https://www.businessinsider.com/chesa-b ... lts-2022-6

https://archive.ph/x80H3

Another day, another California recall. This time, against a DA. Today, the good citizens of San Francisco County will vote on Proposition H - the recall of San Francisco District Attorney, Chesa Boudin. Boudin was narrowly elected as SF DA in 2019, on a heavily progressive platform. He campaigned focusing on not pursuing prosecution of quality of life crimes (like street vending, public urination and sidewalk blocking - aka street encampments), as well as greater police oversight/accountability, decreasing the jail population, promoting diversion programs and eliminating cash bail. It's worth noting that he won from ranked-choice voting, so the majority of San Franciscans did not select him as their first choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_San_ ... y_election

Boudin, himself, is a colorful character who's had an interesting journey to his current position. He was born to convicted criminals (for bank robbery and murder) who were part of the far-left extremist group Weather Underground. Boudin's parents were incarcerated when he was one and he was raised collectively by the group. He worked for as a translator for Hugo Chavez's government before entering law school. And he began his legal career with the Public Defender's Office. This should all give you an idea of his views and how he sees the justice system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesa_Boudin

Chesa Boudin's DA tenure has been tumultuous at best. San Francisco has seen a massive rise in property crime, especially grand larceny. It has gotten so bad that several chains have reduced their hours or closed locations entirely. Homeless encampments are more pervasive than before. His relationship with the SF Police Department is broken. He has been accused of putting criminals' needs first rather focusing on public safety and supporting crime victims. There have been several high profile incidents of individuals who were in Boudin's diversion programs who reoffended, which ended up deaths. Most egregious has been the spike in crimes against Asians and Boudin's apparent lack of concern as well as him not prosecuting drug dealers because for fear they could be deported (!). San Francisco has had more people die the last two years from Fentanyl than COVID.

https://abc7news.com/fentanyl-overdose- ... /11718711/
https://www.sfexaminer.com/archives/son ... 81fb7.html
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... TWICE.html
https://sfstandard.com/criminal-justice ... stigation/
https://susanreynolds.substack.com/p/ch ... lister?s=r
https://sfstandard.com/community/high-p ... e-charges/
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-amer ... -rcna13585
https://archive.ph/YDs8I

Boudin has also been accused of incompetence and not being able to effectively run an office. The DA's office has had an inordinate amount of turnover, especially compared to prior DAs' tenures.

https://archive.ph/O0ii4
https://archive.ph/DtXzU

Chesa Boudin claims that he can't be blamed for increases in homelessness and property crime as he is just a cog in the crime fighting wheel. Crime has also risen all across the country, he contends, so this is a national phenomenon. Boudin has defended his record (although not on public safety), saying that he's run the office exactly like he campaigned he would and touts a decreased jail population. Furthermore, his supporters claim that if he's recalled, it would be a serious blow to criminal justice reform and more time is needed. Boudin has been the public face of this movement and the media is all over this recall. A high profile rejection would severely set it back.

https://archive.ph/KvzKm
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/0 ... t-00036015
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... me/629907/

It should also be noted that Asians, which represent a third of San Francisco's population, have led the drive against Boudin. Blacks, representing just 5%, are least inclined. This recall campaign was organized by Mary Jung, an Asian-American and the former chair of the San Francisco Democratic Party Central Committee, to boot. There is increasing sentiment within the Asian community that the Democratic Party has been using and taking advantage of them to pursue agendas that are detrimental to their community. Asians have disproportionally suffered under the latest crime spikes and they're tired of it and want their voices heard. Beginning of a new political movement or more active involvement? Time will tell...

