Eliana steals the show at Thursday's dueling City Hall rallies

|
(48)

Eliana Lopez once again stole the show as the Ethics Commission Thursday debated the “ethical fate” of her husband Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi inside City Hall while the Stand With Ross forces and their opponents staged back to back rallies on the City Hall steps.

Eliana sat with and supported her husband during the morning at the hearing on the misconduct case and then made an early afternoon dramatic entrance to the Mirkarimi rally. (The commission later Thursday unanimously rejected most of Mayor Ed Lee’s official misconduct charges against the suspended sheriff but voted 4-l to recommend the Board of Supervisors find him guilty of official misconduct for grabbing his wife’s arm on Dec. 31 and pleading guilty to the resulting misdemeanor charge of false imprisonment.  See Steve Jones Guardian blog.)

Eliana was greeted with cheers as the tv cameras and reporters crowded in on her.  

She spoke with ease and authority, greeted many friends, spoke in Spanish to several Spanish language radio and television reporters, and walked easily through the crowd shaking hands and talking with supporters in two languages.

“We don’t want any more hate,” she said. “We want love.” She said the case was
“about democracy” and she said that the community stands behind her husband.

I asked her about her plans.  She said she had finished her movie in Venezuela and was back living with Ross in their home with their young son Theo.   “I have good feelings,” she said.

The two groups worked out an informal modus vivendi.  The Remove Ross group had a permit for using the steps so they went first with their press conference rally with banners saying “We stand with survivors” and “The facts do matter.” Their group was largely from the three organizations leading the charge against Ross, La Casa de las Madres, Domestic Violence Consortium and Futures Without Violence.

The Mirkarimi group initially gathered across Polk Street, waved signs and chanted “Stand With Ross.” The group then got a permit to use the City Hall steps and held its rally after the first rally ended.  Sharon Hewitt, executive director of the Community Leadership project, said that the city owed an “act of apology for the violence” that it had caused to Ross and his family.

The police officer on duty estimated to me that there were 40 or so in the domestic violence group. My count was about 50 or so.  The Stand With Ross group had more people and they were more spirited in their chants and marching.   

Comments

We should be thankful for that.

Posted by Troll II on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 12:14 pm

from her own family. That dramatic, tear filled, videotaped confessional about how her husband beats her just did *not* work out so hot, did it?

Your listed opponents are "La Casa de las Madres, Domestic Violence Consortium and Futures Without Violence". Now that is quite possibly the shittiest position I have ever seen. You are at war with... people trying to stop domestic violence.

Let us all know how that battle works out, Bruce.

Posted by Scram on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 12:47 pm

domestic violence. I don't know anyone with a brain who thinks that men beating women or vice versa is a good thing. However, it is utterly beyond the pale to assert that one arm grab is such an egregious act that the grabee should lose his or her family, career, house, and all resources. As with all things, a sense of proportionality is necessary for both truth and justice to prevail. I predict that the politically driven DV groups that want to castrate any man who doesn't rigidly follow their rules will only have a Pyrhic victory in this one.
Now the same, stale voices urging Ross to just quit are issuing their wails of outrage. Some are men who resent his wife being so pretty and able. Others cheat on their wives all the time, but somehow think they are moral and ethical fellows.
Ross isn't going to quit, either before or after the BOS vote.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 2:24 pm

It's not "their rules" the Sheriff broke; it's the law, and it's clear on exactly what constitutes real abuse.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 2:49 pm

I am completely serious.

I am loving this. I thought we might get 3-4 good months out of this saga but Ross is stretching it well into month 8. If we can get a couple years out of it, amazing.

Rossgate has backed Progressive SF into the most shit stained corner imaginable. They are literally, physically counter-protesting... domestic violence prevention advocates. The Progressives public figurehead is a man who's most widely recognized photo is a mugshot. He is taking down the entire movement with this (Eric Mar is pissing his pants right now), and showing no signs of slowing.

Fight on, Ross!

