SF Mayor - Green win could have impact beyond city race

[eablair3]

I was trying to keep this in one thread so as to avoid multiple threads, but the powers that be deemed to lock the last thread, which was here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=778228#815436


National media attention -- from USA Today:

Green win could have impact beyond city race

By John Ritter, USA TODAY

SAN FRANCISCO — This unabashedly liberal city — caldron of protest, celebrator of the outlandish and the fringe — is flirting with a whole new leftist bent.

A candidate from the eco-friendly, ultra-progressive Green Party is threatening what passes for political convention here with a serious run at City Hall.

Shaggy-haired Matt Gonzalez, darling of the young, the hip and the non-propertied classes, is within striking distance of an upset in next Tuesday's mayoral runoff. If the 38-year-old lawyer wins, this overwhelmingly Democratic city of 791,000 would become the USA's largest to be run by a Green mayor.

His opponent, socially connected entrepreneur Gavin Newsom, architect of a get-tough policy to deal with the city's perennial homeless problem, has seen his once formidable lead shrink. A poll last month by local TV station KPIX had the race a dead heat. Both men sit on the elected Board of Supervisors that governs the city.

A Green victory here not only would raise the fledgling party's profile but also could hasten the defection of liberals from the Democratic Party. After the Oct. 7 election of Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, political analysts expect the state Democratic Party to move toward the political center to compete with the popular former actor and his centrist policies.

snip

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/state/2003-12-02-sfmayor_x.htm

[BayCityProgressive]

1. Well how stupid

isn't moving to the "center" what caused California's problems and created a strong Green Party to begin with? Deregulation of energy and massive prison spending. If the Democrats falter here it is their own fault.

[eablair3]

3. I think the Dems are may have to come around to suporting IRV

or something like IRV. IRV could unite the Dems and the Greens, but the establishment dems oppose it.

Didn't Barbara Boxer recently come out in support of IRV?

[ryharrin]

5. I'm not sure about Boxer, but I know that

Dean supports it. That along with civil unions were the two things that first attracted me to him.

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. I think our problem

is we weed out great candidates way too early. The are culled out during the nomination process or squashed by larger parties if they are indies or small party members.

I'd rather see open debates and IRV used so that Greens and Dems (and labor and socialists) have a better shot at being elected and can work together on the Hill instead of scramble to block each other during elections.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. Let's hope so.

"After the Oct. 7 election of Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, political analysts expect the state Democratic Party to move toward the political center to compete with the popular former actor and his centrist policies."

As usual, the politicians are eager to sell out in fear of losing their seats and income.

[BayCityProgressive]

4. There is no reason to move to the "center"

most Californians support abortion and gay rights. Most want tight controls on energy now (regulation). Most are environmentally friendly and want healthcare for all. stop wasting money on the prison and three strikes, hold corporations accountable ( which is impossible if the Dem party is too corrupt)and deal ina real and constructive way with immigration. There may well have to be budget cuts now to offset the debt though.

[loudnclear]

6. If th eDems move anymore to the center I am moving away from them.

We need some real Dems, not Repug-lites!

[el_gato]

8. green win would help kick out the corporate slime that have hijacked us

[damnraddem]

9. If I still lived in SF, my vote would go to Gonzalez.

Never to Noisome.

That Newsom is a Dem is beside the point, especially in SF. For example, I never voted for Di Fi when she ran for major -- instead I voted for Jello Biafra (who came in 4th), and then skipped the runoff between Lady Di and Quentin Kopp. In much of the country, a moderate Republican is considered a horrible liberal. In SF, a consdervative Democrat is considered a conservative wingnut.

[liberalcapitalist]

10. John Ritter speaks from beyond death?

n/t

[central scrutinizer]

11. notice the whoring

Once again, we see the media whores in action. Herr Gropehfuehrer is matter-of-factly labeled a centrist, when the opposite is true. He may have tried to run a centrist campaign, but once elected, look what has happened - social services being slashed, borrow and spend voodoo economics, the complete Republican playbook. Notice how any Democratic candidate will be dismissed as being "too liberal to win", but you never hear any Republican being called "too conservative". I don't know squat about the SF mayoral race, but this kind of subtle whoring for the right wing is so prevalent that it often goes unnoticed.

[eablair3]

12. you're exactly right

it's really very subtle. they pick and choose the appropriate quote, while leaving others out. they want a certain picture painted.

