Aaron Peskin insists he still has a chance to be San Francisco’s next mayor, even with numerous media outlets and the city elections department’s preliminary results saying otherwise. Unless a miracle happens, and the remaining 157,000 uncounted ballots swing the race back in his favor, Peskin’s defeat could indicate that San Francisco has lost some of its more progressive values.
Boarding a city bus Wednesday morning after election day to thank the Community Tenants Association for their “unwavering support,” the three-time president of San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors and lone progressive in the race told Gazetteer SF that he’s banking on the remaining uncounted ballots. Peskin placed third in the race, according to preliminary results from the city’s elections department, but was confident he could still close a three percentage point gap behind Mayor London Breed.
“I expect this to become a Peskin-Lurie race over the next few days,” he said, referring to Levi Strauss heir Daniel Lurie, who maintains the overall lead. If enough Breed voters marked Peskin as their second choice, he said, “I could still prevail.”
Peskin’s stubborn optimism, however unrealistic, is a big part of his appeal. Termed out as a supervisor, he built his mayoral campaign on preserving a San Francisco for working and middle class families — even as the reality often feels like the city has been eclipsed by the money and influence of Big Tech.
One of his flyers pressed voters for their support “Before the City We Love Fades Away.” He favored expanding rent control and tenant protections against luxury development that eliminates rent-controlled buildings and legacy small businesses. His positions on a higher minimum wage, expanded renter protections, and union solidarity earned him endorsements from the San Francisco Tenants Union and League of Pissed Off Voters.
He appealed to residents feeling priced out, and liberals nostalgic for a city that still cares about its diminishing, less monied classes and cultures. He pitted himself against self-interested billionaires who, he argued, are destroying San Francisco.
To that end, venture capitalist Michael Moritz proved a useful, formidable foil. Moritz openly aimed to crush Peskin under the weight of his largesse thrown behind Mark Farrell (whose campaign ironically fizzled in scandal, and is ranked behind Peskin), and TogetherSF Action, Moritz’s non-profit money funnel. Moritz trumpeted his effort in a New York Times guest essay blaming San Francisco’s woes on Peskin’s “ruinous” grip on City Hall.
The night before the election, Peskin pronounced the San Francisco mayoral race as a referendum on the influence of the likes of Moritz at Bimbo’s 365 Club, the swanky North Beach night club just blocks from his home that his campaign rented for an election watch party.
Despite the grim incoming returns of the national election, which Peskin was checking on his phone, the DJ was blasting Talking Heads, the bar was full, and the Italian food was decent. Peskin ate heartily with his wife, Nancy Shanahan, to one side of him, and his mom, Tsipora Peskin, on the other. He looked and sounded relaxed, confident, and even jovial.
Late in the night, Peskin took the stage to a raucous crowd, many of them union members representing what he called the “house of labor.” As his campaign moved through San Francisco’s neighborhoods, he said, they found a city that still cares, loves, and takes care of each other. “This is a city that refuses to be pushed in the wrong direction by a handful of wealthy billionaires!” he said to cheers.
Peskin said his campaign proved that San Franciscans still believe in its liberal ideals. The city can grow and evolve, he told the crowd, and we “can do it without ruining our neighborhoods, without displacing our small businesses — without turning Ocean Beach into Miami Beach!”
“The night is young, but we are absolutely in contention to win this race,” Peskin said around 10pm. A muted television over the bar out of Peskin’s sightline showed Donald Trump closing in on a victory in the national race for President. “So, hang on, continue to believe,” Peskin added. “And then let us say a prayer for the United States of America.”
Steven Buss Bacio, the director of the moderate political group GrowSF, told Gazetteer in an email that Peskin “would have led San Francisco backwards.” GrowSF, which pushed an “anybody but Peskin” campaign, encouraged voters to rank Lurie, Breed and Farrell in their preferred order. Peskin lost, Buss Bacio said, due to his obstructionism, and opposition to change and development.
Jason McDaniel, a political science professor at San Francisco State University, on Wednesday said Breed might maintain a “very narrow” path to beating Lurie to win reelection. It’s not surprising, he said, that in this election cycle voters backed more moderate candidates who advertised their support for police.
Peskin’s defeat is an “indication that the progressive coalition has been on the defensive on issues like public safety and homelessness,” McDaniel said. The result is a backlash against progressive policies and politicians — a phenomenon that traces back to the recall of District Attorney Chesa Boudin that has not grown but also not abated, he said.
McDaniel said he was also watching the elections of fellow Supervisors Dean Preston and Connie Chan, who endorsed Peskin. If those two also lose, McDaniel said, “that's a clear signal that the progressive positions are not popular with the majority of San Francisco voters.” (As of Wednesday afternoon, Preston and Chan both led in first-choice votes but trail their respective competitors, Bilal Mahmood and Marjan Philhour, with ranked-choice votes taken into account.)
McDaniel said that while it’s unclear what Peskin’s next move might be, he suspects he’ll remain involved in politics but perhaps not as an elected official. Either way, he said, San Francisco’s progressive coalition will “clearly survive” without him.
“The current political environment doesn’t favor progressive candidates or positions, but that will change,” McDaniel said. “I suspect that many progressive leaders will be able to use opposition to a Mayor Lurie to energize their voters.”
Peskin acknowledged in his interview with Gazetteer that he was initially reluctant to run for mayor. He cited his age, 60, and a desire to travel as reasons not to. He was convinced by a list of prominent, mostly retired, California Democrats who urged him to get into the race, including former San Francisco Mayor Art Agnos, former state Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, and former Congressman John Burton.
Willie Brown has been especially encouraging, Peskin said. For months leading up to Election Day, Peskin said, he’s met with the former San Francisco mayor on Friday mornings for coffee at Cafe Greco. (Brown, according to Peskin, said he was selecting Breed as his first choice, and Peskin as his second).
By Wednesday, Peskin had accepted Kamala Harris’s defeat even as he continued to reject his own. With another Trump presidency on the horizon, Peskin acknowledged San Francisco’s next mayor will face many obstacles from Washington.
“This is going to be a city that is undoubtedly going to be very involved in, if not leading, the national resistance to the inevitable onslaught from the Trump administration,” Peskin said. “The votes have been cast. If they bend my way, I’m one hundred percent ready.”
