A Republican Could Win in Liberal SF
Latest Voting Trends Point to Victory Potential
By Richie Greenberg
San Franciscans complain. A lot. Not because it’s our nature, rather, there is so much wrong, so much waste, unaccountability and controversy here in the city we love.
Rampant crime, homelessness and drug addiction point to the clear need to re-align how City Hall spends our tax money on programs and services. Annual spending has reached an insane $16 billion. Yet until now, there’s little to no political will to rein it all in.
The west side of San Francisco is primed for a Republican or conservative independent candidate to win a seat on the Board of Supervisors. Recent elections results coupled with analysts’ data maps overlaying how voters answered key ballot measures by district borders paint a conclusive trend: Should a viable Republican candidate throw their name in the hat for the 2026 and 2028 citywide and district elections, they would have a good chance at winning.
Not only would this be monumental, as San Francisco hasn’t had a conservative of any flavor serve on the Board for nearly 50 years, but such a win would upset the one-party board and allow for a much-needed voice of reason, accountability and obvious dissension to counter the status quo.
With near unanimous voting patterns in supervisors’ chambers on every ordinance and resolution placed before them, the 11-member Board has benefitted from little policy debate and, apart from tweaks to legal language, legislation they pass has clear connection to Democratic Party ideology. And some of it, extremist left-wing. Our City has been reeling from race-based giveaways, from anti-cop stances, DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) ideology and ant-car activists making our lives, livlihoods and way of life unpleasant and extremely expensive.
San Francisco’s west side comprises those districts situated along the oceanfront and vote more conservative these last few election cycles. They voted to recall former rogue DA Chesa Boudin in high numbers. They opposed lowering city voting age to 16. They rejected closure of an all-important Upper Great Highway in droves. Tax increases and bond measures are usually voted down. The west side rejected re-electing the last mayor, London Breed, and rejected a rogue challenger to current DA Brooke Jenkins.
Little is shared by west side voters with those residents of the City’s central, east and northeast corners, who support anti-cop sentiment, support non-accountability candidates and consider themselves Progressive and Socialist. If it were possible to officially split San Francisco in two, creating a new independent city, distinct ideological boundaries would be obvious.
Board of Supervisors members representing western districts 1 and 7 are up for grabs in 2028, both sitting officials terming out of office. Also the west side’s District 4 is represented by embattled supervisor Joel Engardio currently facing recall. The state Assembly representative for the city’s western half, Assembly District 19 Catherine Stefani, faces re-election in 2026.
Donald Trump and the GOP-dominant Congress has set precedent with being sworn into office barely one month ago. America’s voters had enough with the damage to our country inflicted upon us by the Biden/Harris adminstration. Trump’s administration is proceeding at lightning speed making changes and perceived “corrections” to the last four years. With the implementation of DOGE (Dept of Government Efficiency) diving into federal-level wateful spending, the nation’s outlook appears exciting for the near future.
However, locally, San Francisco has no equivalent enthusiasm, even with a new mayor, Daniel Lurie. DOGE uncovering massive handouts to unaccountble NGOs and the fiasco of USAID making current headlines, the budget bloat of San Francisco is indireclty taking a hit. Yet, the City is still not audited. Add to this, San Francisco elected officials’ consistent pursuit of race-based grants and awards, undertones of reparations, DEI in every aspect of city hall operations, a conservative elected official serving in City Hall is much needed.
But it will be a tough fight. Some of the city’s most notorious left-wing individuals live here on the west side, including in The Richmond District. Activists are a determined bunch. Cracks in support for such ideologues are clearly evident now, which is why the time to make a move is now.
Richie Greenberg is a 23-year resident of San Francisco, a political commentator and former candidate for mayor. For more information, go to Richiegreenberg.org. X/Twitter: @greenbergnation .
Categories: Commentary
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
As a liberal Democrat who voted for Harris/Walz, I strongly disagree with Trump and his MAGA followers. Your admiration for DOGE is concerning, and I suspect you voted for Trump. However, I’m open to the idea of a moderate Republican candidate, as I do have some conservative leanings. As a stay-at-home mom, homeowner, and supporter of motorists’ rights, I believe politicians should prioritize making life easier for the people they serve. I’m also a NIMBY and agree with you that the SF Bike Coalition and SFMTA have too much power and are harming San Francisco. While I’m wary of Republican stances on social issues, Any candidate I support must prioritize clean air and water, combat climate change, ensure affordable healthcare for all, reduce income inequality, protect workers’ rights, support affordable housing, and uphold civil liberties such as freedom of speech, religion, and the press, respect the LGBTQ+ community, protect education, support people of color, and uphold women’s reproductive rights, I might consider voting for them.
LikeLike
All the better reason not to move to the drastic step of a recall over a policy disagreement, opening the door for big bucks interests to put in place a supervisor more to their liking.
LikeLike
It’s not a policy disagreement, it’s an issue of honesty vs lying to constituents and throwing them under the bus in favor of downtown developer interests.
LikeLike
and who do you think the downtown developer interests will put up in his place? Or do you think they’ll miss the opportunity to take a bigger hold on our lovely neighborhood?
LikeLike
Why would ousting a Billionaire backed candidate result in Billionaires getting more of what they want? That’s not sense-making.
LikeLike
Look who is backing Engardio – Billionaires and dark money interests.
There is no bigger “big buck” interest than Billionaires. He’s corrupt 100%.
LikeLike
?what on earth are you guys arguing about
LikeLike
Excuse me, but we have not had a liberal mayor since Agnos. And very few liberal Supervisors. But everyone seems to be on board with neoliberalism.
Hiring “nonprofits” to do city work, privatizing parks and persecuting the poor — all of which our Board and mayors do and have done — is a corporate conservative strategy.
“Conservative,” as Greenberg defines it, appears to be wackos on steroids, such as the team we have in control at the national level!
LikeLike
I would argue Trump is obviously not a Conservative at all but a demagogue willing to say anything and claim credit for anything he perceives as an advantage. In the GOP it used to be all about Conservative ideals and credentials – that ship has sailed. The current crop is unable to find the sand to stand up against the hot wind. Actual Conservatives obviously were hoodwinked and now find themselves either going along with essentially fascism or retreating to irrelevance.
“Hiring “nonprofits” to do city work, privatizing parks and persecuting the poor — all of which our Board and mayors do and have done — is a corporate conservative strategy.” – Could not agree more with that. (Newsom began this trend IIRC.)
For his part I find Greenberg to be part of the older version of Conservatism. The problem he faces is trying to convince anyone of that while he maintains a partisan veneer during the current national crisis of pseudo-Conservative autocracy. He would be more successful pretending to be “moderate” like the charlatan DA and Breed’s pre-resigned minions from “GrowSF” “ConnectSF” “SelloutSF” etc. Whatever label they put on the Billionaire 501c4-c3 collusion money, it doesn’t matter beyond how successfully it coerces support from an exasperated voter base. In the end they have the same masters – the moneyed.
LikeLike