Posted by Scram on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 2:53 pm

The ethics commish, the majority of members appointed by the accuser,is composed of individuals who have lives outside of their commission duties.Ross Mirkarimi didn't set that schedule. Why would you say he had? They won't even have a transcript from which to write a little summary for the BOS consideration for several weeks. Then they have to re-convene and vote on the language in the summary. Several of them are headed out of the country. Is that Ross Mirkarimi's fault? no.
Mr. Mirkarimi has every right to insist on due process. If the BOS fires him, then the mother of all lawsuits will begin and the City and County of San Francisco will rue the day they allowed ed lee's political hard-on to cost them millions of dollars, needlessly.
Grabbing an arm in a custody argument is grabbing an arm. It isn't beating, hitting, whacking, bloodying, breaking or any other such thing. Turning the car around from a restaurant in the middle of an argument to avoid taking an argument into a public place is just common sense, not false imprisonment. EVen the Ethics commission found No dissuasion of witnesses,no evidence of evil doing in turning over personal arms,no threats to use his power to get custody of his son.
They found that he did what he said he did and the politically-connected victim women had to be given their due. They must be so proud of the injuries they have inflicted on this family, enough to actually make them crack thin-lipped smiles, albeit briefly.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 4:59 pm

Well first, I probably wouldn't have roughed up my wife to the point that she made a tear-filled video showing the bruises. That would've been the first move.

But after that? I probably would have, you know, *fucking resigned*... Stepped down for family reasons. What he clearly should have done from the onset.

Or, maybe I'd take the Ross option, you know? Ruin all credibility, damage my name forever, go broke, make sure my family went broke, drag the shitstorm out for months if not years, ensure my political allies are put in a lose-lose position, become the most despised SF politician in 30 years, set Progressive SF back a solid 15 years and eventually be recalled. Could a done that I guess, lol.

Posted by Scram on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 5:49 pm

no matter how many times you spew it..there is no allegation that this man "roughed up" anyone.

When this is all over, you may come to understand why insisting on the due process to which he is entitled, no matter what, is the smartest path.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 18, 2012 @ 8:02 am

featuring the victim herself. How bad does this have to get for you guys? Honestly, at what point do you just stop?

You continue to act as if we all just need more time. This is American politics, the attention span is extremely short, and the damage has long since been done. Ross is over. The only question remaining is far down he can take progressives along with him.

I don't think "Scram" is simply being inflammatory by saying he'd love this go on another 2-3 years.

Posted by Guest@yahoo.com on Aug. 18, 2012 @ 10:06 am

If the BOS votes against him, then you are right, it will take about 2 years to go up through the appellate court. People will wonder about that big payoff for back pay and damages.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 4:09 pm

Just a few minutes into the fight, Ronda Rousey grabbed Sarah Kaufman's arm in an expert arm bar and Kaufman had to give up in pain on the first round of their championship fight. Kaufman never really got hit by a punch, so I guess that by your standards there was no beating there either. Kaufman should sue the MMA I guess.

If you are now looking forward to a court battle after the city follows due process through Ethics and the BOS, in exactly the fashion that the voters approved in the City Charter...well then you had best file your notion in the Court of Sore Losers.

Posted by Troll on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 4:42 pm
Posted by Guest on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 2:58 pm

Melodramatic? Yes. Political power grab? Perhaps. Someone is lying, that much is for sure and apparently, there is more at stake to the people involved than we are being told. But progressive versus conservative? This has very little to do with the progressive political movement in this city or anywhere else. Same goes for the Conservatives. Just because someone has a political leaning does not mean that every move they make has some bigger meaning that will influence the political movement that they happen to identify with. It's just life unfolding, for better or worse, regardless of who you voted for in last year's election. And even if it were an argument over ideology masquerading as life in the public eye, who is in which role here? Are the conservatives the pro-wife beaters? Or are the liberals the ones that support and distrust the motives of the Mayor? Certainly, a true liberal probably wouldn't be in law enforcement to begin with and a true conservative wouldn't really allow his wife to work anyway; she should be in the kitchen baking pies. Would the child be an undecided voter? A libertarian? Definitely the kid is not an independent, more likely a socialist or even an anarchist. But if you think about it, the little latin child must be an anchor baby! And the dad must have just realized that he was illicitly involved in illegal immigration, to the delight of the paper-son fiendish mayor, a puppet of the Chinese Six Companies and a tool of developers...

