By Luke Thomas
September 15, 2010
Of all the leading progressive candidates in the race to succeed Supervisor Chris Daly, which includes James Keys, Jane Kim, Jim Meko and Debra Walker, the only candidates not to have endorsed a second and third candidate to date are Keys, Kim and Walker.
It should come as no surprise then to know that Keys is currently reaching out to both Kim and Walker to secure a three-candidate ranked choice endorsement strategy that includes Keys and excludes Meko.
“While my main focus has been to build our campaign and continue bringing our message of social and economic justice to District 6 voters, I have also begun a discussion with other top-tier candidates to deal with the issue of exhausted ballots,” Keys said in a statement released to FCJ. “In recent weeks, it has become more clear that the 3 strongest progressive candidates are Jane Kim, Debra Walker, and me. This analysis is based on number of volunteers, number of supporters within the district, endorsements, fundraising, signatures-in-lieu, etc. While it probably would make more sense for our campaign to concretize our relationship with Jim Meko, who has already recommended me as his 2nd choice, I think that progressives need to unite on a message of our 3 strongest progressive candidates.”
The question becomes, does Keys have more support across the District than Meko? There’s no doubt Daly’s endorsement and strategic involvement in Keys’ campaign has boosted Keys’ prospects, but it remains to be understood whether Keys has more constituent support than Meko. Absent accurate polling data, this question remains difficult to answer.
Responding to Keys’ claims, Meko said, “James Keys is delusional.”
One thing FCJ can confirm, Kim’s #2 and #3 endorsements, previously understood to include Glendon “Anna Conda” Hyde and Keys, is now in flux pending discussions with Walker.
“If Debra wants to do something, then that changes everything,” Kim told FCJ yesterday.
Editor’s Note: Luke Thomas is a resident and voter in District 6. In the interest of transparency, he has provided photography services to the campaigns of Jane Kim, Jim Meko and Debra Walker.
Luke Thomas
Luke Thomas is a former software developer and computer consultant who proudly hails from London, England. In 2001, Thomas took a yearlong sabbatical to travel and develop a photographic portfolio. Upon his return to the US, Thomas studied photojournalism to pursue a career in journalism. In 2004, Thomas worked for several neighborhood newspapers in San Francisco before accepting a partnership agreement with the SanFranciscoSentinel.com, a news website formerly covering local, state and national politics. In September 2006, Thomas launched FogCityJournal.com. The BBC, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News, New York Times, Der Spiegel, San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Magazine, 7x7, San Francisco Examiner, San Francisco Bay Guardian and the San Francisco Weekly, among other publications and news outlets, have published his work. Thomas is a member of the Freelance Unit of the Pacific Media Workers Guild, TNG-CWA Local 39521 and is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists.
Follow Me:
The Hunger Site
October 6, 2010 at 2:21 pm
Patrick: why should we?
At this point, I’m pretty disgusted with the whole thing. I was going to vote for Walker as a third choice, but her political cowardice has nixed that, Keys has shown that he can’t be trusted, Kim didn’t do her homework, and Anna Conda has done even less homework. At this point, I guess I’ll vote for Meko, h., and George Davis
September 18, 2010 at 7:18 am
h
COBBLESTONES, PITCHFORKS and TUMBRILS !!!
http://www.youtube.com.Marat/Sade8X
http://www.youtube.com.Marat/Sade12x
Tried this earlier and it didn’t connect. If anyone is interested try going to youtube; enter Marat/Sade; select 8x, then 12X
September 18, 2010 at 7:03 am
h,
I’m all for redistribution of wealth. I don’t think we need to turn ourselves into Cuba though. Europe and Japan leave plenty of rich people, but still take care of their poor in the process. That’s why I’m in favor of virtually every progressive tax measure that’s proposed.
But CNC isn’t about helping the poor. CNC is just typical neoliberal class warfare.
September 18, 2010 at 6:38 am
well that didnt work. If anyone is interested just go to youtube, type in Marat/Sade, pick 8X, then 12X.
September 18, 2010 at 6:36 am
Pitchforks, Cobblestones and Tumbrils.
http://www.youtube.com.Marat/Sade 8/X
http://www.youtube.com.Marat/Sade 12X
September 17, 2010 at 2:52 pm
True,
The Seneca is a great example of what you describe. They forced out the working poor and Shaw took the sure (and higher) stream of cash from the City. And, with the influx of drunks and addicts the places become half asylum and half jail. That’s been repeated thousands of times. According to THC 990 filings (they run the Seneca) Paul Hogarth spends the majority of his time in court evicting some of the very people he’s ‘saved’.
My point is simple (or, I couldn’t understand it) … like pension reform, you can do nothing and enjoy the ride down the chute or you can try something radical and untried and be certain to do battle with purists.
Remember Jim Reid’s ‘Little House’? Willie Brown offered to fund 2,000 of them at 10k each if Reid would drop his petition to recall him and Reid (a purist) declined.
Ultimate solution is to confiscate the giant fortunes. Re-distribute the wealth. You ready for that? Historically, how’s that been done?
h.
September 17, 2010 at 11:21 am
h,
The problem with CNC is that it’s a massive shell game.
Two illustrations:
1.When I was phonebanking for Chris Daly, one woman yelled at me because she said that due to Chris Daly and CNC, they were moving homeless people and drug addicts into her senior housing building. The irony that CD opposed CNC was lost on her.
2. At one point, my mother-in-law was number 400-something on the list for senior housing. The next time she went in, they moved her down to 2600-something all the sudden. The people in City Hall told her they had to make room for all the new CNC recipients.
