hizzoner da mayor?
Sina Moghadam: Announced platform is "fiscally conservative, socially liberal, intellectually independent"; the first two are common code for "libertarian," and he has a quotation from Thomas Jefferson. Small business owner of Iranian ancestry (I don't really care what his ethnicity is, but his adopting Jeffersonian ideas suggests that he really is "intellectually independent").
Hud Collins: Definitely fiscal conservative, with a strong agenda of improving the city's money management; that seems to be the whole of his platform. Lawyer.
Michael Kemmer: Strongest position statement seems to be about opposition to the city spending money on big projects like a new football stadium or convention center expansion; I'm opposed to that kind of projects myself. A student, and I believe the youngest candidate; I don't know if he has any serious administrative experience.
Kevin Faulconer: Puts himself forward as having taken action to deal with the city's pension commitments, which is a point in his favor, as those commitments are going to be a big challenge for many cities and ruin some; seems to be a moderate Republican otherwise. Currently on the City Council.
Tobiah Pettus: Seems to be a Republican of the more pragmatic sort, with a big emphasis on infrastructure (road construction and such); I seem to recall seeing him in past elections, and he always gave me a flaky impression, for reasons I can't recall now. Businessman, involved in construction, which makes his support for infrastructure seem a bit self-serving.
Lincoln Pickard: Another fiscal conservative, and that side of his platform looks okay, but he has some hysterical comments about schools where children can decide each day whether to use the boys' room or the girls' room, which look much too flaky to suit me. Retired contractor.
Nathan Fletcher: Democrat, but makes a big point of his support for Chelsea's Law, a law imposing mandatory life sentences on the first offense for certain crimes against children; given that we already have multiple laws on that subject, this strikes me as pandering to moral panic, which to my mind makes him significantly less appealing than even a normal progressive. Calls himself an "educator/businessman."
Michael Aguirre: Emphasizes community planning as a process, without a lot of concrete positions on actual issues. Former city attorney, which to my mind is a big point against him, as instead of simply advocating imprisoning more people, he's taken an active role in getting people into prison, and thus contributed to the US's shameful position as having a larger share of its population locked up than any other country on Earth.
David Alvarez: Reportedly a progressive, though he says he wants to govern "for everybody"; the big issue for me, though, is that his Web site doesn't even have a link to "issues" and doesn't say a damned thing about his positions on anything. That doesn't impress me with his integrity. The other city councilman in the race.
Harry Dirks: Calls himself a business administrator/builder/realtor, which makes me suspicious, as real estate interests are one of the big sources of interference with competitive markets in local politics. Unlike Alvarez, whose Web site doesn't say what his positions are, Dirks doesn't even seem to have a Web site, which in 2013 is a major case of fecal disassembly in a political candidate.
Bruce Coons: Dropped out, and endorsed Alvarez, so obviously I'm not going to vote for him.
—I expect that in the runoff I'm going to vote for Faulconer and hope for the best. But in the initial election I think I favor Moghadam.