Why voters should watch San Francisco’s mayoral debates

Let me let you in on a poorly kept secret. Politicians don’t make statements; paid communications professionals make statements.

That’s why I suggest you tune into the mayoral debate this week and the several others taking place before the November election.

After more than a decade of reporting on local government and politics in cities of all sizes, my assessment of the value of candidate debates has usually amounted to little more than a shrug.

Who cares if Richard Nixon is a sweaty mess ? Aren’t we all? (Hygiene turned out to be the least of his problems.)

I’ve always figured voters are best served by picking candidates based on the issues — say, library funding or police reform — rather than whoever who can throw out the wittiest one-liners during a debate.

But in this race? In San Francisco, in 2024? Tune into the debates.

The format forces even a well-rehearsed candidate to think on the fly, in contrast to the carefully vetted statements that often make their way into news articles (including those written by yours truly).

Mountains of money are already pouring into this election, which allows candidates to present themselves to voters on their own terms. San Franciscans have seen Daniel Lurie’s face basically plastered everywhere, but how many have actually heard him speak?

Without an opportunity to see these candidates live, voters are left to wade through a rhetorical finger-wagging war.

Like last week, when Lurie — in response to incumbent Mayor London Breed’s claim that “we aren’t coming back, we are back” — scolded the mayor in a statement , saying, “San Francisco will never be safe, affordable, and welcoming to all if this is how City Hall insiders define success.”

Or when Breed lashed out at Ahsha Safaí and the Board of Supervisors’ resistance to a new Police Commission appointment, saying that “politics, not public safety, are their top priority.” Of course, Safaí had to put out a statement in response, decrying Breed’s statement as a “verbal attack.”

Policy platforms and personal backgrounds still matter. But the bulk of this year’s field of mayoral candidates falls somewhere around what is described — at least in San Francisco — as the “moderate” segment of the political spectrum. (Another pro tip: don’t get hung up on words such as “moderate” and “progressive” in this town — they’re fairly meaningless.)

There are relatively thin ideological gaps between the candidates. The majority of candidates agree that police staffing is a top priority, for example, and you’ll see all of them beaming as they march in the Pride parade.

Voting in San Francisco is a heavy burden. We are not only expected to pick a favorite candidate, but we’re also asked to rank them, and a debate can help suss out important differences.

Tune into a debate and see what a candidate says when they don’t have a teleprompter or a script. See who not only best articulates The City’s current problems, but can actually lay out a solution for them.

I’ll be watching to see how Supervisor Ahsha Safaí approaches the debate given his disheartening poll numbers . Will Supervisor Aaron Peskin proudly defend his often-criticized record on housing , or will he deflect and instead focus on more recent proposals to subsidize low- and middle-income housing ? Daniel Lurie pitches himself as a City Hall outsider, but is he comfortable on the public stage, at the center of attention?

Of course, there will undoubtedly be a handful of times that Breed is forced to defend her record. Will she throw others under the bus or bear responsibility?

The first true debate of the 2024 election will be hosted by City Arts and Lectures on Wednesday at 6:30 p.m. , with an option to livestream from home. If you don’t have $10 to spare — no judgment here — there will be others before November.