Regular readers of The Lash might be scratching their heads right now, wondering: Aren’t you supposed to be on book leave, Adam? Yes, technically, I am still locked in my proverbial attic, writing a biography of the influential political columnist William Safire, who died 17 years ago. Admittedly, I have been more immersed in the 1988 presidential campaign than in the upcoming election here at home. (Incidentally, ’88 was the first election I opined about, as a columnist for The Daily Illini at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. I became a card-carrying member of the American Civil Liberties Union in solidarity with Michael Dukakis (opens in new tab).)

Still, while my head may be stuck in the late-20th century, my body resides firmly in San Francisco’s political present. I am paying attention to the upcoming primary — if not with the same fervor as if I were writing this weekly column, which I intend to resume this summer. Given that my friends and family keep asking, “So, who should I vote for?,” I figured I’d share my pre-election thinking on a few key races.

After all, a lot is at stake on Tuesday. These contests begin a process that, come November, will reshape the political leadership of the state and city. Voters will collectively weigh in on the first open race for governor in eight years, whether Mayor Daniel Lurie gets to work with a sympathetic Board of Supervisors, and who will get a once-in-a-generation opportunity to represent San Francisco in Congress. And in the case of one local initiative, San Francisco voters will decide which is more important: kowtowing to labor unions or giving the city’s business environment an opportunity to recover. 

I didn’t vote for everything on the ballot. I tend to skip races that aren’t contests, like Matt Haney’s unopposed re-election bid in the state Assembly and Attorney General Rob Bonta’s race, where he is effectively unopposed. I also didn’t take the time to figure out important but low-visibility state races, like lieutenant governor, controller, treasurer, and superintendent of public instruction. “Failing to vote is not an option,” Safire once wrote (opens in new tab), and I feel guilty about letting you down here. 

But I do feel strongly about several candidates and measures, and I want to share those arguments. Here goes nothing:

I tend to vote shortly after my ballot arrives in the mail — something that fewer Californians (opens in new tab) are doing this year, likely because of voter indecision over the top of the ticket. Though I realized the futility of doing so, I voted for Matt Mahan. The San Jose mayor, a Democrat, is the only moderate in the race. He has experience running a city, and he seems to be doing a good job of it, particularly by addressing a thorny homelessness problem (opens in new tab) with creativity. 

Best of all, Mahan is no lackey to the state’s Democratic party; he’s been a thorn in the side of Gov. Gavin Newsom, faulting him for not funding 2024’s Prop. 36, which Mahan helped champion to bring the hammer down on repeat offenders, and for his team’s trolly behavior on social media. The youngish mayor, 43, is the workhorse to Newsom’s show horse. He represents the future.

However, if the polls are correct (opens in new tab), Mahan doesn’t have a prayer of placing in the top two in the crowded gubernatorial primary, which is what it takes to move on to the general election in November. It’s not Mahan’s fault that the media pays no attention to San Jose. He is to blame for entering the race late, given that nobody knew who he was in the first place. (By nobody, I mean regular citizens; California political obsessives, especially mods like me, knew all about Mahan.)

The reason I voted for Mahan isn’t just because of his policy bona fides or his clear intelligence. I also think Mahan would stand the best chance against Republican Steve Hilton, a consistent front-runner in the polls who looks likely to make it to November. In fact, Mahan would mop up Hilton. If the general election is close, it won’t be about who people on either extreme will vote for. It would be about who centrist Californians would choose.

I don’t think they’d choose Katie Porter or Tom Steyer, progressive stalwarts with deficient political resumes. Conventional wisdom holds that because Democrats outnumber Republicans by such a wide margin in California, any Democrat will win, even the boring and conventional frontrunner, Xavier Becerra. 

The conventional wisdom is usually right, but not always. I met Becerra once. The two of us were in a small elevator headed to a TV studio. He turned to me and said, “I’m Xavier Becerra.” An awkward silence followed. “The attorney general of California,” he added. He didn’t seem too miffed that I didn’t know who he was — probably because he’s used to it. I suspect voters will feel the same way about him in November.

As for Hilton, whose campaign launch in Huntington Beach I covered what seems like years ago, I continue to believe that he’ll shed his unsavory MAGA-ness and tack toward the center during the general, making him scarily formidable against a garden-variety California liberal. Hilton is smooth and charismatic, which in a campaign masks the fact that he hasn’t had a real job in years.

Come to think of it, that’s what Daniel Lurie’s detractors said about him in 2024. A lot of pundits counted out Lurie early on. They said the same thing about Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2003. 

It’s a big deal to replace Nancy Pelosi. Whichever Democrat wins this race will likely hold the seat for years. And despite the lack of a viable Republican candidate, this contest is a good example of democracy in action, with three distinctly able and competitive candidates.

It’s also a no-brainer that Scott Wiener would be best in Washington. He’s a workaholic — serious, intelligent, committed, middle-of-the-road (by San Francisco standards), pro-housing, and creative as a legislator. He has earned the right to represent us in the House. 

His most capable opponent, Connie Chan, is a stalwart representative of the city’s progressive, labor-dominated, professional political class. However, her background offers little to suggest a passion for national policy. 

My last choice of the trio is Saikat Chakrabarti, a smart, personable democratic socialist with an abundance of cash and a paucity of San Francisco political connections. He’d be part of a fringe faction in Washington, making it difficult to deliver for his constituents anywhere close to the way Pelosi has.

The only thing that will be interesting about this race is who gets trounced by Wiener in November.

The Overpaid CEO Tax is bad in every way. It is a lousy policy, dishonestly introduced, and misleadingly named. Its proponents insinuate that fat-cat CEOs will pay this tax —  though they know it isn’t the case. The measure taxes companies whose CEOs make far more than the average employee, meaning it won’t even touch the mega-cap tech companies whose well-paid workers are relative fat cats themselves.

This is being done in the name of adding $300 million to the city’s coffers to save city-worker jobs. The labor unions who dreamt this thing up (with an assist from progressive lawmakers like Chan) believe that municipal workers are more important than grocery store employees and workers at similar companies, some 900 of whom will lose their jobs if this measure goes through, according to a city assessment. 

Have thoughts on this story?

Worse, the existence of this initiative reneged on one of the finest examples of multi-faction consensus politics, 2024’s Proposition M, which brought together London Breed, Aaron Peskin, the business community, and the same unions to lower a similar tax.

The passage of Prop. D would be a significant setback for Lurie’s efforts to keep San Francisco “open for business” and a sign of who really wears the Levi’s in upcoming city-labor contract negotiations. (Not him.)

I know, I know, this is the ultimate MEGO (“my eyes glaze over”) office. It’s also the easiest call of the entire election. Patrick Wolff, a San Francisco investor and chess genius, knows a lot about the insurance industry and has measured, smart ideas about how to fix the mess that is the state’s insurance market. (He also had the funniest campaign ads of the cycle.) Jane Kim, a former San Francisco supervisor and perennial candidate for elected office, has a left-wing notion of having the state take over insurance coverage, a recipe for disaster that probably won’t go anywhere anyway. There are 11 candidates in all vying for this position, including state Sen. Ben Allen from Santa Monica. One of the others will probably win. But Wolff ought to.

The democratic process is messy, imperfect, and yet somehow beautiful. You’ve still got time to do your part.