The billionaire attack on D5

|
(155)
Billionare mailer tries to sink Olague over her vote on the sheriff

The attack on Sup. Christina Olague, funded by a couple of right-wing billionaires, is in full swing in District 5, with mailers, robocalls, a social-media buy and even TV ads. It’s a disgraceful effort to buy an election in the final week, a flood of sleaze that’s outrageous even by modern political standards.

On the surface, the PAC called San Francisco Women for Responsibility and an Accountable Supervisor is talking about domestic violence. One mailer features a woman whose daughter was killed by an abuser saying she is “appaled” that Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi still has his job -- and that Olague voted not to throw him out. A 60-second TV ad features Ivory Madison, the Mirkarimi neighbor whose video was the centerpiece of the campaign to oust the sheriff.

But the PAC is entirely funded by Ron Conway, his wife Gayle, and Thomas Coates. Conway hasn’t been a leading voice on domestic violence issues, and neither has Coates -- they are business people who are primarily interested in making money. In the case of Conway, he’s someone who has publicly announced that he wants to “take San Francisco back” from progressives and install more big-business-friendly politicians at City Hall. Coates is a real-estate investor who has spent a lot of time and money fighting to limit tenant-protection laws.

Why are these two so interested in the D5 race? Well, in an email, Conway told me that “the Committee that my wife Gayle and other women, including longtime anti-domestic violence advocates, have formed and that I and others support exists solely to oppose Christina Olague because she put her own politics ahead of women and the victims and survivors of domestic abuse.”

But it’s eminently clear that there’s a larger agenda here, that the wealthy donors are using the domestic violence issue to get rid of a supervisor who they see as not sufficiently friendly to their economic interests. And there’s probably a bit of payback involved: Olague defied the mayor with her Mirkarimi vote -- and while a lot of observers still say this was all a setup to demonstrate her independence in time for the election, Conway, one of the mayor’s closest allies and advisors, clearly didn’t get that message.

Coates lives in Los Angeles. Conway lives in Pacific Heights. Neither of them has any connection the D5 -- except for their desire to get rid of Olague. They’ve taken a real, serious issue -- domestic violence -- and used it to their own political advantage.

We haven’t endorsed Olague, but we know a shady scam when we see one, and that’s exactly what this is. The voters of District 5 should reject this kind of outside-influence politics and not let a couple of billionaires decide the future of their the city.

Comments

before now. But I might stipulate that is the case this time. It's not perfectly clear that the law you cite pertains to non-students, though logically a case could certainly be made that it should.

Then again, we don't know how the essay came to be disseminated. Ivory may have handed it out to people freely. If she thought it was good enough to get her into Stanford, we can assume she was quite proud of it.

And, so as not to lose sight of an important point I was trying to make, lets remember that in a comparison of the degrees of violation between Eliana Lopez's privacy versus Ivory Madison's -- if such it can be described -- the net effects show that Eliana's loss was far more damaging.

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 7:18 pm
Posted by Troll II on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 9:17 pm

Is it your contention that Stanford willingly shared her essay with Larry Bush?

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 8:11 am

Does FERPA apply to non-admitted would-be students? One might assume so, and if correct, my comment was wrong. Happy? I'd like any one of the trolls to exhibit .001% of that level of intellectual integrity.

On the other hand, presupposing that Ivory -- being the accomplished and prolix author that she is -- didn't share her essay with any number of people besides Stanford would be a big stretch. No?

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 8:43 am

The SCHOOL cannot release the records of students or applicants, admitted or not, without their permission. There are no categories of student, whether admitted or non-admitted, part-time or full-time, graduated or still attending - where a school can release their records without their permission. This is not a complex issue and FERPA works well for that reason.

Furthermore, having read applications in an admissions office, admissions reps are expressly prohibited from discussing or sharing the information contained within an applicant's submission with anyone outside of the admissions committee. It is illegal and unethical to do so. In many cases the process is blinded so names aren't even known until a decision is made - but that's not the case for every school.

If Ivory released it - fine. But if she didn't, no matter what you think of her, you should be loudly condemning whomever did because there's no justification for it. Period.

