San Francisco: Connie Chan has many flaws, but she recognizes things that normal everyday working-class people want.
Normal people, most of all, don't want to be harmed. She recognizes how the things YIMBYs want, such as tearing down infrastructure WHILE adding population density, will harm most people, so she simply refuses to go along with them.
Not harming most people is a good way to get most people on your side.
Therefore, I predict she'll win handily in parts of San Francisco where YIMBYs are most intent on causing harm.
Connie Chan basically opposes all the same things that the tiny group of Republicans in San Francisco do.
She doesn't want new housing built. She doesn't want urban freeways removed to reconnect neighborhoods. She doesn't want anything done that might even temporarily inconvenience a suburban car commuter or an incumbent homeowner.
It's not a surprise she'd be leading with Republicans.
Most YIMBYs in San Francisco are transplants.
That's why they don't care about what locals want; they share no connection with us. They have no family here. Nobody they love lives here.
And since they've already uprooted themselves, they're unattached. So they might as well go where land is cheap, and they can build to their heart's desire!
California: Looking for affordable housing?
Check out these 4+ bedroom homes on large lots, all for under 400k.
Homes this large in San Francisco's foggy Sunset would cost millions.
But in Fresno, you'd get 300 days of sunshine a year and live close to the mountains!
Contrary to what YIMBYs tell you, nobody has to pay a lot for housing. It's a choice!
@sanbrunamo Not what I said. I said people without roots here have less to lose by fโing it up, because they can just move.
People like me have real skin in the game.
@Gregster56@dustingardiner@jrivanob Find me somebody who identifies as a right-winger who does not despise both Newsom and Wiener.
I've never met one!
In fact, right-wingers in SF are voting for Connie. They consider her the lesser of two evils.
@Theonea05466744 I agree; I LOVE that I can walk to buy food, and my kids can take the bus to school.
But not having to drive is a luxury not everyone enjoys.
If you're a plumber, you're not taking all your tools on your bike or the bus.
Vital Professions that rely on driving: Plumbers, electricians, locksmiths, appliance repair technicians, gardeners, house cleaners, delivery people, first responders, garbage collection, and countless others.
So if you're one of these YIMBY Urbanist Abundance bros trying to do away with roads, you're forgetting that even if you don't drive, your entire cushy lifestyle relies on people who drive.
Without these working-class drivers, your life would totally suck!
This makes sense
She is indisputably conservative on entrenching the NIMBYism and car dependency that is most important to SF Republicans
True of many self described โprogsโ in CA unfortunately
@clearSNR Agreed.
And if you have no family here, you can more easily uproot if SF is not to your liking.
And moving is a lot less stressful than trying to change SF to your liking, given that progress will be very slow.
@lst156 Yes, the lack of fare enforcement makes it hard for it to sustain itself.
Mass surveillance neither helps nor hurts unless it helps catch violent people.
@SingleTax Which means, for the majority, they can leave if they don't like it without much consequence. Those who have roots here have skin in the game, much more to lose if it's ruined.