SF: No longer liberal? (San Francisco: area, business, cities)

[AllenSJC]

Of course, "San Francisco" is not one entirely unified city politically....

Most people there are Democrats sure, but for different reasons from each other.

[junkman9096]

I think is is just the natural progression of change. The liberal/progressive side has had it their way for so long that they took it for granted. They were looking out for their pet constituencies and letting the quality of life and commerce slip. When Newsome came in, although he is considered a flaming liberal elsewhere in the country, he was a moderate and made things work (compared to his predecessors). The middle class/Asian communities are asserting themselves and the progressives are getting squeezed out. Just the way things go.

[ubringliten]

For any big city to progress, extreme liberalism doesn't work. However, it's still liberalism in its core and that will never change.

1. The most green city in the nation.
2. One of the largest gay communities (if not the largest) in the country.
3. Burning Man originates from SF and just sold out for the first time and continually getting bigger.
4. Parklets started here and spread.
5. Bike infrastructure is not as big as Portland or Minneapolis but the culture is bigger and will get even bigger.
6. Where being naked in the public is okay.
7. Folsom Street Fair anyone?
8. Didn't they just banned Happy Meals and thought about banning goldfish purchase?
9. More singles than families, more dogs than children, this is liberal.
10. A solar farm within the city.

I love how Berkeley is next door and will have influence on SF for a long time.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by ubringliten

For any big city to progress, extreme liberalism doesn't work. However, it's still liberalism in its core and that will never change.

1. The most green city in the nation.
2. One of the largest gay communities (if not the largest) in the country.
3. Burning Man originates from SF and just sold out for the first time and continually getting bigger.
4. Parklets started here and spread.
5. Bike infrastructure is not as big as Portland or Minneapolis but the culture is bigger and will get even bigger.
6. Where being naked in the public is okay.
7. Folsom Street Fair anyone?
8. Didn't they just banned Happy Meals and thought about banning goldfish purchase?
9. More singles than families, more dogs than children, this is liberal.
10. A solar farm within the city.

I love how Berkeley is next door and will have influence on SF for a long time.

Please explain. Berkeley operates quite independently from SF and has more influence over Oakland if anywhere.

[ubringliten]

Anyone can operate independently of anything, as long as you are in a nearby vicinity, positive or negative influence is always around. For example, Orange County is grouped together with Los Angeles. You said Berkeley has influence on Oakland right, well it can spread across the water too.

In this case, I think having Berkeley nearby is a positive force on SF.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by ubringliten

Anyone can operate independently of anything, as long as you are in a nearby vicinity, positive or negative influence is always around. For example, Orange County is grouped together with Los Angeles. You said Berkeley has influence on Oakland right, well it can spread across the water too.

In this case, I think having Berkeley nearby is a positive force on SF.

Hmmm interesting perspective. I would agree if the topic of this discussion wasn't about SF moving slightly to the right. There's not much Berkeley influence there. Oakland and Berkeley on the other hand are interconnected like no other cities aside from places like Piedmont, Emeryville, Albany and Alameda which kind of get "dragged along". San Francisco certainly while similar doesn't really "fit" in that group.

[rah]

Originally Posted by majoun

In fact, the OWS in SF has drawn the same number of people as the OWS in Santa Rosa. Santa Rosa is 1/10 the size of SF and is traditionally pretty middle o the road politically speaking, so for Occupy SF and Occupy Santa Rosa to have similar numbers definitely suggests SF is not liberal or leftist. (And yes I know not everyone in OWS is liberal or leftist but most are).

Santa Rosa has 3 different encampments, one of which has 200 tents? Santa Rosa has hundreds of people down there every day, and has hundreds to thousands of people marching every week? Occupy Santa Rosa has had well over 100 arrests so far? Because that's what Occupy SF is like. I think your comparison is slightly off.

Berkeley and Oakland are more liberal than SF, but SF is pretty damn liberal itself, even if it can't quite match those two cities. Half of the board of supervisors supports Occupy SF, and have been down there more than once, just in case none of you knew that...sounds like a pretty liberal city to me.

Originally Posted by andyadhi01

SF is very much of a play ground of the rich corporate types.

The majority of SF is not rich. Not even close. Neither are most protesters at Occupy SF.

Originally Posted by andyadhi01

If anything, the OWS in Oakland is far bigger and more genuine than the one in SF

Occupy Oakland is bigger, but Occupy SF is not exactly small (not at all). Also, how is Occupy SF not genuine, but Occupy Oakland is? Occupy SF has been going since the first day of Occupy Wall Street, which is more than can be said for Occupy Oakland...but of course both are "genuine", regardless of when they started, or how big they are.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by rah

Santa Rosa has 3 different encampments, one of which has 200 tents? Santa Rosa has hundreds of people down there every day, and has hundreds to thousands of people marching every week? Occupy Santa Rosa has had well over 100 arrests so far? Because that's what Occupy SF is like. I think your comparison is slightly off.

Berkeley and Oakland are more liberal than SF, but SF is pretty damn liberal itself, even if it can't quite match those two cities. Half of the board of supervisors supports Occupy SF, and have been down there more than once, just in case none of you knew that...sounds like a pretty liberal city to me.



The majority of SF is not rich. Not even close. Neither are most protesters at Occupy SF.



Occupy Oakland is bigger, but Occupy SF is not exactly small (not at all). Also, how is Occupy SF not genuine, but Occupy Oakland is? Occupy SF has been going since the first day of Occupy Wall Street, which is more than can be said for Occupy Oakland...but of course both are "genuine", regardless of when they started, or how big they are.

LMAO at trying to talk to andy man. I am now having my doubts if he really does live here. How many times have they said on the news about SF's occupy showing solidarity with Oakland's and how some of the protesters have bounced back and fourth between them?

[dmode]

I think I agree with one poster above who noted the flavor of liberalism in SF. I think its more socially liberal (gay culture, folsom street fair, etc. etc.) and also the modern manifestation of progressiveness - environment, vegetarian, healthy food etc. Definitely what has reduced is unionization, workplace rights, protest movements, anti-capitalism etc.

[ambient]

On a somewhat tangential note... I always found it amusing and interesting how these bastions of liberalism around here mingle with some of the biggest monuments to capitalism in the world, all right here in this little bay area.