Posted by Guest on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 1:02 am

Melodramatic? Yes. Political power grab? Perhaps. Someone is lying, that much is for sure and apparently, there is more at stake to the people involved than we are being told. But progressive versus conservative? This has very little to do with the progressive political movement in this city or anywhere else. Same goes for the Conservatives. Just because someone has a political leaning does not mean that every move they make has some bigger meaning that will influence the political movement that they happen to identify with. It's just life unfolding, for better or worse, regardless of who you voted for in last year's election. And even if it were an argument over ideology masquerading as life in the public eye, who is in which role here? Are the conservatives the pro-wife beaters? Or are the liberals the ones that support and distrust the motives of the Mayor? Certainly, a true liberal probably wouldn't be in law enforcement to begin with and a true conservative wouldn't really allow his wife to work anyway; she should be in the kitchen baking pies. Would the child be an undecided voter? A libertarian? Definitely the kid is not an independent, more likely a socialist or even an anarchist. But if you think about it, the little latin child must be an anchor baby! And the dad must have just realized that he was illicitly involved in illegal immigration, to the delight of the paper-son fiendish mayor, a puppet of the Chinese Six Companies and a tool of developers...

Posted by Guest on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 1:04 am

I wonder how long before Callie Williams is forced to call the cops on that couple.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 2:51 pm

why would you want to force miz williams?

Posted by Guest on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 4:50 pm

clearly Ross is completely innocent of all the charges he has admitted and been convicted of.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 17, 2012 @ 11:38 pm

the da dropped the charges ..including dissuasion..etc..because he couldn't prove them..the plea to a misdemeanor count which specifically includes"no intent to harm" and which is specifically NOT a crime of moral turpitude was the choice the Sheriff made.

He has made no assertion that he didn't grab his wife's arm. She has made no assertion that he didn't grab her arm during a heated argument over her desire to take her child out of the country yet again, after just returning from two months with the child in Venezuela. She says he grabbed her arm, she was very angry and yanked it away.

You want to destroy a family over this. You will not succeed.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 18, 2012 @ 8:07 am

Don't you have some elaborate sexual fantasy about Ross and Eliana to ruminate on?

Posted by Troll II on Aug. 18, 2012 @ 8:48 am

Projecting much, Esther?

Posted by Guest on Aug. 18, 2012 @ 3:47 pm

Can one person who does not think Mirkarimi should be ousted please explain to me at what point domestic violence becomes more important then your politics? I would really like to know. If she had a black eye or a broken hand instead of bruising on her arm, is that the line? Does there need to be blood? If you don't like Eliana what about their son that witnessed it? Is is just collateral damage to a political agenda.

Everything that is happening is a result of his actions. His choices.

She ran to more than one neighbor and told her story and showed the bruises. The neighbors they are vilifying opened their house to hold a fund raiser for him.

There is no difference between those who rally behind Mirkarimi and those who championed Penn State.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 4:18 pm

"Please explain."

So polite for someone who goes on to make a bunch of obnoxious false equivalencies and innuendo, culminating in a broad indictment of Mirkarimi supporters as pedophiles and/or their apologists and enablers. Real surprising.

If I took you seriously, I'd be feeling a bit beaten up myself right now, but really your shallow intellectual take on this matter is of no import.

Many people have explained this in any number of ways. Think: Fire Chief Joanne Hayes-White.

What is it about this case of arm grabbing makes it more important to you than hitting someone over the back of the head with a heavy piece of glass? Is it because a woman was the victim? And why, when Julius Turman was proposed for police commission last summer did you DV talkers not make a bit stink? Was it because his violence was against a man? What is the false distinction *you* make with regard to domestic violence?

