INSANITY (definition): Doing the same thing over and over again, hoping for a different outcome.
Three supervisors and the current mayor, all of them the very people who got the city into this mess? Plus one really super duper rich guy? Is this really the best the city can come up with?
Yet this seems to be the pool of favorite candidates for the crucial job of mayor.
Why would anyone think that these supervisors or this mayor are going to deliver anything other than what they have already been delivering? The answer is – there is no reason to think that they will.
C’mon, San Francisco! Why are we concentrating on these five demonstrably feeble candidates? There are other, better candidates. The best candidate in the race was in the audience, for goodness sake. We need to get him up on that stage, to hear what he has to say, and learn how he’s going to make an actual difference. Plus, let’s hear from some other candidates, as well. There just might be some good people and good ideas out there, if we look a little harder.
Unless in our hearts we’re more or less OK with things as they are?
Anyway, that candidate in the audience was me, of course. And I suppose that I’d have to admit that since I’m still running in incognito mode there’s little chance that the Harvey Milk folks would have extended me an invitation.
But I was distressed to learn that the club plans to announce their mayoral endorsement in June! Why so soon? With five months of campaigning between then and the election? And you haven’t even met me yet. Yikes! So I’m going to reach out to the club to see if I can get a chance to state my case to the members as well, before they make that endorsement announcement. Wish me luck!
OK, having now vented, I’ll share some thoughts about last night’s program.
It was an interesting experience to be in that room. Club President Jeffery Kwong did what I thought was a pretty good job of asking some pointed questions. Although he did a little less well at getting the candidates to actually answer the pointed question that he put to them. Especially the mayor, and also Mark Farrell, who showed himself to be a master question dodger.
Daniel Lurie
Seems like a nice man. Is very careful to say “thank you for asking that question” every single time a question is put to him. I don’t doubt that his family’s Levi Straus company and his Tipping Point NPO have done some good philanthropic work in the community, as he stated – over – and over – and over again. He’s obviously sensitive to the whole being rich thing, which he demonstrated by snatching the conversation away from the moderator at the outset and riffing for like five minutes about how we shouldn’t judge him just because he’s from an amazingly rich family. A lot of I – I – I – me – me – me.
It was kinda painful to listen to that for five minutes. I would have suggested that rather than spend five apologizing for his weakness he should spend that time talking about what he is actually going to make the city better. Didn’t hear too much about that.
He needs a better public speaking coach. If I had to describe his presentation in one word I would say it was defensive.
Mayor Breed
Seemed to me to be ever so slightly annoyed to have to be in attendance at this event.
Made her entrance by boldly walking down the center aisle while Daniel Lurie was in the middle of speaking on stage. As she walked down the aisle she paused once or twice, pretending to be looking for a place to sit. After a short delay, she finally identified a target chair – directly in front of where Daniel Lurie was sitting and still speaking. Then, chair identified, she looked up to face the audience and put on a big smile for the crowd. Daniel Lurie was still speaking on the stage, but from my perspective I couldn’t see him because he was well shielded by the standing mayor and her big smile.
Seemed to me like sort of an attempt to exhibit some disdain for Mr. Lurie. But that was kinda OK, as Mr. Lurie was in the middle of his I – I – I – me – me – me thing anyway. I don’t think the audience missed much.
As far as policy things go, I didn’t really learn anything memorable from her remarks. But what can she really say, anyway? She’s the one who lead us down the road we’re currently on. Can’t hide from that.
I would describe her performance as underwhelming but also mildly amusing.
Ahsha Sahai
He’s the unions’ man. Something he is very proud of.
I found him to be a smooth and articulate speaker who radiates sincerity and intellect. I’ll bet that his mother is very proud of him – and I say that sincerely. He struck me as the most likeable of the five.
However, I believe that the city’s 14.6 billion budget is so enormous because the unions essentially run the city already. Lord knows what the budget (and the taxes) would grow to if Mr. Sahai were to take over as mayor.
Aaron Peskin
Mr. Peskin is a well practiced speaker. He handled some of the nights sharpest questions with style and aplomb. Including one about his alcoholism, a question that really didn’t need to be put to him in that forum.
He also gave us a taste of the Aaron Peskin Method. He talked about how he is currently putting forward a “plan” to make certain initiatives to address problems by proposing amendments to the city charter. Man, I’m sure that approach will yield tangible returns real soon. Or never.
He sure does know chapter and verse about many things that have happened in city government in the past. But I suppose that you might expect that from someone who has been in office for 23 years.
While the history lesson was interesting, the chance that he will change many things in city government as mayor looks vanishingly slim to me. The Method will be employed again and again, I’d wager.
Mark Farrell
Man, is that guy good at dodging questions. He put on a master class of question dodging.
I was observing his technique closely, striving to learn as much as I could about how he does it so smoothly. After all, I might have to dodge a question sometime myself. 😉