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... -francisco

Pools don't look too promising for Boudin. He's been behind on every one. My guess is that he's a goner. If he loses, SF's Mayor will choose his successor.

https://www.sfexaminer.com/our_sections ... 0b65f.html

There are other elections happening in California today. The LA Mayoral Candidate Democrat Primary is one. Rick Caruso, a billionaire real estate developer and former Republican who recently registered as a Democrat, and Karen Bass, former Congresswoman, are the leading candidates. LA is facing similar issues as San Francisco, but with a massive spike in violent crime and worse homelessness. Caruso is running on clearing out encampments and being harder on crime than Bass is. Bass was considered a shoe-in for this race, but it's neck and neck right now.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/06/07/politics ... index.html

LA's District Attorney, George Gascon, is also facing a potential recall. Gascon was the former SF DA who moved to LA and ran on a similar progressive platform as Boudin's. Gascon ran SF's DA office in a progressive fashion, but he wasn't as ideological as Boudin has been and he allowed prosecutors some leeway. He seems to have changed since taking charge in LA, however.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/los-angeles- ... -cusp-vote

I feel that this is a consequential election not only for the future of criminal justice reform, but for the future of the Democratic Party itself. Many progressives were elected nationwide the last few years with bold ideas on reform and governance. They have been engaged in a struggle with moderates over the future direction of the party. Progressives have been given an opportunity to prove they can lead and that their ideas work in the real world. However, the case of San Francisco, and California at large, only chaos has ensued.

So, it's going to be interesting. If progressives lose in California, especially in San Francisco, it doesn't portend well for their policies or movement. While California's problems aren't entirely their fault, they've happened under their watch and voters want some accountability. In Boudin's case, he refuses to take any. Democrat leadership should be watching closely.

What say you?

Nice recap - thanks for the work. I sure hope the progressives lose - time for the country to return to the middle.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

Nice recap - thanks for the work. I sure hope the progressives lose - time for the country to return to the middle.

Thanks. Took me a while to post this since this site's draft functions are awful and I kept losing the drafts.

Progressives haven't shown that they can lead or that their ideas work in a real life setting. Either that or they're the world's worst messengers. Again, if they lose San Francisco, arguably the most liberal city in the country, then they're in a host of trouble nationwide and the Democratic Party needs to take note.

In George Gascon's case, if the recall gets enough signatures, and they're really close right now with a month to go, then he's absolutely toast. LA's not nearly as liberal as San Francisco. Heck, 98% of the LA DA's union, his own freaking employees, want him gone because not only can he not do the job, but he's a terrible person to work for.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/prosecutors- ... con-recall

As a disclaimer, I don't live in the Bay Area or California, for that matter. I was bicoastal for a few years before the pandemic and had full intention of moving to the Bay Area full-time, but that's out the window now. I haven't been back since the start of the pandemic, so I haven't personally seen the situation.

Anecdotally, my sister does live there, however, and she states there has been a marked decline in quality-of-life the last two years, especially the last year. She grew up in Canada, so she's hardly conservative and is more or less liberal. Her suburban Silicon Valley neighborhood has a homeless encampment a few blocks from her house. She attends city council meetings (never care for it before) and they claim that they can't do anything or, in the most extreme cases, they won't because encampments have a right to be there too (!). Huh? Her friends who live in San Francisco proper have it worse. All of them have been a victim of some sort of property crime. And they'll be voting "yes" on Prop H. All are liberals, with some venturing on progressive. And she said in her visits there that it's a much different city than two years ago. Much worse and a lot more frightening.

People are fed up and there's only so much bullshit one can take, especially if you pay a lot for real estate and have a hefty tax burden. If it can change my sister, a mild-mannered Canadian, it can change anyone!

There is the old saying that a Conservative is a Liberal who got mugged. Clearly many persons who have liberal and progressive views of society have shifted to the 'right' as to public safety and homeless. They have seen where well intended liberal/progressive ideas to deal with serious issues of law enforcement to certain groups have not worked and led to reaction to shift back to centrist, balanced 'law and order' positions. People don't want to feel endangered when out in public, lose values for their property due to homeless camps and crime, but also want to not just target Black, Hispanic/Latino and non-White 'others' as well as with the homeless with abusive police tactics the liberal polices were to try to temper.
Likely bail reforms will be partially reversed, giving back to police authority to arrest for and return to prosecution of property and 'quality of life' crimes that have been backed off for social justice reasons.

As to the homeless issues, that is going to be a more difficult issue to deal with. There are a number of factors why and variances of form where a person, a family is without housing. In many areas like SF and LA, has been the disappearance of and prevention of replacement of housing for the poor and working class. In some areas, we seen working class persons living in trailers, motor homes, tents as cannot afford housing. There are those with mental and physical health disability, with addictions to drugs and alcohol, with serious financial problems, may be GLTBQ so rejected by families, ex-prisoners, sex offenders, lacking a decent work record or skills to get a job or one sufficient to afford housing.Few want 'affordable' or high density housing near them out of NIMBY, racist and fears of decline of their property values and higher taxes.

