National media gets SF wrong. Again

It's not the progressive politics the city is rejecting. It's incompetence.

Get ready San Francisco. It is happening again.

The pointy-headed pundits back east are going to, once again, put the city on the couch. There will be some squinting and gazing at navels, and then they will explain to us what it all means.

While some of us are still getting over the idea that the recall of three members of the San Francisco School Board was a panel topic on Sunday’s Meet the Press, we’re already moving ahead to the next breathless bellwether event — the recall election of District Attorney Chesa Boudin.

You know the narrative. It goes something like, “San Francisco thought it wanted progressive leaders. But now, in a clear warning to ‘Woke culture,’ they are having second thoughts.”

The national media loves this kind of aha moment, when it is able to turn conventional wisdom on its head, and show that — what do you know? — these people had it wrong all along.

The latest flame fan-er is a Q and A in the New York Times with Boudin.

First, I can’t believe Boudin helped himself with his responses. He complained that the police officers union has it in for him and the cops are doing a lousy job of arresting people. He sounded defensive and petulant. And we will discuss that in a moment.

But just in case there was any doubt about the approach The Times is taking, they spell it out in the introduction, where it says Boudin’s election:

“. . . was seen as a part of a way that swept him and other progressive prosecutors into office . . .”

And now, it turns out those progressive ideals aren’t working for progressive San Francisco. To prove it, on June 7, Boudin is facing a recall election, which he may very well lose.

It’s a nifty angle. It would be even better if it was true.

We’ve been over this before folks.

Subscriptions are available here. You can even choose to contribute to the effort. Either way, thanks for reading.

We can go back to December, when Mayor London Breed had her “bullshit” moment. She called out crime in the city and announced that she intended to be “more aggressive in law enforcement.”

Back east, the media took to their fainting couch.

The New York Post called Breed’s comments a “stunning defund the police turnaround.” It was proof, the Post and others said, that in the face of “skyrocketing crime,” progressive mayors like Breed were having to backtrack.

Again, nice story bro. All it lacks is truth.

Breed never said “defund the police.” In fact, in her 2018 inauguration speech she announced that she wanted to add hundreds officers to the force. She’s pushed for foot patrols in the the Tenderloin and live police access to security camera.

Make no mistake, San Francisco is as “woke” a city as there is. But Breed, like every mayor the city has elected since progressive Art Agnos back in 1992, is a moderate.

There was no U-turn.

The school board was an even more convenient news hook for national deep thinkers.

The board basically wrote the story for them, veering off into one ill-advised crusade after another. Re-naming the schools became a national joke, with “Who cancels Abraham Lincoln?” as the punch line.

When the three were recalled in a landslide, the chin strokers had a field day. It turns out, they opined, that the average American, even in progressive San Francisco, thinks the far left has gone too far. And progressive politicians should take note.

Fine, but that leaves out some inconvenient truths. At the core of this recall was a simple fact — these people were deeply disliked on a personal level.

The recurring theme for them, particularly toxic Alison Collins and board president Gabriela Lopez, was that they knew what was best and everyone — particularly engaged and enraged parents — should pipe down and do what they say.

Job One during the pandemic and finding a way to get the students back in classrooms. They failed. While other districts abandoned remote learning, San Francisco schools were closed for nearly two years, despite a city that had one of the highest vaccination rates and lowest COVID infections.

Granted, it was infuriating that the board was off on wild tangents, but the core issue was still opening classrooms.

And just to remind you of their high-handed approach to COVID, the board has decreed that students must continue to wear masks now, although both the state and the San Francisco Department of Public Health say they are not required.

Collins’ reputation took a dive when a series of frankly racist Tweets about Asian Americans surfaced. Rather than apologize, she doubled down, eventually filing a ridiculous $87 million law suit against the district for removing her from office because of the Tweets.

In another fat pitch for The New York Post types Lopez blamed “white supremacists” for the recall. Calling angry parents white supremacists is not a good pathway to success. Particularly when a large segment of the group is Asian American, many of whom were furious when the board unilaterally changed admission requirements at high-achieving Lowell High.

(A discussion about a public school that bases admission on test scores is worth having. But not now.)

The third member, Faauuga Moliga just got caught up in the throw them all out movement.

Sharing a post with someone is easy. Just click this button.

But a referendum on woke-ness? Don’t think so. They weren’t recalled because they were too progressive. It was because they were incompetent.

Which brings us to Boudin.

A couple of points.

When crime is up, or is perceived to be rising, the DA is always on the hot seat. It’s been that way forever.

And it is true that not all of this is Boudin’s fault. He’s lamented the fact that his office has sometimes tried to hold a suspect in jail, only to have a judge release them.

He makes the point in the Times’ interview that charging for violent crimes like murder and sexual assault have gone up since he’s been in office. Gun violence has gone up around the country. Car break-ins are notoriously difficult to catch and stop.

So let’s agree that some of the factors that have led to Boudin’s recall are out of his control.

But let’s remember, Boudin didn’t sweep into office on a progressive wave. He barely squeaked out a win in 2019 — a little over four percentage points — over interim DA Suzy Loftus. The real story was that Nancy Tung stayed in the race to get over 37,000 votes. That essentially split the moderate vote and gave Boudin a path to win.

Second, we can disagree about what kind of DA he has been. But he’s turning out to be a terrible politician.

The Times interview is another in a series of tin-ear comments that must leave voters shaking their heads.

Already in a fraught relationship with the police, he gripes that only “two percent of reported thefts result in an arrest.” Not that he’s blaming the police, of course, he says.

He says “the police union has been out to get me since day one,” and says “angry elites” are responsible for the recall.

Or, how about the Washington Post story where he says the Tenderloin residents he talks to “aren’t particularly upset that there are drug deals happening there.”

Seriously? Again, this isn’t progressive politics gone off the rails. This is someone who sounds defensive, clueless and has an axe to grind with the police. Not the kind of guy you want as DA.

Back east they see the politics. Here in San Francisco we see the people.

There’s a difference.

Contact C.W. Nevius at cwnevius@gmail.com. Twitter: @cwnevius