[Iverson]

13. Let's assume that the thesis is correct.

It is still a secondary issue. The main point of the democratic franchise is to try to get the best candidate into office.

[Terwilliger]

14. oh give me a BREAK!!

It's the same old song...they reject Gray Davis and elect Matt Gonzalez...so therefore, i.e., to wit, inlieu...it must mean that Democrats are trying to shift to the center

If you people listen to this garbage, then you deserve everything you get.

[Iverson]

15. of recent interest

John Nichols comments on progressivism and Green and Dem candidacies at the local level.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1204-13.htm

excerpt follows


In contrast to Gonzalez's background, Newsom's spottier record is that of a political careerist who has made his name taking cheap shots at the city's homeless population. Newsom has raised $3.3 million for his campaign from corporate givers such as Bechtel, the defense contractor, and prominent Republicans such as former Secretary of State George Shultz. And he is using the money to attack Gonzalez for being too progressive. At the same time, he is calling on Democrats to rally 'round the party banner.

[GreenPartyVoter]

16. I've been following the race via online newspapers: (links)

http://www.sfgate.com/

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/

http://www.sfexaminer.com/index2.html

http://www.sfbg.com/

[Iverson]

21. thank you for those links

I checked them out. While one must take into account a pro-Gonzales bias, it is nevertheless truly surprising to learn about the extent of Newsom's Republican and conservative support.

[GreenPartyVoter]

26. Yep

except for the Gate, they are all strongly pro-Matt.

But they do offer some interesting insight, as you pointed out.

I have searched and searched for other area papers and TV stations covering the topic to find some speaking out in favor of Gavin so I could hear from the other side, but no such luck online.

[Tinoire]

19. In other words ABG?

:puke: on Gavin Newsom

People are hungry and cold on the San Francisco streets. Entire families are living in cars because they can't afford the high rents and all he wants to do is sweep them out of sight so his rich buddies can build more luxury homes?

FOR SHAME!

[Forkboy]

20. Newsom is a real charmer

:puke:

[GreenPartyVoter]

22. Another interesting article

"Why Partisanship Over Progressivism?"


I suspect this particular article will get a lot of Dems riled up.

[Iverson]

23. ummmm, check note #15

:thumbsup:

[GreenPartyVoter]

24. Doh!

I need more coffee! *l* (I also need to not juggle more than one message board at once. But I just can't stay away from the yahoo ones. So many NeoCons to trounce, so little time!)

[Iverson]

41. kick

:donut:

[mdmc]

29. Gore could do better

than get mixed up with SF politics. The old saying is still true, " If you go to SF, wear a flower in your hair." Al Gore, don't go unless you go for Gonz.

[jsw_81]

25. A vote for Gonzalez is a vote for Bush

A Green victory in this race will only embolden the Greens and help them raise more money to attack Democrats in future races. This will allow the right to win races that would usually go Democratic. And when the right-wing gets control of the government -- with a lock on the WH, a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and federal courts packed with freeper judges -- we will truly begin to slide back into the Dark Ages. Choice? Gone. Gay rights? Gone. Student loan programs? Gone. Separation of church and state? Gone. Environmental protection laws? Gone. Gun safety laws? Gone.

And if you think I'm full of it, just go over to Free Republic or some other conservative website and see what they think about Greens. They absolutely love the Greens for splitting the progressive vote and allowing the Republicans to win. Ralph Nader is their hero!

True liberals who care about America will, along with Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, and Dianne Feinstein, support Gavin Newsom for mayor. Are you a true liberal or a pathetic, delusional Green? The choice is yours.

[GreenPartyVoter]

27. Sorry

I don't think you can equate SF with the national race for the Oval Office. Totally different demographic in SF.

[Iverson]

28. manifestly false

A vote for Gonzalez is a vote for Gonzalez.

Now, let's look at your supports for your knowingly false claim.

1. "A Green victory in this race will only embolden the Greens and help them raise more money to attack Democrats in future races."

The purpose of Greens running in races is to advance Green candidacies and the Green Party in general. Further, this support argues that an admittedly right thing shouldn't be done now in case at some future moment it inspires a wrong thing. In its place I suggest Democracy over fear-mongering.

2. "And when the right-wing gets control of the government -- with a lock on the WH, a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, and federal courts packed with freeper judges -- we will truly begin to slide back into the Dark Ages."

This "slippery slope" line of reasoning suggests a direct, causal link between municipal politics and national politics, which is of course total bunk. Further, it carries a warrant that the Democratic Party cannot appeal to the Green agenda. I disagree; cannot and will not are not the same.

3. "...just go over to Free Republic ... They absolutely love the Greens"

One cannot be dissuaded from doing the admittedly right thing because of the stated motives of repellent others. An action either has merit or it does not. Relying on Free Republic to discover the truth is a poor way of evaluating the merits of an action.

4. "True liberals who care about America ..."

This is called victory-by-definition, and it is an unimpressive propaganda tool, since anyone who disagrees is, in this instance, defined out of being a "true liberal." It is barely more sophisticated than direct name-calling.

5. "Are you a true liberal or a pathetic, delusional Green?"

This is simple name-calling.

Your case is non-existent. I also recommend getting out of the sandbox. It sets a very poor example.

edited typo

[jsw_81]

31. My reply

"The purpose of Greens running in races is to advance Green candidacies and the Green Party in general. Further, this support argues that an admittedly right thing shouldn't be done now in case at some future moment it inspires a wrong thing. In its place I suggest Democracy over fear-mongering."

Sure, but I just hope people understand the future consequences of electing someone like Gonzalez. This isn't the Marin County Board of Supervisors or Berkeley City Council (if it was, nobody would care), this is the mayoral race in one of our largest and most prominent cities. A Green victory there will send political shockwaves across the nation.

"This "slippery slope" line of reasoning suggests a direct, causal link between municipal politics and national politics, which is of course total bunk. Further, it carries a warrant that the Democratic Party cannot appeal to the Green agenda. I disagree; cannot and will not are not the same."

It's not total bunk. Like I said, we're talking about the mayoral race in a huge, prominent city. It's laughable to claim that there won't be an impact on national politics. As for the Green agenda, most of it is nonsense (i.e. $10 per hour minimum wage) that could not EVER be enacted at the state or national level.

"One cannot be dissuaded from doing the admittedly right thing because of the stated motives of repellent others. An action either has merit or it does not. Relying on Free Republic to discover the truth is a poor way of evaluating the merits of an action."

Believe me, I do not rely on Free Republic to discover the truth. I was merely pointing out that our worst enemies on the right are actively supporting the Greens and cheering for Gonzalez and Nader. Don't you think that's significant?

"This is called victory-by-definition, and it is an unimpressive propaganda tool, since anyone who disagrees is, in this instance, defined out of being a 'true liberal.' It is barely more sophisticated than direct name-calling."

Well the Greens have done something similar in San Francisco, except they label everyone who disagrees as being a "conservative" or "in bed with the right-wing" even if they're not. Just look at how they're comparing a Democrat like Newsom with Bush, Ashcroft, and even Hitler.

"This is simple name-calling."

And what do you call it when Greens compare Newsom with Bush and Hitler? A sophisticated political analysis? And how about when they threatened his home and family?

"Your case is non-existent. I also recommend getting out of the sandbox. It sets a very poor example."

No, I have an excellent case, one that's supported by Vice President Al Gore, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Senator Dianne Feinstein and literally dozens of other prominent state and local Democrats. You have Ralph Nader and a bunch of obscure leftists supporting your flimsy "case."

I recommend you actually learn about how our political system really works and then you'll see why the Greens are so dangerous.

[Terwilliger]

32. what's this crap?

And what do you call it when Greens compare Newsom with Bush and Hitler? A sophisticated political analysis? And how about when they threatened his home and family?

Back that up with something other than your self-superior attitude.

[Iverson]

33. your reply - a grasp at straws

"I recommend you actually learn about how our political system really works and then you'll see why the Greens are so dangerous."

I recommend for a second time that you eschew insult as your default mode of political expression. While these are less extreme than your previous lofty comments about hygiene, you are still shy of civil. It shouldn't be asking too much.

"As for the Green agenda, most of it is nonsense ..."

I doubt you've read it. Here's link.
http://www.gpus.org/platform.html

"Believe me, I do not rely on Free Republic to discover the truth."

Actually, since that was one of your prominent supports, you did rely on them to discover the truth in a negatively constructed way that you don't seem to understand. Since Freepers also breathe in and out, a more instructive lesson would be to examine their agenda, the Green agenda, and your agenda and see whose are least similar. (hint: yours will be in the middle position)

"Well the Greens ... label everyone who disagrees as being a "conservative" or "in bed with the right-wing" even if they're not."

Sweeping generalizations are unimpressive as supports. I also recommend that you look at Newsom's contributors. You like former Secretary of State George Schultz? Nice going.