Ross Mirkarimi grabbed his wife's arm during an argument, she yanked her arm away and suffered a bruise. That was the sum total of the event which caused her a minor injury.

Now I've shown that you have no credible standard with regard to domestic violence, which strongly suggests that you are the one with a political agenda affecting your take on this.

Mirkarimi is not a bad person. I'll go out on a limb here, and just say it: some of his critics -- who evidently will go so far as to accuse his supporters of being pedophiles or pedophile supporters -- *are* bad people.

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 7:05 pm

in his effort to cover up his own nasty behavior...accused Mirkarimi of being exactly like Jerry Sandusky.
I understand one of his former wives is very interested in the inside scoop on Mr. Bronstein's tactics in custody cases.

good.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 3:00 pm

lillipublicans pontificated:

"Ross Mirkarimi grabbed his wife's arm during an argument, she yanked her arm away and suffered a bruise. That was the sum total of the event which caused her a minor injury."

I'll go way out on a limb here...you also believe in the tooth fairy and are so incredibly naive to the point of troubled simplemindedness. You actually believe that story.

Yes, she yanked her arm AWAY and created a bruise on the INSIDE of her forearm as Mirkarimi was gently guiding her.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 7:46 pm

"I committed an act of violence against my wife".

ChrisCraft and her 99 aliases ignored it too.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 9:26 pm

act on materials.

I'm not sure whether there is any point in debating with some of these Mirkarimi haters -- after all, am I to assay explaining to the likes of Matlock that, no, Ann Coulter and Noam Chomsky cannot be likened to each other or compared in any way? -- but let me at least try something with regard to the bruise.

Nobody needs to try to justify Ross' arm grab for the purposes of proving it did not rise to the level of making him a "wife beater" as the mayor mendaciously claimed, but Eliana testified that she yanked her arm away from his grasp. It is not plausible that Ross encircled her arm with no pressure (again, not attempting to justify it here) and that her jerking it away caused her inner arm to be subjected to compression and the far more damaging shear forces?

Yes. Of course. That must make me "childlike."

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 7:24 am

Torsion - the tendency to twist.

Ross's own words "I committed an act of violence against my wife"

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 8:13 am

A *far* more reliable source is on the SF Gov site.

http://sanfrancisco.granicus.com/TranscriptViewer.php?view_id=142&clip_i...

">> and that is an incident in which you committed a violent act against your wife. >> objection. >> sustained."

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 9:02 am

Thank you again for your clarification and for your source clearly clearly that several of us Trolls are being mendaciously duplicitous by trying to say that Mirkarimi admitted to an act of violence against his wife. We would all be better off if we all just sat back and tried to take in as much of your great wisdom as possible.

I am going to address the other trolls now, you need not take up any more of your valuable time with this post.
---
To everyone else:

Of course Mirkarimi admitted a violent act. It is at 0:25 of this video:

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/06/28/suspended-sf-sheriff-mirkari...

He says 'I grabbed my wife's arm and bruised it. That is an act of violence, yes'.

But on a broader note I don't understand why some of you actually argue with @lilli. He is obviously a troubled individual who is apparently challenged on a number of fronts. It would be best to limit the argument to those people who are equipped to offer something via their participation.

Posted by Troll on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 10:12 am

anti-Mirkarimi liars are willing to repeatedly and falsely put words into the sheriff's mouth (and the mouths of his defenders) and falsely attribute quotes without basis.

Since you are all proven liars, it is a wonder why anyone would bother debating *you.*

Note well that your quote does *not* match that which was promoted previously. (Perhaps you simply think quotation marks are punctuation signals that you are paraphrasing anothers' words?)

Ross' action is not one which his supporters defend, but I for one will not silently permit you damn liars to falsely inflate his mistake to further your political aims.

Troll you still haven't explained your prior claim with regard to a "Louis Renne" serving on the ethics commission.

http://www.sfbg.com/politics/2012/08/16/commission-narrows-mirkarimi-cha...

