Rant BEGIN: Dean Preston is a maniac in my personal experience having talked with him on the street while he was first campaigning -- before he served his first term. He laughed wildly at something frank and simple that I said, when he tried to talk to me about how he was so cool and how people should vote for him. I basically said no I don't want to talk to you and that I was busy. I remember it being an out of place kind of thing as if he sort of didn't care that I was busy? It was odd. Should I be happy that he laughed at me for being myself? Anyhow, Preston is is not someone who I have any reason to trust. END

San Francisco politics are complicated. There is a lot of appeasing and stuff that's done for show, to try and and curry favor from the various highly ideological and disunited, often impractical population segments. Getting nothing done while complaining about it seems to be an art in my opinion that ... what is it, city council, participates in. Boldly proposing impossible plans or shutting things down.

Just because ex-mayor Breed vetoed something doesn't mean that the moneyed rich are THE PROBLEM. SF during Breed's term had a lot of negative growth as the pandemic, extremely cheap fentanyl plus a very aggressive fentanyl user base, and work from home making ghost towns out of business and mixed business/residential neighborhoods, strangulated city operations, making for an extra stressful operations challenge for the mayor's office in my opinion.

This article is under-researched and / or highly opinionated, in my opinion.

The article could be much better, if it were more factually accurate about "conclusions" and less biased towards any particular political goal. I do like the the article is overtly biased and is not hiding its bias.