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 4:37 pm

story, that it is a safe bet she distributed that bit pretty freely. I'll admit to being wrong. Twice.

The first thing I did wrong was get sucked into the troll conversation about stolen documents.

But now back to Ivory, taking it from the top:

"I dropped out of school at age thirteen and became an autodidact by necessity. Instead of heading off to university a few years later, I arrived in New Orleans still a teenager, alone, with seventy-five dollars in my pocket and a worn copy of Love Is A Dog From Hell, by Charles Bukowski. I lied about my age to get a job in a Bourbon Street bar that night, and I moved into a seedy rooming house in the French Quarter."

http://www.citireport.com/2012/07/ivory-madison-in-her-own-words/

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 9:59 pm

I mean - people write about crazy shit in order to distinguish theirs from the thousands of other applicants. I'd really not take it very seriously - it's supposed to be memorable and distinguish itself. Ivory sounds as if she's had an interesting life - she was probably just attempting to frame that in language and imagery that would grab the reader an advance her acceptance.

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 10:54 pm

Madison refused to hand it over until forced to by a court order. I suppose you think she should have gone to jail to protect her friend's batterer.

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 12:49 pm

...even if Madison had done what you say, how does that make it OK to steal her law school admissions essay?

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 12:50 pm

for billionaire developers seeking to exploit domestic violence. Is anyone surprised? Perhaps multi-millionairess Borders fortune, and band of bored Marin housewives maven Christine Bronstein hooked them up?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 3:26 pm

who can attack Olague is the Bay Guardian, we are also at war with Eurasia and are friends Oceania, we are also looking for Emmanuel Goldstein to run in district five in four years.

Posted by matlock on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 4:28 pm

to help pay for SF Women for Accountability etc.

I'm sure there is more coming.

Ivory Madison, I'm told, is desperate for money and likely will try to turn this into some folding money -- just as she has tried so many other ventures (torch singer at a local club, running a restaurant in New Orleans while fighting the mafia, turning out a comic book, starting a business helping authors sell their books, trying the law but failing the bar.

Has anyone checked to see if any of the stories she tells about herself are true? President of a NOW chapter? Really? Where? When? And was she asked to resign?

Posted by CitiReport on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 4:40 pm

The mother of the dead DV victim - surely she must be doing this for some type of personal gain as well. Andrea Shorter - we now know there's something up with her too. Please post more pieces tearing down all of these women - you're doing a real community service and should be terribly proud of yourself.

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 5:02 pm

difference between murder and a momentary arm grab.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 7:25 am

...Madison got paid?

And since you consider yourself to be such a muckraker, why don't you go beyond stealing and actually do some investigative journalism yourself?

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 8:26 am

I see the SFBG hypocrites are again attacking good Samaritans and grieving mothers of DV victims.

After tossing Julian Davis down the drain and attacking London Breed, there's nothing clearer than the SFBG's all White hippie male movement backing a pro-DV hypocrite and political ball player, progressive puppet, Olague.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 4:42 pm

IF by any chance you are a "RENTER" vote for anyone who is NOT Breed like Christina and Rizzo and vote and or help hope and pray that Eric Mar wins over David Lee the million dollar puppet bought and paid for property owners and developers

Posted by thatsthewayitis on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 5:23 pm

My vote per the SFBG, will definitely be:
Davis, Breed and Selby!

The SFBG, likes to THINK they are the D5 Bible and voice but the debacle of Mirkarimi has changed my thinking deeply.
Supporting an Abuser is okay, but Davis is yesterday's garbage? The SFBG has divided the community which I was once proud of. Not all progressives support Ross, and I never will support Olague.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 12:32 pm

"But it’s eminently clear that there’s a larger agenda here, that the wealthy donors are using the domestic violence issue to get rid of a supervisor who they see as not sufficiently friendly to their economic interests."

No where in this editorial is it made "eminently clear" that the donors behind this group are interested in anything other than what they claim to be interested in - defeating a woman who has placed her own personal political agenda above the well being of the city. I guess being wealthy in Tim Redmond's mind is the equivalent of being a criminal and therefore all sorts of paranoid fantasies about this group's true motives are perfectly justifiable. Sad. Also, a little psychotic.