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 10:52 am

you decide that that proves Ross didn't commit DV.

Hilarious.

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 12:41 pm

I got push-polled today. Now I know how they come up with these wild numbers.

First, they prefaced with a ton of negative information about Ross Mirkarimi, mentioning nothing about the politicization of the case, the mayor's perjury, or even the fact that the alleged victim was dead set against the persecution from start to finish. Just that he pled guilty to charges related to domestic violence and was put on probation.

Only after they primed you with a one-sided shpiel, did they ask the "polling" questions. Questions like:

"Do you think someone on probation for three years is capable of performing their duties as sheriff?"
"Would you be more or less likely to vote for a supervisor who allowed a sheriff on probation to continue as sheriff?"
"Which of the following is most is important in your decision whether or not Sheriff Mirkarimi should be removed from office: that he is on probation, that he pled guilty to charges related to domestic violence, that the ethics commission voted to remove him, that [something else negative that I don't recall], or are you not sure?"

The last one didn't even provide any other option than to pick something nasty to say about Mirkarimi.

Folks, this is the way these polls get done. Someone who wants Ross removed digs into their deep pockets and pays for a push poll. The poll is worthless as a poll -you almost can't help but answer the questions the way they want you to answer. But it's not a poll -it's a narrative-setting device. Because next week you're going to see a headline in the Chronicle - "New poll: 80% of San Franciscans want Sheriff Mirkarimi removed from office."

It doesn't directly transfer to votes of course. But it generates headlines, and it shapes a media narrative, and surrogates major (like elected officials) and minor (like internet trolls) talk up the narrative. This is the way it's done when you want to get people to support something they wouldn't otherwise support. Whether they're trying to build a drumbeat for war in Iran, or remove a popularly-elected sheriff, the playbook is the same. This is what Noam Chomsky means when he talks about "manufacturing consent."

Posted by Greg on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 7:58 pm

The poll shouldn't be asking about Lee, Eliana, Madison or anyone else.

They should be asking whether a convicted criminal on probation who admits being violent to his wife should be running a LE department.

It's really that simple.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 19, 2012 @ 9:29 pm

Oh, pretty please, a citation for that? My understanding is that Ross Mirkarimi owned up to having caused an injury to his wife; not something to be proud of, naturally, but hardly as inflammatory as your duplicitous take on it.

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 9:30 am

"committed an act of violence against my wife".

Read it and weep, asswipe.

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 12:39 pm

On occasion -- and especially at times like this -- I recall with amusement Chomsky's tidbit about his personal radio listening habits when on the road.

NPR? No, of course not.

Chomsky listens to sports talk radio, because he loves to hear the confident voices of Americans expounding at length on topics for which they possess great expertise and hold firm opinions.

Anyhow, as for the polls, not only was the first poll -- i.e.: the *only* poll -- a push poll, but also it discarded the responses of anyone who answered in the negative to a question whether they were "following" the news stories regarding Ross Mirkarimi.

I can well imagine myself answering in the negative to that question, because I was beginning to reall resent the skewed reporting emanating from the San Francisco Chronicle just about that time. I'd have said "no" meaning that I didn't agree with the stories; not to mean that I hadn't been paying attention to them.

It shouldn't be surprising that this latest poll's promoters would demonstrate an even more perilously low standard of decency now that they must contend with the image of Eliana and Ross holding hands.

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 12:48 pm

desparate to discredit the poll, even thought the polls are neutrally worded, professionally managed, and yield remarkably consistent results.

It would be fascinating to see you do a 180 if one of these polls showed 80% support for Ross.

But then of course no poll could be that skewed and biased!

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 1:21 pm

"Ross and Eliana holding hands, living together as a family with their young son"

I can just imagine your cringe. You cover your depraved and sadistic needs and give yourself cold comfort by re-telling your bold lies regarding poll results.

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 3:15 pm

Of course she wants him to get his job back. She wants his money. If that means a few "cute" phtotshoots with her pretending, that's all in a day's work for a soap "star".

