9 ms·

> Violent crime went down during Boudin’s tenure. Don’t base opinions on media propaganda. So are SF residents propagandized sheeple and recalled him for no g

> Violent crime went down during Boudin’s tenure. Don’t base opinions on media propaganda. So are SF residents propagandized sheeple and recalled him for no good reason, or is there more to the story than your first sentence?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Apocryphon 4y ago
Garry Tan and police unions from multiple cities funding a big campaign? https://www.theinformation.com/articles/garry-tan-vs-chesa-boudin-the-san-francisco-political-scene-gets-a-new-tech-combatant https://www.theinformation.com/articles/garry-tan-vs-chesa-b... https://twitter.com/jackiefielder_/status/1641656117083381760 https://twitter.com/jackiefielder_/status/164165611708338176... Maybe recalling Boudin is right or not, but either way when a lot of money is injected into a campaign, it tends to influence outcomes. Just see Prop 22.
- shuckles 4y ago
  Boudin had plenty of donors from around the country (including from billionaires) and was getting free puff pieces placed about him in The New Yorker about his Los Angeles fundraisers. Money flows in all directions.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    Certainly, but not equally. > By June, the groups seeking to recall Boudin together raised $7.2 million to oust him, while the district attorney’s backers gathered about $3.3 million. https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/Chesa-Boudin-ousted-as-San-Francisco-District-17226641.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/Chesa-Boudin-ou...
    - shuckles 4y ago
      Yes because by that point Boudin had lost his electoral credibility. It's instructive to see who funded his original run for DA.
      - Apocryphon 4y ago
        The narrative was against Boudin by the time of the recall, but that campaign was nevertheless still funded by big money, which has a tendency to amplify narratives, and this entire discussion was focused on the recall anyway.
        shuckles 4y ago
        The entire discussion has no focus and starts with a false claim about violent crime being down between 2020 and 2022. In any case, claims that money influenced outcomes are ill-substantiated since many San Francisco election results go against the best-funded outcomes.
        Apocryphon 4y ago
        Though apparently, neither in the case of the election of Boudin, nor in his recall! https://ballotpedia.org/District_Attorney_election_in_San_Francisco,_California_(2019)#Campaign_finance https://ballotpedia.org/District_Attorney_election_in_San_Fr... https://ballotpedia.org/Chesa_Boudin_recall,_San_Francisco,_California_(2021-2022)#Election_spending https://ballotpedia.org/Chesa_Boudin_recall,_San_Francisco,_...
        shuckles 4y ago
        Yes, even in that case. In a ranked choice election, you cannot simply look at the numbers in isolation. The opponents to Boudin ran something of a slate where they cross-promoted each other. So in a real sense, Boudin won despite being outspent in 2020. (Though there is a compelling case to make that Boudin's victory was mostly a fluke due to Nancy Tung's Cantonese language voters being misled by local Chinese-only newspapers about policy positions.)
Fatnino 4y ago
Shoplifting is not a "violent crime". It was everywhere, out in the open, broad daylight. Ride a bike into a store, ride out with a garbage bag full of stuff, set up a table around the corner and sell what you stole at a discount. Boudin refused to prosecute any of this.
- fogzen 4y ago
  Boudin's charging rate was not significantly different than other DAs: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/3QGJv/1/ https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/3QGJv/1/ SF has a significantly lower charging rate than other major cities, but there's many factors that go into that (the quality of police work, percentage of defendants that live in the district, etc.).
fogzen 4y ago
Violent crime is more than homicides. Violent crime was down according to SF city police department: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7kTBb/1/ https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7kTBb/1/ You can see more statistics in the discussion here: https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Chesa-Boudin-San-Francisco-crime-statistics-recall-16268178.php https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Chesa-Boudin-San-Fra... Homicides were not outside of historical trends during Boudin's tenure. A few homicides difference across years has nothing to do with the DA. This narrative that radical leftist district attorneys are responsible for crime is media propaganda completely divorced from the factual realities of crime. Comparing charging rates of recent San Francisco district attorneys with other cities shows San Francisco has tended to charge way fewer crimes brought to them. Boudin and previous attorneys have blamed this on poor policing, and that SF is unique in that people in surrounding metros travel into SF to commit burglaries. Even so, that has nothing to do with the political leanings of the DA, since cities with much higher charging rates and lower petty crime have Democrat DAs.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