The recall in SF and primary for Mayor in LA, the pattern of other primary election, will likely lead to changes tougher on crime and the homeless.

CNN has called it and it looks like Boudin had been recalled as DA. SF Mayor, London Breed, will appoint his replacement. Results were a blowout and somewhat expected. Boudin’s term has been a disaster and his campaign to save his job was cringy.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2022/resul ... =cnn_hp_ft

Still too early to call the LA Mayoral primary, but it looks like a runoff between Bass and Caruso. The latter is performing better than I expected.

https://www.cnn.com/election/2022/resul ... 40AdobeOrg

Boudin deserved to be recalled. My cousin and several close friends still live in SF proper - all are liberal and all voted to kick him out.

It is impossible to be an effective DA without PD and public support. The growth of homeless encampments has hardly anything to do with the DA’s office though - everyone familiar with the issue in SF knows it is a complex, multigenerational issue that has not improved with either liberal or conservative mayoral attempts to resolve it.

You will never solve the homeless problem until you allow more high density property development in these cities. The same people who are freaking out about the homeless people on the street are the same people fighting high density development. If you own property, your interest is in seeing that it grows in value, thus any solution to the housing shortage is detrimental to you. There is no way around this simple case of supply and demand.

victrola wrote:

You will never solve the homeless problem until you allow more high density property development in these cities. The same people who are freaking out about the homeless people on the street are the same people fighting high density development. If you own property, your interest is in seeing that it grows in value, thus any solution to the housing shortage is detrimental to you. There is no way around this simple case of supply and demand.

There is no easy solution, and "density" as you are suggesting certainly isn't it. The recently passed legislation allowing four houses to be built on what is zoned as single residence" (or whatever) has me voting against whoever supported it. It won't help real problem more than it will hurt communities.

Densify all you want, you will end up with four $700,000 homes where once there a single house. The problem is a constrained market and high building expenses. Open more spaces to build (Horrors! Urban sprawl!) and reduce the cost (remove bureaucratic regulation and paperwork) and you might begin to address the housing issue (but not the homeless problem which is not directly the result of the housing shortage).

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

victrola wrote:

You will never solve the homeless problem until you allow more high density property development in these cities. The same people who are freaking out about the homeless people on the street are the same people fighting high density development. If you own property, your interest is in seeing that it grows in value, thus any solution to the housing shortage is detrimental to you. There is no way around this simple case of supply and demand.

There is no easy solution, and "density" as you are suggesting certainly isn't it. The recently passed legislation allowing four houses to be built on what is zoned as single residence" (or whatever) has me voting against whoever supported it. It won't help real problem more than it will hurt communities.

Densify all you want, you will end up with four $700,000 homes where once there a single house. The problem is a constrained market and high building expenses. Open more spaces to build (Horrors! Urban sprawl!) and reduce the cost (remove bureaucratic regulation and paperwork) and you might begin to address the housing issue (but not the homeless problem which is not directly the result of the housing shortage).

Tugg

By European standards, American cities are very low density. For example, Munich, Germany, a very pleasant and livable place has a population density of about 12,000 people per square mile. Los Angeles has a population density of only about 7000 people per square mile. This is an enormous waste of space. Furthermore, more densely populated cities lend themselves much better to efficient public transportation, which is much better for the environment. Outward urban sprawl just creates more traffic and pollution.

victrola wrote:

You will never solve the homeless problem until you allow more high density property development in these cities. The same people who are freaking out about the homeless people on the street are the same people fighting high density development. If you own property, your interest is in seeing that it grows in value, thus any solution to the housing shortage is detrimental to you. There is no way around this simple case of supply and demand.