If you want to talk sleaze, talk about Olague. She's the one who has no problem selling out abused women for political favors. Her decision to back Mirkarimi is just indicative of her overall incompetence, which has been on full display from the sad moment she was foisted upon the people of District 5. It's time to cart her snaggle toothed ass, along with the entire corrupt "progressive" machine off to the ash heap they so richly deserve.

Posted by A Concerned Citizen on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 5:33 pm

So, let's also now demand the resignation of Ben Hur, chair of the Ethics Commission and a partner at Keker and Van Ness. And let's revile former Public Defender Geoff Brown, who also believed that the mayor did not have a justification under Official Misconduct to remove Ross.

And meanwhile let's ignore Ed Lee's own record of firing an EEO officer who blew the whistle on a manager who was a sexual predator who held women employees prisoner in a car with him while making unwanted advances.

Lee personally approved her dismissal, she sued, and then Lee as Mayor paid her $105,000 to make it go away.

So who has the record for tolerating the abuse of women, and then firing an EEO officer for forcing the issue, and finally had to paid $105,000 out of the city budget to make it disappear.

Good luck convincing anyone of that.

Posted by CitiReport on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 7:18 pm

Just attempted to redirect attention elsewhere. The "everyone's bad" defense again.

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 8:56 pm

CitiReport, absolutely nothing of what you wrote bares any relevance at all to my comment. All the same, thanks for sharing.

Posted by A Concerned Citizen on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 7:07 pm

For me, it's ANYONE BUT OLAGUE!

Posted by VotingTuesday on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 7:11 pm

Christina made very clear her strong position in support of victims of DV when she made her decision. She said this was an important legal principle in which the "Official Misconduct" amendment cannot be used like a "tool" because it is overturning an election and she stated she must uphold the rule of law. The amendment cannot be used unless the elements of the law are followed or risk tyranny or judicial challenge NO court would have upheld a decision that removed RM as sheriff using the Charter as written, that is based upon settled law. The idea that there was a choice was a false one, the charter is titled "Official" misconduct requiring the wrongful conduct (even assuming it rose to the level of seriousnness to be removed from office) be guess what ...."official" right how did you know? The wrongful conduct also must be "official" that is in the conduct of his or her duties. RM was neither the conviction being a "misdemeanor" THAT is the law MUST follow WHAT it says you cant change the law because it doesnt sing and dance the way YOU want it to, dont you get that will you ever. Its called "the rule of law" (look it up) if you want the law to do something different you need to pass one... SO Christina Olague did the ONLY principled thing that could be done she obeyed and followed the law... at the same time she made clear her strong support for the victims of DV .... Ron Conway is trying to rescue his little corrupt dictator Ed Lee and hurt the candidacy of Christina ...cause Ed Lee's feelins is so hurt ...what a bunch of cowards and punks.

Posted by thatsthewayitis on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 7:18 pm

Yeah - Olague "cares" all right. She's too stupid to even begin to comprehend the "legal principles" involved here.

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 7:27 pm

Whether any one believes she cares or not she clearly stated her position of absolute support for the victims of DV and the reasons she voted as she did anyone can view that on SF gov tv and find the archive and her posiition is as I stated.

Posted by thatsthewayitis on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 8:29 pm

God bless Olague for being a woman who thinks for herself and realized that this incident with Ross & his wife, was not DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. Because it wasn't a husband and a wife had a moment of physical action (a grabbed arm) and now the whole episode has led to the prostituting of "real" Domestic Violence validity and abuses.

Women should be outraged! Mainly domestic violence survivors and advocates against domestic violence for this clear example of exploitation by political toolage of a very serious issue in this country.

And Ms. Shorter too while she is on this "sudden" campaign to act like she gives a fuck about violence against women, should delve deeply into those abuses in the LGBT culture. It's one of the best-not-so-kept secrets in our society; and will be one of the next big EXPOSED stories in the media and social discourse.

Olague will remain where she is because those who really want SF to be free of zion influenced rule and moderate pretense (London Breed) will vote for a woman who isn't participating in these silly, high school hallway gossip and whine sessions, and fake advocacy. Sure wish we had one of her here in Berkeley.