"No, I have an excellent case, one that's supported by Vice President Al Gore, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Senator Dianne Feinstein and literally dozens of other prominent state and local Democrats. You have Ralph Nader and a bunch of obscure leftists supporting your flimsy "case.""

Partisanship is what you refer to, again with name-calling as the irresistible siren song. You as much as admit it when your entire misguided denunciation proceeds from some idea of party affiliation. Substance and policy enter nowhere.

If partisanship is all that you wish to take into account, that's fine, but just please be honest about it.

Have a bipartisan day.

[IrateCitizen]

35. Real Democracy vs. Blind Partisan Loyalty

At least it's good to know what side YOU are on, jsw_81. Personally, I'll continue to stand on the side of real democracy.

I guess so will pretty much everyone else on this thread. Bully for them. Shame on you.

[MadHound]

36. I suggest you go learn how corrupt the Democratic party is

Go read Greg Palast's "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" to see how Gore abdicated his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. Go read Kevin Phillip's "Wealth and Democracy" along with anything by Jim Hightower to see how and why the Democratic party is a bought and paid for corporate whore. Go educate yourself, and then you will see how truly dangerous the Dems' current course is.

To make the assertion that "a vote for Gonzalez is a vote for Bush" is laughable. We Greens have heard the constant mantra around here that we should stick to state and local races(not that I agree with that), and then when we have a real chance of winning a high profile mayorial race, you Dems come whining in, saying that we're "voting for Bush". Hypocrites all of you! And whining ones at that. Get a clue, the Greens are here to stay.

[jsw_81]

38. A question

I suggest you go learn how corrupt the Democratic party is. Go read Greg Palast's "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" to see how Gore abdicated his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution. Go read Kevin Phillip's "Wealth and Democracy" along with anything by Jim Hightower to see how and why the Democratic party is a bought and paid for corporate whore. Go educate yourself, and then you will see how truly dangerous the Dems' current course is.

If you actually believe this crap then why, exactly, are you posting here at Democratic Underground?

[MadHound]

39. Because I enjoy it here

DU provides information you can't get anywhere else and some lively debate.

And why do you call such well respected sources that I mentioned "crap"? Because they don't fit into your neat little worldview? Or is it just that the truth hurts?

[Iverson]

40. support your claim

Exactly what part of Palast's research are you objecting to, and on what basis?

Surely, you aren't just making a knee-jerk dismissal out of convenience.

[SahaleArm]

34. That's SF - Should it surprise anyone that the city leans left? *nm*

*nm*

[Hell Hath No Fury]

37. I am a true liberal...

I am also a San Franciscan and a lifelong Democrat.

And I will be voting for Matt Gonzalez in this race, the candidate who is the true liberal and true "democrat".

BTW, San Francisco mayoral races have traditionally had very little to do with party and everything to do with the persons running.

[Room101]

42. jsw_81- You make me sick and now ignored

"A vote for Gonzalez is a vote for Bush"
"True liberals who care about America will, along with Al Gore, Nancy Pelosi, and Dianne Feinstein, support Gavin Newsom for mayor. Are you a true liberal or a pathetic, delusional Green? The choice is yours." And when the right wing gets control of the government -- with a lock on the WH Hello where have you been it has already happened.

Spare me the Orwellian arithmetic you employ, a vote for Gonzalez is a vote for Gonzalez. You must not be aware of Feinsteins voting record in recent history, she has been on the DINO side of things. I'm a true Liberal and San Francisco is my birthplace Gonzales has my vote.

We have had a two party installed Dictatorship upon our republic that eternally yields the carrot on the stick. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. The two parties don't represent anyone of us here, and yet people still vote for them. Speaking of Free republic you are the Freeper of the left.

[TheDonkey]

30. ... or proof that one doesn't have to run as repuke-lite to win votes

I really doubt SanFran electing a green mayor will change the American party system forever.

I'd vote for him if I had the chance.

[GreenPartyVoter]

17. It's typical "red-scare" tactics

"Remove this one small thing, and a red wave will come crashing down over you."

Never mind the fact that Greens aren't communists. But to most folks the two are synonymous because they've never tried to find out what the greens actually stand for. (and because they can't tell the difference between socialism and communism.)

Honestly, I dunno which stereotype I get hit with more often, that I am a "commie" or that I only care about the environment..and at the peril of mankind at that. :eyes:

[mdmc]

18. SF

SF