TBH even if you build brand-new high density development, you'll just end up with a bunch of "luxury" condo/apartments that are overpriced.

leader1 wrote:

It should also be noted that Asians, which represent a third of San Francisco's population, have led the drive against Boudin. Blacks, representing just 5%, are least inclined. This recall campaign was organized by Mary Jung, an Asian-American and the former chair of the San Francisco Democratic Party Central Committee, to boot. There is increasing sentiment within the Asian community that the Democratic Party has been using and taking advantage of them to pursue agendas that are detrimental to their community. Asians have disproportionally suffered under the latest crime spikes and they're tired of it and want their voices heard. Beginning of a new political movement or more active involvement? Time will tell...

While reading some of the Asian community sentiment, there's also the issue with education in places like SF or NYC also - i.e. "progressives" want to open up magnet schools as "equity/equality" only leading to backlash particularly among Asian communities. Before that it was affirmative actions which disproportionally affect Asian-Americans.

Many will not exactly switch their vote to Republican party soon, especially with the modern GQP filled with xenophobia, but I can see AA start pushing Dems to go back to more middle path.

Anyway, Boudin is gone. The precinct map is also interesting, though:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/ar ... 226641.php

The "no" vote are concentrated among Mission District (Hispanic) and places like Bayview-Hunters Point (aka about the only place in SF proper where you can still find African-Americans)

EDIT:

victrola wrote:

By European standards, American cities are very low density. For example, Munich, Germany, a very pleasant and livable place has a population density of about 12,000 people per square mile. Los Angeles has a population density of only about 7000 people per square mile. This is an enormous waste of space. Furthermore, more densely populated cities lend themselves much better to efficient public transportation, which is much better for the environment. Outward urban sprawl just creates more traffic and pollution.

It's more than population density, though - City of LA alone (not counting the gajillion suburbs) proper is almost 4x larger than Munich proper (469 sq mi vs. 120 sq mi). Having a compact city proper helps even more in terms of public transportation than population density alone anyway.

victrola wrote:

By European standards, American cities are very low density. For example, Munich, Germany, a very pleasant and livable place has a population density of about 12,000 people per square mile. Los Angeles has a population density of only about 7000 people per square mile. This is an enormous waste of space. Furthermore, more densely populated cities lend themselves much better to efficient public transportation, which is much better for the environment. Outward urban sprawl just creates more traffic and pollution.

And Frankfurt has a population density of 7,600/square mile.

All towns, even in Germany, are "sprawl" and there are over 2000 towns/cities in Germany. Each started when someone created sprawl by setting up their homestead away from another town and more people settled nearby and a new community was created. LA started out as a number of nearby communities that are now one metroplex. And the entire region will continue to densify by its own nature and necessity.

But that is not any more relevant as they are very different countries and peoples with different histories and expectations.

They key thing is that opening more area to develop and build creates more homes and communities for people to live in. California has 40,000,000 people, that needs to be addressed. And adding regulations and constraining supply does nothing to alleviate the problem.

Tugg

zakuivcustom wrote:

While reading some of the Asian community sentiment, there's also the issue with education in places like SF or NYC also - i.e. "progressives" want to open up magnet schools as "equity/equality" only leading to backlash particularly among Asian communities. Before that it was affirmative actions which disproportionally affect Asian-Americans.

Many will not exactly switch their vote to Republican party soon, especially with the modern GQP filled with xenophobia, but I can see AA start pushing Dems to go back to more middle path.

Anyway, Boudin is gone. The precinct map is also interesting, though:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/ar ... 226641.php

The "no" vote are concentrated among Mission District (Hispanic) and places like Bayview-Hunters Point (aka about the only place in SF proper where you can still find African-Americans)

Many of them have already switched. In NYC, Asians voted for the GOP mayoral candidate the last election. They’re certainly upset at the magnet school changes, but also that many Democrat city leaders have pushed opening homeless shelters in Asian districts. And, of course, crime is a major issue and there is a strong perception that the Dems are overlooking crimes against Asians because they’re mostly committed by Blacks. Many AAPI groups fully backed the BLM movement and feel let down that they haven’t received reciprocal support.

https://news.yahoo.com/asian-americans- ... 58879.html

Even Grace Meng, NY’s only Asian Congresswoman (or man!) sounded the alarms.

https://twitter.com/Grace4NY/status/145 ... MZICZy_HyQ

Dems haven’t even made any efforts to reach out to the community.

https://twitter.com/ycinnewyork/status/ ... MZICZy_HyQ

And don’t forget that Young Kim and Michelle Steel are Asian GOP Congresswomen.