Bottomline. It's sad to see domestic violence being "pimped". Especially by women.

Posted by Guest Titus Moreland on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 7:46 pm

Zion influenced rule? Really?

Posted by D. Native on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 8:37 pm

I saw that but had no idea what he was talking about in referencing "Zion." Is Olague the anti-semitic choice now?

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 8:49 pm

Just pointing out, at least for me and many, who aren't afraid to point it out, whether you like it or not, that there is a strong jewish influence in SF politics and some of them are on either side. And as far as anti-semitic, interesting no reference can be made towards the jewish/zion community w/o being labeled a "racist". GTFOH. Grow up and drop the sensitivity song. It's 2012. And this is the Bay Area. Are you denying that there is a heavy jewish influence in politics & culture in San Francisco?

Because I bet that whoever these realtors and landlords are that pumped money into London Breed's campaign are of the ilk of which I speak. And I'm sure Olague has the same support too.

Glad you feel you caught something. Which you didn't. What you really caught was a case of hyper-sensitive alarm. But you'll be alright.

Posted by GuestTitus Moreland on Nov. 06, 2012 @ 9:46 am

Are you kidding me? I assume you that "ilk" uses the blood of gentile babies in their matzoh dough, too. Unbelievable.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 07, 2012 @ 5:11 pm

I ragged Chrisitna for allying herself with Ed Lee. However Chrisitna Olague asked to be the FIRST to vote on the charges on October 9 in front of the BOS she chose to show the world her decision was based upon principle and her support for the victims of DV by stating that clearly and announcing her decision and WHY despite those who disparage her now and then and her decision to be the first member of the BOS to vote she was showing the decision wasnt based upon what anyone else did or didnt do or any kind of strategy based upon what others might or might not do....I think I know why she made that decision she was involved in all kinds of intrigue around Ed Lee's perjury etc AND finally it appeared to me she decided ENOUGH and the only thing to do was to vote based upon her principles whatever happens or doesnt after that be damned She was going to do the principled thing and nothing else I believe she did.

Posted by thatsthewayitis on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 8:26 pm

Christine needs to stop flip flopping, either be under the wing of Ed Lee, or be a progressive, either or. Her down fall is the flip flopping.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 02, 2012 @ 9:56 pm

There are only two ways to be in this city, under the wing of Ed Lee or under the wing of the "progressive" movement? False dichotomies are false.

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 1:15 pm

Dirty politics San Francisco style, the well ochrastrated smear campaign against Davis is starting to unravel. Davis was far to popular with the voters of D5 he had to be taken out. Sadly but true, you Tim played into the hands of downtown interests and helped with the takedown of Davis. With the only true progressive in the race severely brusied and battered and no longer a threat, he was even told to resign from the race by you Tim, as to fully negate any willpower Davis may of had left to stay in the race. Now the real battle for D5 could begin, with attack adds against Christine, as Olauge had betrayed her masters with the Mirkarimi vote and could not be trusted to follow orders.
Winners downtown intrests
Losers progressives of San Francisco

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 9:35 am

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Posted by William Jennings on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 10:31 am

Tim, when you feel like you've been beaten and must compromise with reactionary forces, they have you exactly where they want you. You *are* going to lose. Feeling like you are losing is the first step towards losing.

No. When this is your sense of things, it becomes more important than ever to jerk yourself erect. Tim, it was absolutely foolish for you try to throw Julian under the bus.

No matter how the race shakes out, your weakness hurt progressives. Now *that's* something you can prostrate yourself about.

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 11:00 am

Yeah Tim, how dare you have an opinion! Only Lillipublicans is the all knowing and sole entitled opinion maker!

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 12:26 pm

I've diagnosed you with narcissistic personality disorder based on your endlessly stated fascination with yourself and your belief that the entire world orbits around you and your daily missives here.

Posted by Troll II on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 12:31 pm

Lilli claims to be the smartest person on the internet.

