By Larry Remer
This is an edited version of an email I wrote to a very close friend who is supporting Nathan Fletcher for Mayor explaining why I’ve chosen to support David Alvarez. I appreciate the opportunity to share my thinking with the broader Progressive community.
I like Nathan Fletcher. In fact, I like him a lot. He’s VERY SMART. (David Alvarez is also VERY SMART.) And he’s very dynamic.
I am also really glad that Nathan has become a Democrat. We should welcome him with open arms. As crazy as the Republican Party has become, it’s amazing that there aren’t more defections.
BUT my problems with Nathan’s mayoral candidacy are the following:
One. I am worried that Nathan simply CAN NOT WIN (against Faulconer or against DeMaio or against any well-funded Republican) and those who are supporting Nathan (and are doing so in good faith) are inadvertently setting up San Diego for Kevin Faulconer.
It’s no accident that the Republicans are running Faulconer. They are a lot savvier and more disciplined than the Democrats. They pulled their top people together. They commissioned a lot of polling. They thrashed it all out and they got behind their STRONGEST candidate. Believe me, they polled Nathan Fletcher versus Carl DeMaio and Nathan Fletcher versus Kevin Faulconer and Nathan Fletcher versus Ron Roberts and even Nathan Fletcher versus Mickey Mouse.
They (the Republicans) are very confident Faulconer can beat Fletcher. That’s because Nathan has what we pundits and spin doctors call “very serious negatives”.
This election is all about TRUST. Bob Filner, after all, betrayed our TRUST.
So, what do you think the voters are going to TRUST after the Republicans spend a gazillion dollars pummeling Nathan for all of the various contradictory positions he’s taken? Remember, this will be a special Mayoral election where turnout will be more conservative than the Presidential general last November that re-elected Obama that elected Bob Filner.
I don’t want to go into the gory details of how somebody like Karl Rove can and will fillet and fry Nathan because I don’t want to give Papa Doug and his ilk any new ideas. But, trust me, that’s what’s coming.
Carl DeMaio and Bob Filner were the most polarizing political figures in San Diego. Yet, DeMaio got 47% of the vote in the high turnout Presidential. Now, DeMaio is gone (Filner too) and I certainly don’t expect the DeMaio voters will now turn to Fletcher?
Enter now a “supposed” moderate named Kevin Faulconer. I say “supposed” because we insiders all know he’s 100% with Carl DeMaio on policy. He’s really Carl DeMaio with a smile. But the voters know him as a 2-term Councilman with a sprinkling of environmental credentials and enough ertatz accomplishments to be “sold” as a moderate who can be “TRUSTED”.
So, that’s my first concern.
Two. We do have another excellent option. David Alvarez is a lifelong Democrat with a proven history. David is a solid progressive. Pro-choice his entire career. Pro-environment when tough votes needed to be taken. Pro-education. Pro- worker. I could go on. Look at the phenomenal job he did this week on the Council championing the Barrio Logan Community Plan and earning his community a measure of justice and self-determination.
David grew up in Barrio Logan, was the first in his family to attend college, and lives in the community with his family. He has a strong moral rudder and he knows which side of the race/class/neighborhood/
Over the weekend, 150 people gathered in David’s backyard to start his campaign and walk precincts. He doesn’t have a multi-million dollar paid walk program like Nathan does. He knows that he’s not well known across the city and that the odds against him are high. But he believes that the Mayor of San Diego should be chosen by the people in the neighborhoods and not by billionaires (Dem or Rep) who use their wealth to manipulate the process.
For a parallel, just look at what just happened in NYC. The “smart” money was behind Quinn. She had the money. She had the Name ID. She had all the “smart people” and all the insiders. But DeBlasio had better politics – and a solid track record to prove it. DeBlasio stood up to police. He stood up to Wall Street. He stood up FOR working people. He stood up to all of the self-appointed power brokers – and now he’s poised to be New York’s next Mayor.