What a change from a few years ago when they went 68% for Joe Biden.

Chesa Boudin's parents participated in the murder of three people (two police officers and a Brinks driver) in 1981. With his parents incarcerated, Boudin was raised by members of their terrorist group-

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/ne ... in-prison/

It is shocking to me that someone like that could be elected in the first place. At least the voters finally recognized their mistake.

leader1 wrote:

zakuivcustom wrote:

While reading some of the Asian community sentiment, there's also the issue with education in places like SF or NYC also - i.e. "progressives" want to open up magnet schools as "equity/equality" only leading to backlash particularly among Asian communities. Before that it was affirmative actions which disproportionally affect Asian-Americans.

Many will not exactly switch their vote to Republican party soon, especially with the modern GQP filled with xenophobia, but I can see AA start pushing Dems to go back to more middle path.

Anyway, Boudin is gone. The precinct map is also interesting, though:
https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/ar ... 226641.php

The "no" vote are concentrated among Mission District (Hispanic) and places like Bayview-Hunters Point (aka about the only place in SF proper where you can still find African-Americans)

Many of them have already switched. In NYC, Asians voted for the GOP mayoral candidate the last election. They’re certainly upset at the magnet school changes, but also that many Democrat city leaders have pushed opening homeless shelters in Asian districts. And, of course, crime is a major issue and there is a strong perception that the Dems are overlooking crimes against Asians because they’re mostly committed by Blacks. Many AAPI groups fully backed the BLM movement and feel let down that they haven’t received reciprocal support.

https://news.yahoo.com/asian-americans- ... 58879.html

Even Grace Meng, NY’s only Asian Congresswoman (or man!) sounded the alarms.

https://twitter.com/Grace4NY/status/145 ... MZICZy_HyQ

Dems haven’t even made any efforts to reach out to the community.

https://twitter.com/ycinnewyork/status/ ... MZICZy_HyQ

And don’t forget that Young Kim and Michelle Steel are Asian GOP Congresswomen.

What a change from a few years ago when they went 68% for Joe Biden.

And it is definitely no surprise. Some Hispanic voters (i.e. Tejanos) voted for GOP in 2020 for the exact same reason - Dem basically took their vote for granted without caring about issues that they care about.

Those AAPI hate especially in SF and NYC certainly doesn't help. And education is always an issue where AAPI are far from being "progressive". If anything it is good to see AAPI raising up in local politics!

tl;dr: The Dem needs to wake up and stop thinking everything is a black-white issue. They embraced "diversity" but at times they expect an "us vs them" mentality especially when it comes to things like BLM - as if an AAPI or Hispanic has to support African-Americans just bc we are all technically minorities.

leader1 wrote:

Even Grace Meng, NY’s only Asian Congresswoman (or man!) sounded the alarms.

https://twitter.com/Grace4NY/status/145 ... MZICZy_HyQ

Dems haven’t even made any efforts to reach out to the community.

Just read this.

But yes, Dem basically rely on "Trump bad!" and at times forgot that local/state race can be won/lose by focusing on local/state issue. Yes, local/state race are more nationalized than before, but running on issue that matters to voters can still win election!

And in SF/NYC local election AAPI does matter b/c of the large number of them. For years they're just not politically active, though (it's a cultural thing...AAPI from East Asia (i.e. Chinese/Korean) in particular does have some sort of "slave mentality"), but I'm definitely glad that they're finally speaking up and say "enough is enough".

zakuivcustom wrote:

leader1 wrote:

Even Grace Meng, NY’s only Asian Congresswoman (or man!) sounded the alarms.

https://twitter.com/Grace4NY/status/145 ... MZICZy_HyQ

Dems haven’t even made any efforts to reach out to the community.

Just read this.

But yes, Dem basically rely on "Trump bad!" and at times forgot that local/state race can be won/lose by focusing on local/state issue. Yes, local/state race are more nationalized than before, but running on issue that matters to voters can still win election!