Posted by matlock on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 1:04 pm

SFBG=Hypocrites
The Progressive machine hard at work with political paybacks.
Vote for the DV Sheriff, get our endorsement! (isn't that right SFBG, Avalos,Campos and Agnos)
Olague played perfectly as a tool, doing as she us told!
Good girl Olague, now you can hang with the good 'ol progressive boys.
If you're good maybe they'll even feed you. Now roll over, sit, that's a good girl.
Women, know your place!
Or the Progs will attack you !

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 12:24 pm

outright lies and slick reactionary propaganda here under that generic name so that each whopper doesn't get saddled with the level of verisimilitude established by its predecessors; but the Guardian has endorsed Selby and Rizzo. Only.

Posted by lillipublicans on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 12:42 pm

I believe that dodge about as much as I believed the Chronicle's endorsement of David Chiu for mayor. Triangulation uber alles.

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 1:17 pm

"But the PAC is entirely funded by Ron Conway, his wife Gayle, and Thomas Coates. Conway hasn’t been a leading voice on domestic violence issues, and neither has Coates -- they are business people who are primarily interested in making money. In the case of Conway, he’s someone who has publicly announced that he wants to “take San Francisco back” from progressives and install more big-business-friendly politicians at City Hall. Coates is a real-estate investor who has spent a lot of time and money fighting to limit tenant-protection laws." Tim Redmond

Please reread your own words above and then look up the Campaign Finance records for "Yes on B". Coates and Conway between them are contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars to this campaign!

Other contributors include: the Fisher brothers -- of the City Fields Foundation and the Beach Chalet soccer disaster - a construction company, the AT&T PAC, and a real estate developer.

Please reconsider the Guardian YES ON B stance -- why are these people so interested in our parks? What business-benefit will they be seeking?

We must have more accountability from Rec and Park and more control over what happens to our parks, before we give $195 million to this rogue department with such close ties to developers.

Vote NO ON B!

Posted by Golden Gate Park Preservation Alliance on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 4:41 pm

It's been a tough season for most of the D5 candidates.

Hope Johnson, a smart, articulate candidate never seemed to get any traction with other progessives.

Julian Davis with his outstanding list of progressive endorsements got tripped up by 6-year old allegations from someone who became a political heavyweight in her own right. (Not that I'll ever learn, but we need to careful who we offend - we'll never know how it might bite us later.)

The incumbent Olague seemed to have the D5 win in the bag after being appointed by Mayor Lee - a very sage choice since she was a developer's dream when she sat on Planning - only to watch her advantage slip away after a series of terrible progressive votes, but bounced back nicely with her vote on Mirkarimi.

John Rizzo, who hasn't offended too many people over his 10 year involvement in local politics (except for a few of the crank GGP garage obsessives), seemed to be running a lackluster campaign until the past couple of weeks when it it appears many D5 residents could add his name somewhere on their ballot.

London Breed was likely hoping for an important endorsement from Mirkarimi, but after the Jan 1st incident people couldn't distance themselves far enough away from Ross, much less want his political endorsement. I suspect most of us who are not D5 residents are very tired of the hyperbole and nasty campaign rhetoric by now (with Pearce and Haaland running one of the shows, what can we expect?), and D5 residents are likely even more tired of the whole process.

Assuming most of the ballots have been cast - or assuming most voters have made up their minds about their Tuesday ballot rankings - I'm curious what others think the rankings will look like on Tuesday night and after the 1st couple of elimination rounds. My uninformed guesses are:

1) Olague 28% - Incumbancy is as important as people said it would be

2) Rizzo 22% - Name recognition from two citywide elections for College Board equates to plenty of #1 votes

3) Davis 17% - A (formerly) long list of endorsements from top progressive institutions (Tenants Union) and leaders still mean something in D5 (in perhaps one of the last "progressive races" in D5 before all of the rent-controlled apartments are converted to condos by the likes of Selby and Mirkarimi?)

4) Breed 15% - Long history of involvement in the community, seat on Redevelopment, and African-Amercian heritage translates to #1 votes

5) Selby 10% - Well-liked and committed core of volunteers, but too new to SF electoral politics to get many #1 votes in D5

All others less than 10%

After the first few rounds of elimination, the top four don't change, but Rizzo (or whoever is 2nd) gets a bit closer to Olague. But where do Breed's votes go? Mostly Olague because they are both avid friends to millionaire developers?

