap at its utmost--but his economic policies consign thousands of women to economic abuse.

Economic abuse is not criminalized, indeed it is encouraged, while non abuse is criminalized and punished while real physical abuse is ignored by the DA if there is no political percentage to it. 6000 DV cases not investigated and charges allowed to languish is your patriarchy.

These are the blind spots that fake radical feminists such as Hortencia hope to erect to shade their political patrons from scrutiny.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 9:49 am

Let's not equivocate on that, but neither should we confuse a momentary act of randy forwardness (if such occured) with rape; that's just like saying an arm grab is the same as a murderous two-fisted beat-down. Those relatively minor wrongful acts are not the same as the severe ones they are being likened to, and to lose sight of that is madness.

As a matter of fact, it is telling how the anti-Mirkarimi/anti-Davis haters so freely engage in this sort of mendacious word-play, creating false equivalencies to advance their goals.

All victims of sexual and domestic abuse deserve sympathy -- but those falsely exploit that axiomatic truth to fraudulently advance political goals deserve *no* such sympathy.

Excellent observations by marcos and Greg above with regard to the city's hiring process. Based on my own experiences and the experiences of people I know well, being qualified and scoring highly on a test is an *exceedingly* small part of the requirement for getting hired.

Posted by lillipublicans on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 8:40 am

Getting back to basics, feminism is not about sympathy for poor, powerless, defenseless women, it is about relentlessly empowering women as equal to men by all measures in civic society.

There remain more questions than answers in this case. So long as those answers are not forthcoming, there will be more and more questions.

I'm not asserting that these claims were thrown out with racist intent, there is no evidence of that. But when a charge resonates with historical racist themes, then that is relevant to point out.

Nor am I asserting that Kay's appointment was political. There is no evidence of that. But in the absence of a representative number of progressives being appointed to similar positions, it raises questions.

The deafening silence on the answers to these questions only creates the space for more speculation, more efforts to connect the dots to figure out what the fuck is going on here.

It seems that there is an effort to sink two progressive balls in different pockets. First Davis via what might well be machine related political payback and second Olague who very well might have been used as a progressive fig leaf by Lee and thrown under the double decker London bus by Pearce.

Apparently there is a contract where Olague cannot fire Pearce even though he has a record of successfully sabotaging campaigns--Gonzalez in 2003, Prop B and Sanchez in 2008.

At least Pearce has one talent. Christina was never going to be allowed to be her own woman under this corrupt regime, there is too much money at stake. And that is perhaps the most sexist aspect to this entire political coup.

Given this developing record of powerful male politicians using feminist scare tactics against women while enacting policies that stomp on women, at home through displacement and gentrification and abroad via drone strikes, women are on the cusp of "asking for it" if they continue to empower those who are scaring them into acting against their best interests.

Feminism means empowering women equivalent to men. And that means owning the consequences of political actions and not running crying to the big powerful man who objectifies you whenever someone hurts your feelings.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 8:06 am

Olague could always fire Pearce. Simple. If there is a contract she might have to keep paying him. But she's rolling in the dough from the big guys, so why not?

Posted by Gust on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 8:22 am

If the cash has switched its bet to Breed post-reinstatement, then she'd have to drain her coffers to relieve herself of the anvil that is Pearce with little hope of replenishment at this critical time.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 8:56 am

Actually, marcos, for many of us, feminism is about tearing down patriarchy, not striving for necessarily false equality within it.

Posted by Hortencia on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 9:20 am

That is why radical feminism has been reduced to an irrelevant residue in the petri dish of politics and like so many other radical identity movements, queer, race, etc, is practically irrelevant to most everyone today. I'm talking about what remains of mainstream feminism.

Even within what passes for "the left" today, and even within the women queer and racial communities, the radical conceptualizations and theories of the radical aspects of second wave feminism are minority positions and are only becoming more marginalized. For queers and race, election results confirm this.

The experience of the Oppression Olympians' marginalization within Occupy last fall confirms this. The reaction to rejection has been an upping of the shrillness and brittleness of doctrine which in turn creates a nasty feedback loop that further marginalizes.

All the while, the position of race and gender and to a lesser extent queers deteriorates.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 9:42 am

You obviously are quite knowledgeable with regard to the inner workings of political campaigns. I'd be interested in learning more about how Pearce sabotaged Matt Gonzalez... though now as I write this, I seem to recall that he ran the campaign out of money three weeks before polling time -- was that it?

I'd also like to see you more directly -- or perhaps I should write "accessibly" -- break down why Hortencia's stated version of feminism is one destined for marginalization and failure.

Is the focus on "breaking down patriarchy" -- being wholly negative and confrontational in nature -- naturally less likely to succeed than an affirmative version of feminism that you describe?

Posted by lillipublicans on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 10:13 am

I'd rather not comment on the details, just that Pearce was at the helm when the ship went down. Suffice it to say that one of my roles was routing around Pearce's failures by facilitating getting done what needed to get done but what he would not do.