And in SF/NYC local election AAPI does matter b/c of the large number of them. For years they're just not politically active, though (it's a cultural thing...AAPI from East Asia (i.e. Chinese/Korean) in particular does have some sort of "slave mentality"), but I'm definitely glad that they're finally speaking up and say "enough is enough".

Not for nothing, their kids make up a significant portion of the professional class in the Bay Area (and LA) and are more politically active than their parents.

TriJets wrote:

Chesa Boudin's parents participated in the murder of three people (two police officers and a Brinks driver) in 1981. With his parents incarcerated, Boudin was raised by members of their terrorist group-

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/ne ... in-prison/

It is shocking to me that someone like that could be elected in the first place. At least the voters finally recognized their mistake.

Seems over-the-top to blame him for something his parents did. There’s plenty to criticize of his own record without blaming the son for the sins of the father.

zakuivcustom wrote:

Just read this.

But yes, Dem basically rely on "Trump bad!" and at times forgot that local/state race can be won/lose by focusing on local/state issue. Yes, local/state race are more nationalized than before, but running on issue that matters to voters can still win election!

And in SF/NYC local election AAPI does matter b/c of the large number of them. For years they're just not politically active, though (it's a cultural thing...AAPI from East Asia (i.e. Chinese/Korean) in particular does have some sort of "slave mentality"), but I'm definitely glad that they're finally speaking up and say "enough is enough".

I also think that AAPI politicians or organizations haven't done their constituents any favors or represented them in the best ways possible. AAPI politicians in San Francisco did not support the recall, even though their community essentially organized it. In NYC, the more prominent AAPI politicians are progressives or take progressive stances for political expediency's sake. For instance, they support bail reform or don't push back on homeless housing in AAPI neighborhoods, even though they're detrimental policies to their community. And AAPI organizations went hard in their support for BLM, even though they didn't get the same support back nor did they raise any concerns over AAPI hate crime. It is good to see that the broader AAPI electorate is waking up and getting more involved, however. Maybe we'll see a change in their politicians.

And speaking of slave mentality, funny fact about Boudin's initial election. He apparently speaks some Cantonese and puts Chinese characters next to his name on his social medial accounts and campaigned in Cantonese. This supposedly impressed a lot of Chinese speakers in San Francisco enough that he got most of the second place votes after Nancy Tung. No other reason. They're probably the ones who put him over the top to get the job in the first place.

TriJets wrote:

Chesa Boudin's parents participated in the murder of three people (two police officers and a Brinks driver) in 1981. With his parents incarcerated, Boudin was raised by members of their terrorist group-

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/ne ... in-prison/

It is shocking to me that someone like that could be elected in the first place. At least the voters finally recognized their mistake.

Boudin won through ranked-choice voting. He got around 35% of the first place votes, so more people voted someone else as their first choice. Even after all the votes were tabulated, he squeaked by. Also, he apparently spoke some Cantonese and campaigned in the language, so that impressed enough Cantonese speakers (of which San Francisco has aplenty) to put him as their second choice after Nancy Tung. Ironically, they're the ones who organized the recall to boot him out!

TriJets wrote:

Chesa Boudin's parents participated in the murder of three people (two police officers and a Brinks driver) in 1981. With his parents incarcerated, Boudin was raised by members of their terrorist group-

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/ne ... in-prison/

It is shocking to me that someone like that could be elected in the first place. At least the voters finally recognized their mistake.

As a rule, I find that the further from the political center people are, the more ignorant they are. There is no intellectual thought involved in the foaming-at-the-mouth shouting of slogans on the ultra-right or ultra-left.

This has been a wave of ignorance that denied the facts known to criminology, sociology, anthropology, ethics. It’s not ethical to let a criminal rob and rape the innocent. We know how to stop them - place cuffs on them and place them in prison. No conjugal visits either, obviously. Only let them out when the odds of repeat offense are below 10%. If that means they spend sixty years in prison, then they spend sixty years in prison.

LCDFlight wrote:

TriJets wrote:

Chesa Boudin's parents participated in the murder of three people (two police officers and a Brinks driver) in 1981. With his parents incarcerated, Boudin was raised by members of their terrorist group-

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/ne ... in-prison/

It is shocking to me that someone like that could be elected in the first place. At least the voters finally recognized their mistake.