If it gets down to the 3rd place candidate deciding the election, do the Davis (or Breed or Rizzo) voters split roughly evenly among the top 2 candidates?

If Olague is first after the initial results are posted, does she win wire-to-wire?

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2012 @ 9:30 pm

My prediction:

1) Olague 26 % -- Incumbency helps but she's the subject of a concerted campaign to unseat her, scads of money and with vicious attack ads. Negative campaigns tend to turn voters off.

2) Davis 25 % -- This is the most progressive district in SF, and Davis is hands-down the most progressive card in the race. Some women voters will be turned off, but the vast majority will be suspicious of eleventh hours bombshells D5 voters designed to sway voters.

3) Breed 19 % -- The media has framed the narrative as a race between Breed and Olague. Some D5 voters, particularly women, will gravitate to Breed because they are pissed over Olague's vote favoring Mirkarimi. Most won't care, and would rather see a solid progressive in #1 or #2 spot (hence, Olague and Davis).

4) Selby 10 % -- Not progressive enough for D5, but some female voters (and a few male voters) would like to elect a woman who doesn't come with so much baggage -- that is, anyone but Olague or Breed!

5) Rizzo 10 % -- Too little, too late. What can I tell you? Name recognition is not always enough, especially when you've run a thoroughly lackluster campaign. And some progs blame Rizzo for the mess at CCSF (perhaps unfairly, but nonetheless).

Hope Johnson claims that she wants transparency in government, but nobody knows what else she stands for. Ditto Resignato. I predict that these two will be the first to get knocked off the ballot. Everyone else will come in single digits.

Posted by Cassandra on Nov. 04, 2012 @ 6:21 pm

It's not just the six year old allegation (actually not six years old as the allegation was amde to various people at the time) but there is a series of such allegations against him. He's totally tained as a groper at this point.

And you're omitting the other factor. His heavy-handed reaction to the allegation. It's never the incident but the coverup, that sinks politicians.

My prediction:

1. Olague
2. Breed
3. Rizzo

D5 isn't as liberal as it used to be - too many million dollar homeowners in Cole Valley, Buena Vista, Hayes Valley etc.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 1:59 am

This seems right on. What about 2nd round? Here's my prediction for order of elimination and the number of votes that will get reshuffled, based on an estimated 35,000 votes. First to 17,500 wins in this scenario.

1. Daniel Everett - 250 #1 votes
2. Hope Johnson - 500 #1 votes
3. Andrew Resignato - 1000 #1 votes
4. Thea Selby - 4,250 #1 votes
5. John Rizzo - 5,000 #1 votes
6. Christina Olague - 7,000 #1 votes
7. Julian Davis - 8,000 #1 votes
8. London Breed - 9,000 #1 votes

I think Daniel, Hope, and Andrew's #2 get redistributed randomly.
Thea's votes will mostly get split between London Breed and John Rizzo, and 1,000 to Davis and Olague.

I think it'll look like this after a few rounds:

5. John Rizzo - 7,000
6. Olague - 8,000
7. Davis - 9,000
8. Breed - 11,000

Now it gets interesting. Rizzo's votes will split between Olague and Davis, but maybe 500 go to Breed. Davis will get most of Rizzo's #2's and take the lead.

6. Olague - 11,000
7. Breed - 11,500
8. Davis - 12,000

Then I think Olague *barely* gets knocked out, and her votes go mostly to Davis, because even though they attacked each other all season, none of her supporters want London Breed to win. Davis gets 3,000 of her #2's, Breed gets 1,000.

7. Breed - 12,500
8. Davis - 15,000

DAVIS WINS.

Seem like a longshot? Prove me wrong. In detail!

Posted by William Jennings on Nov. 05, 2012 @ 3:36 pm

...you wrong, didn't it?

Posted by Hortencia on Nov. 11, 2012 @ 7:19 pm

New Year's Eve is celebrated at evening social gatherings, where many people dance, eat, drink alcoholic beverages, and watch or light fireworks to mark the new year.

Posted by New Years Eve 2013 on Nov. 04, 2012 @ 12:23 am