Apocryphon 4y ago

Garry Tan and police unions from multiple cities funding a big campaign? https://www.theinformation.com/articles/garry-tan-vs-chesa-boudin-the-san-francisco-political-scene-gets-a-new-tech-combatant https://www.theinformation.com/articles/garry-tan-vs-chesa-b... https://twitter.com/jackiefielder_/status/1641656117083381760 https://twitter.com/jackiefielder_/status/164165611708338176... Maybe recalling Boudin is right or not, but either way when a lot of money is injected into a campaign, it tends to influence outcomes. Just see Prop 22.

shuckles 4y ago
Boudin had plenty of donors from around the country (including from billionaires) and was getting free puff pieces placed about him in The New Yorker about his Los Angeles fundraisers. Money flows in all directions.
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  Certainly, but not equally. > By June, the groups seeking to recall Boudin together raised $7.2 million to oust him, while the district attorney’s backers gathered about $3.3 million. https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/Chesa-Boudin-ousted-as-San-Francisco-District-17226641.php https://www.sfchronicle.com/election/article/Chesa-Boudin-ou...
  - shuckles 4y ago
    Yes because by that point Boudin had lost his electoral credibility. It's instructive to see who funded his original run for DA.
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      The narrative was against Boudin by the time of the recall, but that campaign was nevertheless still funded by big money, which has a tendency to amplify narratives, and this entire discussion was focused on the recall anyway.
      - shuckles 4y ago
        The entire discussion has no focus and starts with a false claim about violent crime being down between 2020 and 2022. In any case, claims that money influenced outcomes are ill-substantiated since many San Francisco election results go against the best-funded outcomes.
        Apocryphon 4y ago
        Though apparently, neither in the case of the election of Boudin, nor in his recall! https://ballotpedia.org/District_Attorney_election_in_San_Francisco,_California_(2019)#Campaign_finance https://ballotpedia.org/District_Attorney_election_in_San_Fr... https://ballotpedia.org/Chesa_Boudin_recall,_San_Francisco,_California_(2021-2022)#Election_spending https://ballotpedia.org/Chesa_Boudin_recall,_San_Francisco,_...
        shuckles 4y ago
        Yes, even in that case. In a ranked choice election, you cannot simply look at the numbers in isolation. The opponents to Boudin ran something of a slate where they cross-promoted each other. So in a real sense, Boudin won despite being outspent in 2020. (Though there is a compelling case to make that Boudin's victory was mostly a fluke due to Nancy Tung's Cantonese language voters being misled by local Chinese-only newspapers about policy positions.)

Fatnino 4y ago

Shoplifting is not a "violent crime". It was everywhere, out in the open, broad daylight. Ride a bike into a store, ride out with a garbage bag full of stuff, set up a table around the corner and sell what you stole at a discount. Boudin refused to prosecute any of this.

fogzen 4y ago
Boudin's charging rate was not significantly different than other DAs: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/3QGJv/1/ https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/3QGJv/1/ SF has a significantly lower charging rate than other major cities, but there's many factors that go into that (the quality of police work, percentage of defendants that live in the district, etc.).

fogzen 4y ago

Violent crime is more than homicides. Violent crime was down according to SF city police department: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7kTBb/1/ https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7kTBb/1/ You can see more statistics in the discussion here: https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Chesa-Boudin-San-Francisco-crime-statistics-recall-16268178.php https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Chesa-Boudin-San-Fra... Homicides were not outside of historical trends during Boudin's tenure. A few homicides difference across years has nothing to do with the DA. This narrative that radical leftist district attorneys are responsible for crime is media propaganda completely divorced from the factual realities of crime. Comparing charging rates of recent San Francisco district attorneys with other cities shows San Francisco has tended to charge way fewer crimes brought to them. Boudin and previous attorneys have blamed this on poor policing, and that SF is unique in that people in surrounding metros travel into SF to commit burglaries. Even so, that has nothing to do with the political leanings of the DA, since cities with much higher charging rates and lower petty crime have Democrat DAs.