As a rule, I find that the further from the political center people are, the more ignorant they are. There is no intellectual thought involved in the foaming-at-the-mouth shouting of slogans on the ultra-right or ultra-left.

This has been a wave of ignorance that denied the facts known to criminology, sociology, anthropology, ethics. It’s not ethical to let a criminal rob and rape the innocent. We know how to stop them - place cuffs on them and place them in prison. No conjugal visits either, obviously. Only let them out when the odds of repeat offense are below 10%. If that means they spend sixty years in prison, then they spend sixty years in prison.

Neither major political party in the United States is near the middle. One is center-right, the other is extremist right. All these cries and screams on this thread to bring America back to center is laughable at best.

leader1 wrote:

I also think that AAPI politicians or organizations haven't done their constituents any favors or represented them in the best ways possible. AAPI politicians in San Francisco did not support the recall, even though their community essentially organized it. In NYC, the more prominent AAPI politicians are progressives or take progressive stances for political expediency's sake. For instance, they support bail reform or don't push back on homeless housing in AAPI neighborhoods, even though they're detrimental policies to their community. And AAPI organizations went hard in their support for BLM, even though they didn't get the same support back nor did they raise any concerns over AAPI hate crime. It is good to see that the broader AAPI electorate is waking up and getting more involved, however. Maybe we'll see a change in their politicians.

And speaking of slave mentality, funny fact about Boudin's initial election. He apparently speaks some Cantonese and puts Chinese characters next to his name on his social medial accounts and campaigned in Cantonese. This supposedly impressed a lot of Chinese speakers in San Francisco enough that he got most of the second place votes after Nancy Tung. No other reason. They're probably the ones who put him over the top to get the job in the first place.

And reading more into this...

https://missionlocal.org/2022/04/sfs-ch ... sa-boudin/

Funny that Boudin was booed at the CNY parade. He lost the support of Chinese-American in SF = no wonder why he's recalled. But yes, speaking Cantonese certainly helps especially in SF .

The BLM thing is definitely...divisive among AAPI anyway AFAIK. You got the "liberal" AAPI (younger) who voiced support for their minority brothas. You also have some blacks rallying against AAPI hate in NYC. But the ironic thing is that at least in NYC a lot of the AAPI "hate" crime (since some of them are not exactly hate crime but simply robbery/mugging) are also committed by African-Americans.

(Of course, I'm also born in HK and do read a LOT into the crazy amount of support Trump gets among that community for being "tough on (mainland) China/CCP" -> does not support BLM)

leader1 wrote:

It should also be noted that Asians, which represent a third of San Francisco's population, have led the drive against Boudin. Blacks, representing just 5%, are least inclined. This recall campaign was organized by Mary Jung, an Asian-American and the former chair of the San Francisco Democratic Party Central Committee, to boot. There is increasing sentiment within the Asian community that the Democratic Party has been using and taking advantage of them to pursue agendas that are detrimental to their community. Asians have disproportionally suffered under the latest crime spikes and they're tired of it and want their voices heard. Beginning of a new political movement or more active involvement? Time will tell...

That doesn't appear to be the message that the recall organizer is sending.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/1 ... a-00038675

Recall leader and former San Francisco Democratic Party head Mary Jung said in a statement after Boudin’s defeat: “San Francisco voters are engaged and well-informed. They know that we can have important criminal justice reforms and public safety for all, but that neither was being achieved with Chesa in office.”

I know the spin is "liberals have failed this nation" but, it reads to me that democracy works. The people of San Francisco were sold a bill of goods that turned out to be not what they wanted, so they changed their minds. As democracy should work.

seb146 wrote:

Neither major political party in the United States is near the middle. One is center-right, the other is extremist right. All these cries and screams on this thread to bring America back to center is laughable at best.

I halfway agree with you. The GOP has gone far right but the Dems are, at best center left and that's only because Pelosi won't give some members the platform that the GOP gives to MTG and her ilk.

johns624 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Neither major political party in the United States is near the middle. One is center-right, the other is extremist right. All these cries and screams on this thread to bring America back to center is laughable at best.

I halfway agree with you. The GOP has gone far right but the Dems are, at best center left and that's only because Pelosi won't give some members the platform that the GOP gives to MTG and her ilk.