Thinking about San Diego, those who believe that Nathan is “inevitable” because of all the money that seems to be behind him, just remember that money didn’t elect Peter Q. Davis, Ron Roberts or Steve Francis.
This, to me, is what primary elections are for. This is when we should vote with our hearts and with our beliefs . . . when we should be called to answer to our better natures.
Three. As happy as I am that Nathan is now a Democrat, I think he needs to prove himself before we anoint him as our savior and our leader.
In my book, Nathan should run for City Council. There are openings in Districts 2 and 6. We need more Democrats on the Council regardless of who the Mayor turns out to be. Nathan could/should serve a term or two on the Council. He can prove himself and his Democratic credentials by making tough votes, working with neighborhood groups, parsing thorny problems and showing us some of his mettle.
But, instead he runs for Mayor. He’s said that he didn’t plan to run, but suddenly it became open. Well, he still didn’t have to run. Much as I dislike the Republicans, at the end of the day their best candidates sat down and hammered it out. Think about it: Carl DeMaio (of all people!!!!) took one for the team.
Why didn’t Nathan offer do the same? Why didn’t he try to sit down with Toni Atkins and Todd Gloria and David Alvarez et al and say,We need to get behind the strongest candidate. Let’s poll. Let’s assess strengths and weaknesses. Let’s agree that we are all in this together and unite the progressive forces for the betterment of San Diego.
Instead, he got out in front with the argument that HE ALONE was the best candidate to beat DeMaio. No proof. And – most important of all – no accountability. We all know he wants to be Mayor. He says that he is running as a Democrat. If he fails to make it through the primary, I assume he will he endorse and work for David Alvarez. Has anyone asked him that question?
Having said all of that, if Nathan Fletcher does emerge in a runoff as a candidate against Kevin Faulconer, I will support him. I believe him when he says that his politics have evolved. I believe that he’s no longer the Republican back-bencher with the abysmal record. And I believe he will be a better Mayor for the issues I hold dear than Kevin Faulconer, if that’s the choice.
But, in the interim, I am supporting David Alvarez because:
-He’s a proven progressive.
-He’s accountable to the community.
-It’s time to vote my beliefs and not “settle”.
-We need to keep not just Nathan Fletcher and Kevin Faulconer honest, but we also need to keep the system honest.
Larry Remer has been a fixture in San Diego progressive politics for more than 40 years. He worked on the DOOR in the early 70s, went on to found SAN DIEGO NEWSLINE and later became a political consultant who works for progressive Democratic candidates and to pass school bonds including Propositions S and Z for San Diego public schools.
Source
Latest posts by Source (see all)
- And Then They Came for the Vietnamese… - December 13, 2018
- Amazon’s Disturbing Plan to Add Face Surveillance to Your Front Door - December 13, 2018
- 140+ Arrested as Youth-Led Protests Demand Green New Deal on Capitol Hill - December 11, 2018
Of course Fletcher Nathan can’t win the mayoral race. He has first to
overcome about 60 percent of Democrats dedicated to their party who
also happen to the most likely ones to vote in the primary. Those Demo
loyalists view him as an itinerant salesman selling tonics and elixirs from
the back of his own special donkey. He’s never held a city office, and he’s
spent his public life as a Republican conservative.
But if he WERE to beat Democratic city councilman David Alvarez
… through some combination of millions of dollars in ads and payoffs
from the Jacobs family, a drunk driving charge against Alvarez in a
set-up using SDPD, or the discovery by the GOP’s moral guardians
of a mysterious Alvarez mistress, let’s say, just to hypothesize…
Fletcher Nathan would still have to lure a considerable number of
fellow Republican defectors to his side who sympathize with whatever
reasons he had for leaving the Republicans.
Remember, we don’t even know WHY he left the Republicans. Hell,
maybe he didn’t.
Bob-
Lord knows that Larry and I have not agreed on much in the last year. We’ve been known to butt heads from time to time in this publication and the OB Rag. But on this I think I completely agree with Larry: Nathan Fletcher’s switch is genuine, and the result of genuine reflection as to what his values really are. I do believe that he is evolving, and I respect him for it. I truly wish more people (particularly those on the center-right) could be more like him. That does not mean that he’s a “progressive” by any stretch of the imagination, but it does mean that the primary concerns of Democrats at large have now become his concerns.
