Two Endorsements, Two Narratives

Owen Kellogg Owen Kellogg 5 Comments

Share

Interesting day in the mayoral race. Both Nathan Fletcher and Carl DeMaio rolled out significant endorsements that say a lot about their priorities and what to expect from their prospective administrations.

Nathan Fletcher and the Lifeguard Union
Fletcher announced the endorsement of the Lifeguards union and released a “Clean Water and Safe Beaches Plan.” Fletcher is clearly continuing to advance his narrative as a moderate, highlighting the environment, public safety and education.

It will be interesting to see how this message plays with primary voters in a crowded field.  The two other Republicans have publicly stated that they will not accept the endorsement of city government employee unions (both were unlikely to receive them anyway, so judge their sincerity for yourself). I would assume that they may also have some sort of polling data to suggest that they are better off actively distancing themselves from the government unions.

Fletcher’s seems to sidestep the question of whether such endorsements are appropriate, by stating that he welcomes all support as an “investment in good government.” It remains to be seen whether voters believe this reasoning reflects his “New Generation of Leadership,” or simply a continuation of labor’s unholy influence in City Hall. (See Fletcher’s non-answer to the question of whether the unions have too much influence in city government at the Lincoln Club debate).

Carl DeMaio and the EGCA
DeMaio rolled out the endorsement of the Engineers and General Contractors Association and highlighted his previously released “Save Our Streets Plan.” DeMaio continues to advance the narrative that he is the reformer and businessman who can fix the dysfunction that has dominated city government.

DeMaio seems to be aware that he could be perceived as a single-issue candidate who has staked his campaign on Pension Reform. In recent weeks he has been highlighting a variety of other issues as well, from streets to veteran employment. He is also careful to emphasis that the ultimate purpose of Pension Reform and other reforms is to improve neighborhood services, and that ultimately, he is the best candidate to make those improvements.

While DeMaio has been unabashed about his combative relationship with the unions, we’ll have to see whether his support in the business community will be sufficient to fend off their barbs as the election approaches. Labor’s split between Filner and Fletcher suggests they have an “Anyone But Carl” strategy. DeMaio better hope that the public’s disgust with the government unions holds strong through November.

Share

Comments 5

  1. Endorsements ARE helpful to voters. Sometimes perhaps more helpful than the candidates themselves would like.

    Recently big-time liberal (and just plain big) Bill Walton endorsed Fletcher. Some labor unions are backing his campaign. Nathan also has the firm support of the Downtown Business Subsidy Association (I forget what their exact name is — if they have one — but this one fits like a glove).

    Okkaaayyyyy. Good to know.

    A politician can also be gauged by his OPPOSITION groups. When it comes to Carl DeMaio, the rabid fear and hatred emanating from our labor unions are really all we need to know about whether or not Carl can be bought off in his quest to reform city government. In this matter, trust the opinion of our “public servants.”

  2. Really nice that you guys are censoring comments and only letting pro-DeMaio ones through… keep it classy.
    ——————
    From Admin — Absolutely and unequivocally FALSE. At no time do we censor comments, unless they are libelous, foul, spam, or threatening bodily harm. We’ve addressed this before and we will do so again. Due to our spam filters, without which we would have several HUNDRED spam comments per day appearing on the blog, legitimate comments often go into a review queue. We do are damned best to get them approved as quickly as possible, but it’s not a perfect world. Sometimes there are delays, although every effort is made to review comments quickly. Additionally, every comment filtered as spam is reviewed to ensure legitimate ones haven’t slipped through. We are presently working to improve all of this. But, NEVER has a comment been approved or deleted based on the position being taken or the candidate being supported. NEVER. On very rare occasions, comments have been ACCIDENTALLY deleted, without any consideration of the commenter or the opinion taken. We have owned up when that has happened.

    Vidosic, your accusation is without merit and classless. We believe an apology is in order.

  3. Absolutely and unequivocally FALSE. At no time do we censor comments, unless they are libelous, foul, spam, or threatening bodily harm. We’ve addressed this before and we will do so again. Due to our spam filters, without which we would have several HUNDRED spam comments per day appearing on the blog, legitimate comments often go into a review queue. We do are damned best to get them approved as quickly as possible, but it’s not a perfect world. Sometimes there are delays, although every effort is made to review comments quickly. Additionally, every comment filtered as spam is reviewed to ensure legitimate ones haven’t slipped through. We are presently working to improve all of this. But, NEVER has a comment been approved or deleted based on the position being taken or the candidate being supported. NEVER. On very rare occasions, comments have been ACCIDENTALLY deleted, without any consideration of the commenter or the opinion taken. We have owned up when that has happened.

    Vidosic, your accusation is without merit and classless. We believe an apology is in order.

  4. If that is what happened, then I apologize. But I definitely made a comment on this post that disagreed with the premise that was NOT approved, and shortly thereafter a comment from Mr. Rider that DID agree with the premise WAS approved.

    That is not the first, nor the second, time that almost that exact set of circumstances has happened with comments I have made on this site.

    If it is merely a clerical error, and not intentional, then I apologize for the accusation.

  5. We appreciate that and if we did anything unintentional to reject your comment, Vidosic, we apologize as well. A search of the spam and trash files shows no comments from you in the last few days. We have no doubt you tried to comment. Most of our complaints are due to comment delays, and sometimes related to authors that choose to close the ability to comment on their posts, not for comments made and never approved. This is a mystery, then, and we would be interested if others have had the same problem. All commenters should be aware that sometimes things happen on their end, related to browsers, etc., in which a comment doesn’t “take.” In such a case, there would be no comment on our end to approve. When a comment is submitted and it goes into the “for moderation” queue, at the top of the comment posting area it should read, “Comment awaiting moderation.” Thanks for your and anyone else’s input on this, so we can address going forward.

Leave a Reply

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