MTG has no platform within the GOP. She has no committee assignments. She has no bills. She only is in the news because she independently appears on non-mainstream media. She's going the way of Cawthorne.

LabQuest wrote:

She's going the way of Cawthorne.

We can only hope...
There's also Boebert.

CowAnon wrote:

leader1 wrote:

It should also be noted that Asians, which represent a third of San Francisco's population, have led the drive against Boudin. Blacks, representing just 5%, are least inclined. This recall campaign was organized by Mary Jung, an Asian-American and the former chair of the San Francisco Democratic Party Central Committee, to boot. There is increasing sentiment within the Asian community that the Democratic Party has been using and taking advantage of them to pursue agendas that are detrimental to their community. Asians have disproportionally suffered under the latest crime spikes and they're tired of it and want their voices heard. Beginning of a new political movement or more active involvement? Time will tell...

That doesn't appear to be the message that the recall organizer is sending.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/1 ... a-00038675

Recall leader and former San Francisco Democratic Party head Mary Jung said in a statement after Boudin’s defeat: “San Francisco voters are engaged and well-informed. They know that we can have important criminal justice reforms and public safety for all, but that neither was being achieved with Chesa in office.”

That's what Mary Jung said (and all I did was mention that she is organizing this), but there is strong sentiment within the AAPI community that the Democrats are taking advantage of them and not doing anything about their concerns. Education and public safety are of paramount concerns to Asians. That's why they recalled three SF Public School board members and recalled Boudin. Heck, even here in NYC, they voted for the GOP mayoral candidate because of the two issues I listed. Democrats will ignore them at their own peril.

johns624 wrote:

I halfway agree with you. The GOP has gone far right but the Dems are, at best center left and that's only because Pelosi won't give some members the platform that the GOP gives to MTG and her ilk.

For all the flack Pelosi gets, I think she's done a good job of reigning in most of the crazies in her party. It could be a lot worse if AOC and the likes were in control. Unlike the GOP, which basically laid down their arms to their crazies within.

leader1 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

I halfway agree with you. The GOP has gone far right but the Dems are, at best center left and that's only because Pelosi won't give some members the platform that the GOP gives to MTG and her ilk.

For all the flack Pelosi gets, I think she's done a good job of reigning in most of the crazies in her party. It could be a lot worse if AOC and the likes were in control. Unlike the GOP, which basically laid down their arms to their crazies within.

How are Democrats like AOC "crazy"? By wanting health care for all and equality for all? The media keeps repeating that one thing she said that one time as proof that is all she is, but, as usual, they take that one comment wildly out of context and completely ignoring everything else she, and everyone to the left of Pelosi, wants for this country. They focus on one thing one person said because "the Democratic party is crazy!!"

seb146 wrote:

How are Democrats like AOC "crazy"? By wanting health care for all and equality for all? The media keeps repeating that one thing she said that one time as proof that is all she is, but, as usual, they take that one comment wildly out of context and completely ignoring everything else she, and everyone to the left of Pelosi, wants for this country. They focus on one thing one person said because "the Democratic party is crazy!!"

Crazy is all about how other people perceive someone. And it is up to that person to redirect and change that perception. AOC is doing better, she has gotten quieter and is not creating as much distracting noise as she had in the past. Again something that Pelosi has done after AOC and others decided to take her on.

Ships have two sides, port and starboard, Pelosis job is to keep the Democrats ship centered enough that the diverse elements within the party don't A: jump ship; and B. don't overweight the agenda such that the ship is in danger of capsizing.

I can't stand Pelosi for the most part (much like I can't stand Hillary Clinton) but she is cut from "iron bitch" cloth and it very adept at controlling levels of power and the machine (again much like Hillary). She seems to get that any parties first task is to placate its members and make sure everyone thinks they are being heard and their issues are important. I think AOC and others like her are focused on changing things primarily, uncaring of those that do not want THEIR THINGS to change.

Right now, if any part of any party decides to "leave" it causes the party to lose. That is why Republican's lost the presidency. Biden wasn't too bad for a chunk of Republican voters to either vote for or to not show up to oppose.

That is the sad truth of today's politics.

Tugg