San Francisco Mayor London Breed Unseated By First-Time Public Office Candidate

[mystery-ak]

San Francisco Mayor London Breed Unseated By First-Time Public Office Candidate


Wallace White
Contributor
November 08, 2024 9:00 AM ET
Font Size:

Democratic San Francisco Mayor London Breed lost her reelection race to philanthropist and Levi Strauss heir Daniel Lurie, according to multiple reports.

Breed, who has served as the city’s mayor since 2018, was defeated by independent candidate Lurie in the first mayoral election to utilize ranked-choice voting, according to multiple sources. This will mark the first time Lurie has served in public office.

As of Friday morning, Breed holds 43.8% of the vote while Lurie leads with 56.2%, and 100% of precincts reporting, according to the unofficial count.

Ranked-choice voting in the city made Breed’s path to victory harder than usual, as a third of likely voters expressed their intention to rank Breed as their lowest choice, according to a February poll. Before Breed and Lurie faced off in the final round, 13 previous rounds whittled away the number of qualifying candidates.

more
https://dailycaller.com/2024/11/08/san-francisco-mayor-election-results/

[PeteS in CA]

Breed came into office over-promising what she could actually do about The Sacred Homeless. Even assuming she wanted to do something meaningful, the 9th Circus' Boise decision tied her hands and hobbled her. The Grants Pass decision this pass summer overturned Boise, but based on the lack of howling by activists, she doesn't seem to have done much. She also does not seem to have attempted much to stem the crime that has driven much business out of SF, again, based on the lack of howling by activists.

Over-promise, under-perform, bye-bye Mayor Breed. Lurie made good noises, but then again, so did Breed.

[Fishrrman]

The article says:
As of Friday morning, Breed holds 43.8% of the vote while Lurie leads with 56.2%
but then...
Ranked-choice voting in the city made Breed’s path to victory harder than usual, as a third of likely voters expressed their intention to rank Breed as their lowest choice...

I'd like to know how many voted for Breed as their "first choice"
v.
...how many voted for Lurie as their "first choice".

I'm going to go out on a limb (because I don't have those numbers), and take a guess that Breed "got more" ballots (for first choice) than did Lurie.
(I'll admit I could be wrong).

But if I'm correct... this may be a perfect example of the evils of ranked choice voting.
That is, it's effect is to turn winners into losers, and make losers into winners.

It's fundamentally opposed to all concepts of "what an election is supposed to be about" -- that the person receiving the most "votes" wins.

[PeteS in CA]

[Sarcasm] Rank [/Sarcasm][/size] choice voting is not statewide. Were it proposed I'd vote against that proposition in half a heartbeat.