How soon you forget how she couldn't wait to flip the popstand though, rather than stand by his side.

And of course the chances are she'll divorce him if and when he ever gets paid again.

No doubt the poll will show yet another 70% to 80% majority for Ross going. And you'll whine and bitch some more.

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 9:56 pm

Melodramatic? Yes. Political power grab? Perhaps. Someone is lying, that much is for sure and apparently, there is more at stake to the people involved than we are being told. But progressive versus conservative? This has very little to do with the progressive political movement in this city or anywhere else. Same goes for the Conservatives. Just because someone has a political leaning does not mean that every move they make has some bigger meaning that will influence the political movement that they happen to identify with. It's just life unfolding, for better or worse, regardless of who you voted for in last year's election.

And even if it were an argument over ideology masquerading as life in the public eye, who is in which role here? Are the conservatives the pro-wife beaters? Or are the liberals the ones that support and distrust the motives of the Mayor? Certainly, a true liberal probably wouldn't be in law enforcement to begin with and a true conservative wouldn't really allow his wife to work anyway; she should be in the kitchen baking pies. Would the child be an undecided voter? A libertarian? Definitely the kid is not an independent, more likely a socialist or even an anarchist. But if you think about it, the little latin child must be an anchor baby! And the dad must have just realized that he was illicitly involved in illegal immigration, to the delight of the paper-son fiendish mayor, a puppet of the Chinese Six Companies and a tool of developers...

Posted by Guest on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 1:07 am

The public-opinion manipulation is done through abusive use of English language such as calling Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi a "wife beater."

When "proofs" of such a claim are shown to be illusory, then the story changes to "Mirkarimi admits to being violent."

It's just another permutation of the same lie.

We say one thing, but that one thing can be taken in two different ways.

Taken one way, a particular claim may seem to be justifiable -- albeit perhaps barely. The difficulty lies in the way that a phrase can also signify something completely different; inappropriate as a description of the facts at hand.

So when the claim is now made that "Mirkarimi admits to being violent," the plan is to defend it by recounting a momentary arm grab, but the true intention is to go on promoting the discredited notion that Ross Mirkarimi is a "wife beater."

That's because "being" is an active verb and can be taken to refer to an ongoing state.

Along with some push polls, they can drive the opinions of those who are undecided on this question.

It is not surprising for those who are against Progressive politics in San Francisco to be pouring on so much coal right now.

No doubt the split between those who think this *has* been a "dog and pony show" and those who support the mayor are much closer than the mayor's forces would like.

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 2:43 pm

ongoing anger issue with his wife. Your attempt to dismiss that as one-off is disingenuous. And in fact Eliana is on video, pointing to her bruise, saying "it's happened before". While Ross is on video saying "I committed an act of violence against my wife".

If even Ross isn't trying "Eliana bruised herself by pulling away" then why are you? And who would need to pull away unless they were being imprisoned against their will, which Ross pled guilty to?

The poll is fair and you know it. You are so scared of the poll that you spend 24/7 trying to discredit it. Yet 3 out of 4 SF'ers know what they think on this, and don't believe that a violent criminal on probation should be sheriff..

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 10:01 pm

Ross' ass for like 8 months straight now. And you know what makes that even more odd? Ed Lee is hardly a smooth and cunning politician. The guy is awkward to say the least .

And still, Ross Mirkarimi has been getting his ass whooped by this guy left and right. Think about that - a glorified city manager has broken this dude down entirely. Which really just goes to show how spectacularly Ross screwed up. Seriously, if you could run through a series of decisions, Ross somehow chose the wrong move every single time for *eight fucking months*.

Lilli, for your sake, you need to just let this one go. It's just a total loser. Like, iI'm trying to see your best case scenario, and even that looks grim. If Ross isn't recalled, he's essentially a Sheriff with no power and no political capital and respect until he loses reelection. Not sure why you're so invested in this. Devote your energy to origami or something.

Posted by Guest on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 10:25 pm

They both just dig themselves deeper and deeper into a hole.

