Why does the East Bay Times (Daniel Borenstein) bother endorsing candidates who will never win?
The fight against homelessness takes center stage in Alameda, San Leandro, and the county level this week.
—WHY? WHY? WHY?—Give the East Bay Times credit in this regard, their one-man editorial board of Daniel Borenstein and the anti-union voices in his head, does not care about backing election winners. Last week, Borenstein chose David Kakishiba to replace the late Wilma Chan on the Alameda County Board of Supervisors in District 3.
—There should be a debate about newspaper endorsements. Should an editorial board select who they think will win an election or the pick the best person for job? Here’s another way of looking at it in the East Bay. If a local newspaper like the East Bay Times were truly in touch with the community it supposedly serves, then picking winners would go in tandem with picking the best candidate.
—The East Bay Times has given up covering government in the East Bay for several years. I rarely see any of their reporters at Alameda County Board of Supervisors meetings or at various city halls. Their Alameda and San Leandro reporter died not too long ago and apparently so did coverage of those cities.
—Most in our local politics know Borenstein is a one-trick pony. His expertise is public employee pensions. A topic that is not currently part of our public and political discourse. If you add that Borenstein doesn’t have a beat reporter to inform him, it’s no wonder the newspaper issued the curious selection of Kakishiba, a noted community servant, but someone who hasn’t held elected office since 2009 and that was at the school board level.
—Who knows what Kakishiba told Borenstein? But on the campaign trail, Kakishiba has proven lackluster in his knowledge of county government and routinely offers generalized answers, as opposed to Rebecca Kaplan and Lena Tam, the two candidates in this race that have shown themselves in differing ways to be suitable heirs in District 3.
—When push comes to shove, no progressive should ever bother engaging Borenstein. It’s likely Kaplan, as the most progressive candidate in this race, ditched Borenstein’s soiree. It’s a smart move. Time and time again over the past decade, Borenstein treats progressive candidates with insults only a closeted conservative could muster.
—From last week’s editorial, Borenstein curiously said Kaplan has been overshadowed by new Oakland councilmembers, kowtows to labor and, “If she were to win, Oakland would be better off without her braggadocious political style, but Alameda County officials would have to put up with it.” Two things here: Was Chan a progressive who always stood strong for unions? You bet. Isn’t every member of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors a braggadocious sort? One hundred percent.