I think his change of heart is genuine, particularly given the radical rightward swing of today’s GOP.
I wouldn’t try to elect a former Republican conservative to the mayor’s office because I had the thought he’d undergone an epiphany on the way to Qualcomm; I’d want to KNOW what he’s done since his enlightenment before I’d elect him my mayor. Why did he leave behind all those years with Cunningham and those Republican votes in the Assembly? What can we point to as his democratic and labor-friendly views?
He should have run for a council seat.
Let him run for council.
If “political consultant” Remer considers Alvarez a “solid progressive,” that’s enough for me … to vote for someone else.
Alvarez supported the onerous Jacobs plan for Balboa Park, is behind the current convention center expansion plan, has formed an alliance with Lorie Zapf on the council. Even though he be from da hood, he got “north of 52” aspirations. A DINO in the making. Progressive my ass.
Here’s a thought: how ’bout we wait a bit and see who actually qualifies for the race before we allow a “spin doctor” to annoint a “progressive” candidate.
The election is 2 months from today. Not very much time to “wait a bit and see”.
Get a grip. David Alvarez was the man responsible for ultimately ending the TMD “crisis,” getting the hoteliers to the table and finishing off negotiations, which ended favorably for the mayor (and the taxpayers). David Alvarez was the closer behind the deal with the city’s employee unions that led to a 5 year labor agreement. Time and time again, Alvarez has been the go-to guy to close a deal when no one else could.
There is absolutely no question as to what side of the debate Alvarez comes down on; the pro-workers/pro-community side or the big money interests side. Faulconer will bend over for the business interests EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Fletcher? I think it will be a mixed bag with him, but like Larry, I do believe that he is legitimately and honestly evolving in his political views.
David Alvarez is not the charismatic, magnetic force that Fletcher seems to be. But he is smart, he is focused, he is patient, and he is persistent. And being able to work with those on the other side of the aisle should not be viewed as a bad thing. It keeps the lines of communication open, which can only result in good outcomes for the city. It also means the the Republicans are willing to work with him, which is a rarity in partisan politics these days, even though they know he’s ideologically their polar opposite.
Our current situation seems to be due to the utter failure of the local Democratic Party chair Ms. Busby. Was she given the chair as a reward for running against Duke Cunningham? I see nothing of note coming from her office.
Judith,
Ms. Busby just recently became chair of the party. So she’s already the one to blame…..for what? She can’t act alone; a committee will be voting on who the candidate should get their backing. So give her some slack, please.
Oh my God. Andy, another Democrat means another potential client for Remer.
Please don’t say you believe Nathan has had a genuine change of heart. A change of mind, yes. A change of heart, no.
(I would have sworn Larry was already representing Nathan who got the jump on everybody last weekend with the first yard signs!)
I agree 100% with Judith Wesling that Francine Busby is an unfortunate choice to head the County Democratic Party. She shut Mayor Filner out of the Annual Gala Roosevelt Dinner and welcomed Fletcher Nathan with open arms and a standing ovation. That’s not leadership — it’s capitulation.
BTW, thanks for that excellent moniker, Bob Dorn, I hope it was intentional. I intend to use it henceforth if I have to mention him at all, which generally I don’t like
to do.
I wouldn’t go so far as to blame the disaster that’s befallen San Diego Democrats on Francine, but she’s not helping to repair it. Then again, probably nothing can repair the harm that’s been done here for years and years. For that, I thank Donna Frye, Marco Gonzalez and Cory Briggs (who says he’s not a Democrat, so I guess he gets a pass.)
Francine, I wonder where you got the information you state that Francine Busby “shut Mayor Filner out” from the annual dinner; totally not true.
He was listed in the Blue View newsletter before the dinner as would be
guest , and it took 3 mon. to pin him down (and spoke to at least 3 different schedulers) and then he cancelled the last minute before program printed and then agreed at last minute to speak. His remarks were warmly received.
