4 ms·

Often the people voting for policies that allow urban camping are the people who have private security and aren’t exposed to the effects. The people voting out

by mc32 4y ago

Often the people voting for policies that allow urban camping are the people who have private security and aren’t exposed to the effects. The people voting out progressive DAs are the people most affected which happen to be the poorer neighborhoods and don’t have private security.

whimsicalism 4y ago
It's interesting how this has become a popular talking point. > Often the people voting for policies that allow urban camping are the people who have private security and aren’t exposed to the effects. The vast majority of voters do not have "private security" - certainly there are not enough with it to influence any election. > The people voting out progressive DAs are the people most affected which happen to be the poorer neighborhoods and don’t have private security. Nope, it is the most affluent neighborhoods that are voting for these recalls. [0] Poorer neighborhoods do not like crime, but they also have direct interactions with the criminal justice system and are generally skeptical of "broken-windows" style policing as compared to "stop shootings" style policing. [0]: https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/These-were-the-neighborhoods-that-drove-the-17228393.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/These-were-the-...
- mc32 4y ago
  I dunno, the article you're citing says that Visitation, Tenderloin and Bayview all voted against him: >"The PVI index shows that neighborhoods in the city’s core — the Haight, the Mission and Bernal Heights — tend to vote more progressively than those on its outer rim, like Lake Merced, Visitacion Valley and the Marina. >These outer-core neighborhoods, which voted against Boudin in 2019, also voted against him on Tuesday. But this time, they were joined by several neighborhoods that voted for Boudin in 2019, including the Bayview, the Tenderloin and the Richmond."

by mc32 4y ago

whimsicalism 4y ago

It's interesting how this has become a popular talking point. > Often the people voting for policies that allow urban camping are the people who have private security and aren’t exposed to the effects. The vast majority of voters do not have "private security" - certainly there are not enough with it to influence any election. > The people voting out progressive DAs are the people most affected which happen to be the poorer neighborhoods and don’t have private security. Nope, it is the most affluent neighborhoods that are voting for these recalls. [0] Poorer neighborhoods do not like crime, but they also have direct interactions with the criminal justice system and are generally skeptical of "broken-windows" style policing as compared to "stop shootings" style policing. [0]: https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/These-were-the-neighborhoods-that-drove-the-17228393.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/These-were-the-...

mc32 4y ago
I dunno, the article you're citing says that Visitation, Tenderloin and Bayview all voted against him: >"The PVI index shows that neighborhoods in the city’s core — the Haight, the Mission and Bernal Heights — tend to vote more progressively than those on its outer rim, like Lake Merced, Visitacion Valley and the Marina. >These outer-core neighborhoods, which voted against Boudin in 2019, also voted against him on Tuesday. But this time, they were joined by several neighborhoods that voted for Boudin in 2019, including the Bayview, the Tenderloin and the Richmond."