So basically, CNC didn’t add any new services. They took housing from some people, and offered it to other people, often in an unfair and half-assed way. Meanwhile, they cut poor people’s monthly benefits by 80%.
That is to say, they stole money from the pockets of poor people, told them they’d get benefits in return, stole those benefits from other poor people, and used the whole theft operation as a wedge issue to bludgeon progressives, so that we could have a conservative mayor who would steal even more money from the pockets of poor people.
Nice, huh?
The more I think about it, the angrier I get.
That’s why not a single progressive supported this shit. To date, Jane Kim is the only one I know of. Frankly, I’m incredulous. Maybe -honestly, I *HOPE*, it was a typo on her part. But she really needs to explain herself. If she actually meant to answer that way, she doesn’t deserve progressive support at any level.
September 17, 2010 at 8:53 am
Greg,
Care Not Cash isn’t a bad program. It’s just 1/3rd of what Continuum of Care projected would be needed to address the problem. At least Newsom addressed the problem (I got my SRO room through it after years of couch-surfing) which Willie refused to do.
It’s kind of like Adachi’s Pension Reform. Something has to be done to avoid bankruptcy (ask private sector companies who lost ALL their benefits when their companies went belly up) … but, entrenched players never want their turf touched (just as Marc Salomon).
h.
September 16, 2010 at 11:02 am
Hey, quick question for Kim supporters out there…
I just read her Green Party questionnaire. It can be found on the SF Green Party website – can anyone answer why she said she SUPPORTS Care Not Cash???
September 16, 2010 at 7:57 am
Delusions can be fun,
There’s no feeling like going out and meeting a few thousand people who pat you on the back and praise and applaud and then give you 1% at the polls. It’s a real punch to the solar plexus and it’s about to happen to James Keys. And, to Elaine Zamora (who’s gonna pay over 50 grand for the experience). Anna Conda likewise.
It’s the old, ‘watching a train wreck in slow motion’ thing. A train wreck I might add, that I’ve seen a thousand times before. All these candidates really think they have a real chance of winning and nothing could be further from the truth.
Only 4 of the 14 candidates in this race have a prayer. Sparks on the Moderate side and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if she got the most 1st place votes in the opening round. But, she gets no seconds. She only leads in firsts because Meko, Walker and Kim split the Prog 1st place tallies.
Not saying that with Enrique Pierce’s help she can’t do it, but this is Jane Kim’s race to lose. She’s got the money to hire the out-of-district foot soldiers (think Newcomer High) and Randy Shaw’s formidable ‘volunteers’ (paid with City tax money through his phony ‘leadership’ program that gives a rent reduction to a rep from every floor in every building of his THC empire). She’s young and pretty and well educated and self-absorbed which will play big time with the Rincon Hill voters who are pretty much the same.
Debra Walker’s a fine person but you can’t tell where she ends and Aaron Peskin begins. She’s got all of her eggs in the D Triple C basket and that’s simply not going to fly in D-6.
Which leaves us with Jim Meko to pick up the pieces (2nd place votes) in November. He has by far the largest long-time footprint in the district. He’s the steadiest and most mature of all the candidates. He has no ties to any political machine or to Downtown money.
48 days to go.
Go Giants!
h.
September 15, 2010 at 8:04 pm
IRV is not new. I think we have to give voters more credit here. Past elections in several districts including D6 bare this out and the positive progressive result. A huge percentage of Debra, James, Jane, Jim and Anna Conda’s voters are going to vote for 1 or 2 of the others in this group without the DCCC or any of the candidates making full ranked endorsements. What this pressure to do so is leading to are backroom dealing, unnecessary negativity and counterproductive use of progressive candidates’ time and energy. However, I continue to appreciate your excellent independent coverage of local elections which is so sorely lacking in the local mainstream press.
September 15, 2010 at 4:52 pm
@Mark, I agree with your sentiments, but disagree that the inherent mechanisms of IRV should be undermined or overlooked. I don’t have a crystal ball but I would be very surprised if one D6 candidate gets past 50 percent + 1 in the first round.
Why?
Because in 2006, there were 20,204 votes cast in D6 split among eight candidates. Rob Black, who was the “downtown” moderate candidate, received a total of 7,051 votes. Daly ultimately won the runoff with a total of 8,654 votes, but it took five passes to put him over 50 percent + 1.
This time around, we have fifteen D6 candidates with at least four strong progressive candidates vying for a large share of Daly’s 2006 votes. Add to this the D6 demographics are swinging to more moderate voters, it makes sense to promote a strong progressive candidate endorsement strategy to maximize the direction of continuing ballots and to minimize exhausted ballots.
I hope I’m making sense. IRV shouldn’t be this complicated.
September 15, 2010 at 3:45 pm
Now I am concerned. IRV is supposed to make elections less negative. This discussion has finally gotten a direct derisive quote out of one progressive candidate about another. I knew that was the direction it was going to go if everyone kept pressing. Maybe we should just drop this nonsense and move on. I have always thought all this speculation about IRV and exhausted ballots and all the rest was just that – speculation. Nothing has ever been proven to me on any of this IRV nonsense – and that’s just what I consider it – nonsense. Get out and get all the No. 1 votes you can for your candidate if you have any real sense.
Mark Barnes
September 15, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Marc,
Love you man but the difference is that Meko is able to work with people and has the guts to sign up and run. You only shoot from the sidelines like a naughty kid with a BB gun.
h.
September 15, 2010 at 10:43 am
First, Jim Meko rants about my “Cadillac health insurance” that I get as a domestic partner of a City employee after Sunday’s housing and land use forum, now Meko is dismissing James Keys as “delusional?”
And you all thought that I was impolitic! Crash + Burn.
-marc