And yes, Nathan Fletcher was received warmly also, as Republicans would have received a Democrat who had converted to their party. At that time no one knew of Filner’s failings.
Nancy —
I am Frances.
Francine is who’s selling the San Diego County Democratic Party down the river, probably following order$ from bundler$.
And just to belabor the point, why don’t you put up a copy here of that Blue View newsletter that allegedly features Bob Filner as an honored dignitary at the Party’s annual Roosevelt Dinner in May? I must have missed it.
Sorry, Fran, too much in a hurry. I’m not computer-savvy enough to give you the direct link to the Blue View, but you can go to http://www.sddemocrats.org and click on the Blue View (under “newsroom”) near bottom right and click on 4/3/13 issue, and you’ll see Bob’s picture and the nice writeup about his addressing the gala. No, not as “honored dignitary” as you’d have liked.
Local Republicans are afraid of Nathan. They funded Bob to get him through the primary because they thought Bob would be easier to beat than Nathan.
When David announced his candidacy for Mayor, many Republicans made nice-sounding comments about how much better David is than Nathan. I assume that is motivated by 1) Deep dislike of Nathan and 2) a notion that David will be easier to beat.
Regardless, a Nathan “win” – in fact, that he’s a viable candidate as a Dem at all – signify increasing Republican weakness in a changing world. They’re enraged that one of their most promising young leaders would choose to no longer subject himself to their internal controls and follow a path that better matches his ethic. They’re not the boss of him, and he exposes their flaws.
I agree with Andy and Larry that David is the more proven progressive, and that ideals, not fear, should inform politics. The more riled up Dems get in the next two months (two months from today!), the better voter turnout we’ll have.
So keep debating it, picking sides, getting your friends riled up and interested, and the next, short-term Mayor will have a (D) behind his name.
. . . and then there’s Bruce Coons: a solid progressive who every community group knows and most favor but who is often left out of the media discussion because he is not a politician. He’s the only one of the candidates who opposed the Balboa Park – Cabrillo Bridge adulteration. Yet he is also capable of negotiating a compromise, as he did in the Petco Park condemnations and redevelopment project. He built SOHO from a small financially shaky organization into a solid well funded non-profit force to be reckoned with. He’s Bob Filner on policy and courage, but without the baggage.
No question in my mind; Bruce Coons is courageous, intelligent, hard-working, all of which is to say he’s not like most politicians. The SD-UT will overlook him, will find reasons not to admit him (as well as another formidable and very qualified Democrat, Mike Aguirre) to their debates, but they are going to be big forces in the coming primary. They’re capable of bringing real Democrats out to the primary and I doubt Fletcher Nathan can inspire them.
The real danger is, real Democratic candidates, like Aguirre, Coons and Alvarez, will tend to split intelligent, labor-friendly and progressive voters between them, letting Fletcher Nathan slip in riding the donkey because he’d managed to get more votes than any other, single, candidate. He’d have won the nomination even though the three others together won a large majority of the vote.
If that turns out to be the case, a Mayor Fletcher Nathan would have his own party barking at him for supporting the SD-UT’s politics, something that the acting mayor, Todd Gloria, does well enough
A commenter on the VOSD site made this point to me: It doesn’t really matter who you vote for in the primary election, as long as it’s NOT Kevin Faulconer. Faulconer is going to make it to the runoff. It’s a foregone conclusion. The key is to make sure he does not earn more than 50% of the vote and win the primary outright. The better candidate will come in second, and then the real race is on. It will simply be a matter of getting the Dems to coalesce behind whoever Faulconer will be facing in the runoff.
As the commenter put it, “It doesn’t matter who you vote for (in the primary), as long as it’s for someone other than Kevin Faulconer.”
Totally agree Bill. Bruce is the only one running who is a true progressive…Anyone who supports or cheerleads the status quo politicians is a mindless fool. Please, David is not the person to lead the city.