Women own the responsibility for charting a successful course for feminism, not men. But men can point out where something is not working. Like so many radical movements, radical feminism became theoretical and self referential in character, trying to shoehorn other peoples' realities into their theory on the terms of radical activists whether they wanted it or not.

So many radical movements that claim to speak for "the people" or some subset thereof have abandoned any connection to "the people" and in many cases have grown to hold "the people" in contempt for daring to not agree with the radicals.

Again, this does not mean that the problems in society do not arise from rotting roots that require a radical approach. Rather that the radical approach taken has ceased to function and that many radicals prefer to latch onto the tried and false instead of rethinking their approach based on the history of failure with an eye towards doing what has worked and avoiding what has failed.

One thing that I've learned during my sojourn in electoral politics during the first decade of this millennium is that progressives and radicals should be humbled by the fact that the "good ideas" that we think we have aren't fully formed and perfect.

"No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy's main strength" wrote Helmuth von Moltke the Elder, but in reality, it is the encounter with the allies' main strength that is equally dangerous and from which we must learn.

In other words, with allies like this, who needs enemies?

Posted by marcos on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 10:41 am

Uh, Greg, it's not that hard to pass that exam. There are thousands of civil service employees. Faux pedestal.

Posted by MistOfTheCity on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 4:00 am

Groping and someone's political ploy to expose it are not the most important issues re Davis. The Cease and Desist clinched it for me - victimizing again someone he had likely victimized six years ago. SO revealing of his character. There were other ways to handle this that may have saved him.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 5:43 pm

Ok let's follow the logic here from the spin zone. The worst possible action is to use a legal remedy to prevent false allegations about a human being --who hurts and bleeds like the rest --from being linked forever on Google to battery and sexual assault charges or worse. Even Pravda regulars are in on this one.

Even a wannabe politician has a right to fight falsehoods. This should be an easy one for progressives to grasp, who less than two weeks ago were twisting themselves into pretzels to explain how DV can be something different. It was more "complex."

Progressive supervisors elevated a handful of sentences in the 1980 Mazzola decision to the equivalent of Brown, even after Law and Motion Judge Kahn -- who is a liberal -- said the facts before him did not apply to a ruling an airport commissioner during the 1976 crafts strike.

So the SF Bay Guardian will fight to the hilt for one man convicted of false imprisonment but rubbish another if it's a 6 year old allegation that surfaces in the SF Weekly three weeks before an election. The allegation was made white, well educated member of the Lee administration with resources. It involves an alleged African American perpetrator and a Caucasian woman.

It is an elitist construction that treats one politician so differently from another, and it's unjust.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 20, 2012 @ 10:26 pm

Holy sweet mother of christ are you fucking serious? lol...

Literally, I laughed out loud. Because this is blaring. If anybody on here - from Tim to Avalos to Campos to Daly wants to pretend it's all about Julian Davis that's fine... But unless you're a fucking idiot you see this for what it is - collateral damage.

You dumb, dumb, dumb motherfuckers anchored yourselves to a man who publicly announced he "committed an act of violence against my wife"... and now you get the fall out from it. Your movement - somehow, someway - has become tied to misogyny. Amazing? I know. Only SF Progressives could pull this level of fail off.

Anyway, going forward you get to produce one type of candidate only.... Lesbians. Somebody who is certainly not a man and hopefully never had contact with a man - ever. If you're a male in Progressive SF hoping to rise up, you better move to Portland. This fuckfaces have already wrecked it for you.


Posted by Lurker on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 12:17 am

And all the blaring obscenity does is make it more obvious that you are coming from a half-witted right winger perspective.

Posted by lillipublicans on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 5:56 am

Those who game the system for a seat in one of Titanic's dwindling musical deck chairs by climbing over others like crabs trying to escape a boiling pot, will find themselves in a special circle of hell once the center can no longer hold.

Posted by marcos on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 8:48 am

Looks like it's sinking fast. He went from the great progressive hope to the Pope of grope. Well, i'm still undecided. Hope he can pull through.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 2:32 pm

D5 residents are buying the smear.

Posted by Political Realist on Oct. 21, 2012 @ 5:10 pm

Uh, No! You are not being that realist, Realist. You have no proof of that, not even a poll that you can refer to. This is as unreal as the allegations with no corroborating evidence, police report, NOTHING. Back off.

Posted by Troll II on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 4:14 am

Steve Jones tries to convince us there is a mass exodus of the Davis campaign but don't think three candidates and one incumbent that have to quickly redeem themselves constitutes anything but them covering their asses. In fact, can't believe the SFBG is stooping so low to give them apologetic cover for their support of now Sheriff Mirkarimi.

You would have been better off leaving things be as to try to foist or pressure a young woman who apparently from news reports in other papers had already forgiven Davis for his transgressions after HE TOOK RESPONSIBILITY and initiative to APOLOGIZE if she felt he had done anything wrong.

That is a stand-up man in anyone's book.

Now you are USING HER AS LOW-HANGING FRUIT for increasing your readership.
Does she know this is your prime intention and was (ab)used for this purpose?
Shame on you.

Posted by MistOfTheCity on Oct. 22, 2012 @ 3:55 am