Why I'm not a San Francisco progressive

Rob --

Do you believe in a progressive San Francisco?

Then we need you to step up, right now.

Here’s why: After a game-changing June 7th election, the balance on the Board of Supervisors could come down to who wins in District 5, as 48 Hills explains. This race isn’t just about who represents District 5, it’s about the direction of our City as a whole.

We need your support to win in November. And it’s urgent. On Thursday, we report our campaign fundraising figures to date. Going up against a corporate-backed incumbent, it’s important that we have a strong showing. That means everyone who believes in a progressive San Francisco stepping up, and pitching in what they can. 

We need to raise $5,000 in the next three days. Click here to make a contribution.

Can I count on you to help us get to victory, and continue to fight for the future of San Francisco?

Thank you, 

Dean Preston

www.votedean.com

Rob's comment:

No, I don't believe in a "progressive" San Francisco, though I'm a liberal and a Democrat. I've been blogging for more than ten years about the damage progressives have done to this city. 

The reality is that the left/right designation is of little value when dealing with local issues. 

I would support you if you weren't too timid politically to take a stand on anything but housing. What about the Masonic Avenue bike project and so-called Smart Growth on Treasure Island, at Parkmerced, and at Market and Octavia? Transportation is intimately connected to housing and development.

Linking a Tim Redmond article doesn't help your pitch, since he's always been a typical San Francisco progressive with the many negatives that includes. 

London Breed has been a terrible supervisor, but so far you've provided no evidence that you would be any better. 

Based on the campaign so far, I won't vote for either of you.