Hacker News Reader

Comment by tablespoon | Hacker News Reader

> 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?

View on HN

Garry Tan and police unions from multiple cities funding a big campaign?

https://www.theinformation.com/articles/garry-tan-vs-chesa-b...

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.

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.

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-ou...

Yes because by that point Boudin had lost his electoral credibility. It's instructive to see who funded his original run for DA.

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.

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.

Though apparently, neither in the case of the election of Boudin, nor in his recall!

https://ballotpedia.org/District_Attorney_election_in_San_Fr...

https://ballotpedia.org/Chesa_Boudin_recall,_San_Francisco,_...

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.)

It is not a false claim. Violent crime is more than homicides. Violent crime was down according to SF city police department: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7kTBb/1/ You can see more statistics in the discussion here: 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.

Police department crime statistics in San Francisco are so unreliable that a single store electing to report all shoplifting incidents tripled the citywide rate: https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/shoplifting-data-Targ.... Many policy changes are being enacted throughout the city such as teachers who were beaten deaf by their students not being allowed to file a police report: https://missionlocal.org/2022/04/total-meltdown-at-everett-m....

Homicides give a useful corrective since they’re harder to under report.

Given this fact and the various confounders (e.g. how do you rob or assault someone during a time of complete shutdown, how does nilling out the substantial daytime population increase do to per capita rates, is an overdose death really not worth reporting in crime statistics), at best we don’t know what actually happened to violent crime rates in the last three years.

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.

Boudin's charging rate was not significantly different than other DAs: 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.).

Violent crime is more than homicides. Violent crime was down according to SF city police department: https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/7kTBb/1/ You can see more statistics in the discussion here: 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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com