Perhaps that's why Lilli empathizes with Ross - they both share the same crushing structural flaws.

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 20, 2012 @ 11:14 pm

JUSTICE IS A PRECIOUS ART. WE AS A CULTURE ARE SO DIVERSE, WHAT IS RIGHT CAN BE WRONG AND WHAT IS WRONG CAN BE RIGHT AS TRUTH IS KNOWN IN THE MOMENT. IF OUR GOVERNMENT IN DC IS A EXAMPLE WHAT IS TO BECOME OF US? CALIFORNIA TREATS IT'S PRISONERS WITH LITTLE FOOD THAT IS HARDLY EDIBLE, OVER-CROWDING THAT IS INHUMANE, LAWYERS THAT ARE NOT AFFORDABLE, VIOLENCE IN PRISON THAT IS INEXCUSABLE AND KEEPS INNOCENT PEOPLE THERE BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS SO CLOGGED. ROSS MIRKARIMI WILL CERTAINLY BE SENSITIVE TO HAVING "LIFE TURN ON A DIME" IN THIS JUSTICE SYSTEM THAT DEPENDS ON MONEY AND INFLUENCE. SAN FRANCISCO'S RENTS ARE OUT OF SIGHT, PAY IS SO UNJUST FOR MOST IN THIS CITY....SO MANY PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD DENTAL CARE EVEN WITH THE "DISCOUNTS AT THE DENTAL SCHOOLS , NOT TO MENTION MEDICAL CARE. WHEN DID GREED OVERCOME OUR SYSTEM? WHEN DID WE BECOME SO CONCERNED ABOUT PUNISHMENT THAT JUSTICE FLEW OUT THE WINDOW? COULD WE START HELPING EACH OTHER INSTEAD OF DAMNING....HOW CAN WE MAKE THE CHANGES THAT WILL HELP US?

Posted by Guest ANONYMOUS 2E on Aug. 21, 2012 @ 8:25 am

Here we go... here come the headlines from the corporate press. That didn't take long, did it?

I expected 80% given the questions they asked and how they asked them. The bias in this case wasn't in the choice of pollster. Pollsters are hired guns. They work for anyone, and they ask the questions their clients want asked.

The trolls can spin away, but the fact is that they broke two cardinal rules of polling.
1. You ask the main question FIRST; If you're going to give any talking points, you do that AFTER
2. If you're going to test out talking points, you test out both pro- and against your side

They did everything backwards.
FIRST, they primed you with a ton of anti-Mirkarimi talking points. They presented NO arguments from the other side. They asked certain questions in a way that ONLY allowed you to answer in a way that casts Mirkarimi in a bad light.

And then, ONLY at the end, did they ask the main questions. I'm surprised they only mustered 60% under those conditions. Ross should survive this.

And note to Eric Mar: the Richmond apparently had one of the tightest margins, even under these conditions. That means the real sentiment in the Richmond is probably strongly against a recall.

Also, just a couple side points.
1. They polled on the weekend, which is known to be a terrible time to poll from the perspective of true scietific polling. Mostly older, more conservative people are home at that time, and you're going to get skewed results.
2. They did not "release" the poll. They released selected numbers that they cherry-picked. When PPP does polling for Daily Kos, DK releases the whole poll and lets you examine the internals -the questions asked, the order, the demographics, etc. I can't find that information on PPP's website. This was a private push-poll, and the wealthy funders released what they wanted to release.

Downtown will use this for maximum spin effect, but these are actually pretty good numbers for Ross, considering.

Posted by Greg on Aug. 22, 2012 @ 9:14 am

page? You protesteth way too freaking much, so obviously you see the writing on the wall here.

Your guy is toast.

Posted by Anonymous on Aug. 22, 2012 @ 9:23 am

probably simply hang up after hearing the sort of robocall invective against him you described. The "poll" results are informative, it is true, but not in the intended way.

The numbers are *excellent* for Ross, considering.

Posted by lillipublicans on Aug. 22, 2012 @ 9:30 am