Yesterday a representative of the San Diego Democratic Party attending a meeting of the Martin Luther King Democratic Club said that Bruce Coons “paperwork” at the City Clerk’s office was incomplete as of filing deadline Friday 9/20 and therefore Coons is no longer a qualified candidate for Mayor. I have not checked this out myself, but if it is true, that is a loss for the community
Not sure what info that representative has, but the city’s official list of potential candidates as of 9/23/13, 11:40 AM still lists Bruce Coons (5th entry in the list). The disclaimer states that “A ‘potential candidate’ becomes an official candidate after the nomination period closes and the candidate’s sufficient petition has been verified.” Whatever info the rep has, if true, apparently hasn’t made its way through official channels.
As it turns out, that emphatic Democratic Party Central Committee lady was misrepresenting the facts last Saturday.
Bruce Coons IS one of 19 mayoral candidates, ALL of whose citizen signature petitions are being verified by City Clerk staff. That task will be complete by 5 p.m. tomorow, Wednesday, September 25. Thanks to City Clerk’s office Denise Jenkins, in the Elections division, for providing this information.
They may have finished earlier than anticipated. The city’s web site which formerly had a link to “Potential Candidates” now has a link to a document simply titled “Mayoral Candidates” for November 19, 2013. The list has eleven names and it does include Bruce Coons.
As a republican I can tell you all that Nathan Fletcher only cares about being elected to higher political office. He left the Republican Party not because of the party leaving him ideologically, but because Republicans didn’t see him as the savoir he sees himself as and wants everybody else to see him as. That and he got out campaigned, badly.
I hope David Alvarez finishes top two even if I disagree with his ideas. Not as matter of trust in one candidate or another, I think misses the mark here. This should come down to who you can respect. In that regard I hope we all can agree that Nathan is far down the list of mayoral candidates in the race.
Oh, horse poop.
Tens of thousands of people have left the GOP because of its views/actions (or lack thereof) on immigration, marriage, birth control, treating the less privileged with respect and dignity and a host of other issues.
I’m not here to defend Nathan Fletcher. I’m commenting because delusional Republicans need to face up to the reality that a) the civil war is over b) the earth is not flat and c) lots of other solid common sense reasons.
People are leaving the Grand Old Party because it’s become a mean spirited and narrow minded organization.
At an exclusive GOP Ex Committee meeting, Fletcher was asked if he would support Dumanis or DeMaio against Filner, if he didn’t make the runoff. He unequivocally said he would. So, don’t put too much weight into the question if you ask if he’ll endorse Alverez. Whatever he said may change depending on what he feels is most opportunistic of an endorsement.
He’s a driven politician, determined to win higher office for the rest of his life until he’s president, or higher office is no longer an option. His shift to being a Democrat is only because he now believes that’s the most opportunistic path for moving forward. Surely someone of the author’s intelligence can recognize this. We’ll see how many Democrats fall for Fletcher’s spell.
Good article.
Wow! The comment of the day. Welcome back into the world, ExCom Member, it’s good to see a human being emerge from that sea of hatred and exclusion. Here’s to a better world, and city.
“When David announced his candidacy for Mayor, many Republicans made nice-sounding comments about how much better David is than Nathan.”
I was one of them. Alvarez is probably on the other side of policy issues, as I am, 8 out of 10 times BUT, I know exactly what I’m getting with him. A lot of Republicans, though we disagree with Alvarez, admire him from being principled.
” I assume that is motivated by 1) Deep dislike of Nathan and 2) a notion that David will be easier to beat.”
It’s about character. Faulconer and Alvarez have it. At this point, San Diego needs a Mayor with character.
At this point, San Diego needs a Mayor. And, as day follows the night, we will get one that we deserve. You, Brian Brady, know perfectly well it will have nothing to do with “character.”
Correction! I should have proof-read. Francine Busby ran against Brian Bilbray, not Duke Cunningham. It was Nathan Fletcher who was an aide to Duke Cunningham. Totally different. Thanks for letting me clear my conscience.