Home>Articles>Mayoral Candidates Slam SF Chronicle’s Support For London Breed, Daniel Lurie For Mayor

San Francisco Mayor London Breed Giving the 2024 State of the City Address on 3/7/2024 (Photo: SF Office of the Mayor)

Mayoral Candidates Slam SF Chronicle’s Support For London Breed, Daniel Lurie For Mayor

Other candidates slam endorsement as ‘hit piece’

By Evan Symon, October 15, 2024 7:42 pm

Many San Francisco lawmakers and political commentators were surprised to learn Tuesday that the San Francisco Chronicle announced support for both San Francisco Mayor London Breed and Levi Strauss heir Daniel Lurie for Mayor. Others called the editorial a “hit piece.”

For months, the 2024 San Francisco Mayoral race has been a constant fight between all the candidates. Breed, Lurie, former Mayor Mark Farrell, Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin, and Supervisor Ahsha Safai have all been in a dog fight for the election that still has no clear front-runner ahead by more than a few points. Specifically, Breed, Lurie, and Farrell have been constantly coming out in polls in either the one or two spot. Polls last month had both Farrell and Breed in narrow leads, while the most recent one this month had Lurie out ahead.

With such a close race, and so many issues ranging from crime to homelessness to affordable housing on the line, candidates have been fighting for every scrap of an advantage. This has included more and more targeted ads, more tailored to the audience campaigning, and grabbing every endorsement possible. Breed has by far the most endorsements, with her backers including Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), numerous Supervisors, Actor Danny Glover, and former Mayor Willie Brown. And that’s not including Vice President Kamala Harris, who hasn’t officially backed her, but still nonetheless is touted by Breed for being a close friend and even attending a few of her rallies.

Everyone else has big names too. Farrell has Supervisor Catherine Stefani. Lurie has former Mayor Frank Jordan. Peskin has several Supervisors as well. But one of the last big names out there, and what could cause a minor bump in votes, was the San Francisco Chronicle. However, they finally released their opinion on Tuesday, confusing many. In it, they said the safe choice would be Breed, while the candidate for change was Lurie. In it, they also completely dismissed Farrell’s economic recovery plan of using tax breaks to lure companies and brining people back to the office back despite it having a proven track record of working. For example, even though Los Angeles has lost many movie and TV productions in recent years, the state tax credit has kept many  productions in the city, even taking some back from Atlanta and Vancouver. On more local levels, companies like Amazon have brought back workers to offices through such programs.

“Lurie doesn’t have to be a policy ace to be successful,” said the endorsement. “It will be his job to hire a coterie of smart, dedicated people and then hold them accountable. His connections, unearned as many are, and his demeanor, make that possible.

“We won’t sugarcoat the reality that supporting Lurie is a risk. But if you genuinely think San Francisco would benefit from a change, as we do, then Lurie is a risk worth taking.

“Is Breed the best person to clean up San Francisco’s mess, both literally and figuratively? Up until a few months ago we still would have said yes, owing to deep skepticism of her competitors in the mayoral race.

“But when news recently broke about outrageous mismanagement within her signature Dream Keeper initiative — a $120 million effort to revive San Francisco’s Black community — it solidified our concerns for the next four years under a mayor whose attention and eye for detail isn’t what she promised it would be.

“The question, of course, is who can do better? Mark Farrell hardly seems like the answer.”

However, for Farrell and others, the endorsement felt more like a hit piece. Even Peskin and Safai were targeted. On X, Farrell even fought back, saying that the Chronicle had also backed former DA Chesa Boudin and supported tax increases.

“Shocked that the Chronicle Editorial Board that doubled-down on backing Chesa Boudin, and who is supporting more tax increases while opposing more support for cops/firefighters chose a candidate who stands for nothing with no experience trying to buy the election. Moving on…”

For those actively watching the race, the endorsement may give a small boost, but they also said that newspaper endorsements aren’t the big bump that they used to be.

“1% tops, probably less than that,”  said political advisor Sharon Lee to the Globe on Tuesday.  “That’s how much the candidates can expect in poll changes. Farrell and Lurie are still, overall, just behind Breed, but they can easily make it back up with some ads.

“Peskin serves as a bit of a spoiler for Breed and Safai, at this point, is a human margin of error. But in a race this close, even a Chronicle endorsement could be a bit of an edge, and Breed and Lurie both gain from it. For those wanting San Francisco to continue to recede from being so Progressive, the choices have been Lurie and Farrell by and large, and the fact the Chronicle is even saying good things about one of them is a shocker. But they went out of their way to attack Farrell in their decision, so it’s no wonder why this is so controversial.

“San Francisco is a mess right now, and that includes this election. This endorsement only further confirms it.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Evan Symon
Spread the news:

 RELATED ARTICLES

3 thoughts on “Mayoral Candidates Slam SF Chronicle’s Support For London Breed, Daniel Lurie For Mayor

  1. Does anyone even read the SF Chronicle anymore? Isn’t an irrelevant Democrat propaganda relic from the last century?

    1. Nope. The comical has been on life support since they faced competition from internet media. The only people who still trust tge comical is over 65 and prefers newspapers. The younger generation relies on online sources.

  2. SF politics is at best badly mismanaged and at worst promotes corruption and fraud. I think Lurie is the only candidate who stands a chance at restoring downtown. The Supervisors have outsized influence yet assume no responsibility when things fail. While some may view it as buying an election, I see Lutie as someone investing in the City with his own money, without a guaranteed ROI. – A Prograsive Democrat

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *