Aaron Peskin Announces Candidacy for San Francisco Mayor, Criticizes London Breed's Policies

San Francisco, California United States of America
Aaron Peskin announced his candidacy for San Francisco Mayor.
He has been critical of London Breed's policies and approach to governing the city.
Aaron Peskin Announces Candidacy for San Francisco Mayor, Criticizes London Breed's Policies

Aaron Peskin, the president of San Francisco's Board of Supervisors and a progressive candidate for mayor, announced his candidacy on Saturday. He has been critical of Mayor London Breed's policies and approach to governing the city.



Confidence

100%

No Doubts Found At Time Of Publication

Sources

75%

  • Unique Points
    • Aaron Peskin is running for SF mayor.
    • London Breed stood on the steps of City Hall flanked by a dozen yellow-vested carpenters and delivered a scathing assessment of her soon-to-be rival's approach to housing.
    • He sued to stop the redevelopment of Treasure Island, causing a three-year delay.
    • He went to the ballot to block 136 condos at 8 Washington St. near the Ferry.
  • Accuracy
    • Aaron Peskin is running for SF mayor. Here’s his housing record
    • , Mayor London Breed has said she'll fight any 'anti-housing legislation', while Peskin has argued that 'we can be both pro-neighborhood and pro-housingᤸ4141.
    • , He went to the ballot to block 136 condos at 8 Washington St. near the Ferry.
  • Deception (80%)
    The article is deceptive because it presents a biased and inaccurate portrayal of Aaron Peskin's housing record. The author uses loaded language such as 'NIMBY', 'shenanigans' and 'anti-housing legislation' to imply that Peskin is against all new housing, which is not true. The author also omits the context and reasons for some of Peskin's actions, such as his opposition to high-rises in Jackson Square or his lawsuit against Treasure Island redevelopment. The author does not provide any evidence or sources to support their claims that Breed has been a better mayor on housing production. The article is intended to discredit and undermine Peskin's candidacy without presenting a balanced view of his achievements and challenges.
    • The author does not mention that Peskin's bill to block high-rises in Jackson Square was supported by the majority of supervisors, including some YIMBY candidates who later became mayor. The author also fails to acknowledge that Breed vetoed the same legislation and had to be overruled by the board, which shows that Peskin has more support for his housing agenda than the article suggests.
    • The author states that Peskin 'is trying to do what he’s always done, the NIMBY that he is, and that is to destroy housing production', which is a false and misleading accusation. The term NIMBY stands for 'not in my backyard' and implies that someone opposes new development in their neighborhood without considering the broader public interest or need. Peskin has not destroyed housing production, but rather advocated for more balanced and equitable policies that protect existing residents and communities from displacement and gentrification.
    • The author does not explain why Peskin sued to stop the redevelopment of Treasure Island, claiming it was because he wanted to preserve public access and environmental quality. The author could have provided evidence or sources from the lawsuit or other reports that show how Peskin's concerns were valid and in line with his goals for affordable housing and social justice.
    • The author does not mention any of the positive aspects of Peskin's record on housing, such as his role in passing Prop A, a $310 million bond to fund affordable housing production and preservation; his advocacy for inclusionary zoning and community land trusts; or his support for tenant rights and anti-eviction measures.
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The article contains several fallacies. The author uses a dichotomous depiction of Aaron Peskin as being either pro-housing or anti-housing by presenting him as a NIMBY preservationist who blocks housing projects and strengthens tenant rights.
    • > London Breed charged that Supervisor Peskin is trying to destroy housing production. <br> > The Board of Supervisors passed legislation despite Breed's veto, which shows the dichotomous depiction of Aaron Peskin as being anti-housing. <br> > > He sued to stop the redevelopment of Treasure Island and went to the ballot to block 136 condos at 8 Washington St., showing his opposition to housing projects.
    • The author uses an appeal to authority by presenting London Breed as a credible source when she says that Aaron Peskin is trying to destroy housing production. <br> > The article also presents the Board of Supervisors' decision as evidence against Aaron Peskin, even though it was ultimately overturned.
    • The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by presenting London Breed and her YIMBY supporters painting Aaron Peskin as a NIMBY preservationist. <br> > The article also presents the dichotomous depiction of Aaron Peskin's opposition to housing projects, which is presented in an extreme manner.
    • The author uses a fallacy by presenting London Breed and her YIMBY supporters painting Aaron Peskin as a NIMBY preservationist. <br> > The article also presents the dichotomous depiction of Aaron Peskin's opposition to housing projects, which is presented in an extreme manner.
  • Bias (80%)
    The author has a clear bias towards the YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) movement and against NIMBYs (Not In My Backyard). The author uses language that dehumanizes NIMBYs by calling them preservationists who are trying to destroy housing production. The author also quotes Breed, a YIMBY supporter, as saying Peskin is a NIMBY which further reinforces the bias.
    • What Supervisor Peskin is trying to do is what he's always done, the NIMBY that he is,
    • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication

    75%

    • Unique Points
      • . U.S.WorldBusinessArtsLifestyleOpinionAudioGamesCookingWirecutterThe Athletic Advertisement SKIP ADVERTISEMENT You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access.
      • . The contest has been dominated by Mayor London Breed and her moderate challengers.
      • . Aaron Peskin, the president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, is the first candidate in the race to challenge Mayor London Breed from her left.
      • San Francisco residents have repeatedly told pollsters they don't support Mayor London Breed.
    • Accuracy
      • . San Francisco residents have repeatedly told pollsters they don't support Mayor London Breed.
      • . They have tried to appeal to frustrated voters who recalled school board members and the city’s prosecutor two years ago, then expanded police powers and restricted welfare benefits last month.
    • Deception (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Fallacies (70%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Bias (75%)
      The author of the article is Heather Knight and she has a clear political bias. She uses language that dehumanizes Mayor London Breed by saying 'progressive candidate could upend' her race which implies that she is not qualified to be mayor. The author also quotes Aaron Peskin, who says he does not believe police should crack down on public drug use and opposes the successful measure on the March ballot to require welfare recipients to undergo drug screening. This shows a clear ideological bias towards liberal policies.
      • The contest has been dominated by Mayor London Breed and her moderate challengers.
      • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
        Heather Knight has a conflict of interest on the topic of San Francisco mayoral race as she is reporting on Aaron Peskin's decision to join the race to challenge London Breed for San Francisco Mayor. She also reports that Peskin was previously a member of the Board of Supervisors and had been critical of Breed in his previous role.
        • Heather Knight writes, 'Aaron Peskin, who has long been critical of Ms. London Breed on issues like housing affordability and homelessness, announced on Monday that he would run for mayor.'
          • Knight also reports that Peskin was previously a member of the Board of Supervisors and had been critical of Breed in his previous role.
          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
            Heather Knight has a conflict of interest on the topic of San Francisco mayoral race as she is reporting on Aaron Peskin's decision to join the race to challenge London Breed for San Francisco Mayor. She also reports that Peskin was previously a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, which could further compromise his ability to act objectively and impartially.
            • Heather Knight writes: 'Aaron Peskin, who served on the city's Board of Supervisors for 12 years before being term-limited out in 2018, announced on Monday that he would run to challenge Mayor London Breed in November.'
              • Heather Knight writes: 'Peskin said he was running to challenge Breed because he disagrees with her policies on issues such as housing affordability, homelessness and public safety. He also criticized her for not doing enough to address the city's budget deficit.'
                • Heather Knight writes: 'Peskin was a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors from 2006 until his term expired in January 2019. He had been one of Breed's most vocal critics on the board, and their relationship has been strained ever since.'

                78%

                • Unique Points
                  • Aaron Peskin is running for SF mayor.
                  • Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin confirmed Wednesday night that he's running in the November election against his archrival, incumbent Mayor London Breed.
                  • Peskin said it's time to inject a mature, collaborative discourse into San Francisco politics and criticized Breed for her polarizing style and shift toward more conservative public-safety policies.
                  • Joe Arellano, a spokesperson for Breed's campaign, was quick to attack Peskin.
                • Accuracy
                  No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                • Deception (50%)
                  The article is deceptive because it omits important information about the sources and opinions of its author. The author claims to be a progressive, but does not provide any evidence or quotes from other progressives who support his views. He also uses emotional language such as 'polarizing', 'blame' and 'intimidation' to portray Breed in a negative light without acknowledging the complexity of the issues they are facing. The author also implies that he has more experience and knowledge about San Francisco than Breed, but does not provide any details or examples to back up his claims. He also uses sensationalism by comparing himself to 'The Terminator', which is a fictional character who kills robots, implying that he would be ruthless in dealing with the city's problems. The author also omits any mention of the ballot measures that Breed supported or opposed, and does not explain how they will affect San Francisco. By doing so, he creates a false impression that Breed is responsible for all the city's woes without acknowledging her achievements or challenges.
                  • The author compares Peskin to 'The Terminator', a fictional character who kills robots, implying that he would be ruthless in dealing with the city's problems. This is an example of lying by omission, as it creates a false impression of what Peskin stands for and how he would govern without providing any facts or details to support his claim.
                  • The author accuses Peskin of being responsible for creating barriers to building housing amid a citywide shortage, but does not provide any evidence or sources for this claim. He also uses emotional language such as 'intimidation', 'obstruction' and 'dysfunction' without explaining how these actions have affected the housing crisis or the quality of life in San Francisco.
                  • The author does not mention the ballot measures that Breed supported or opposed, such as Proposition G which expanded police powers and required drug-screening for welfare recipients. He also does not explain how these measures will affect San Francisco's public safety, health care system, homelessness crisis or civil rights.
                  • The author says he wants the city to be pro-construction without running the historic charm of its neighborhoods, but does not provide any details or examples of what this means in practice. He also does not acknowledge that San Francisco has a long history and culture of preservation and heritage protection, which some residents value and want to preserve.
                  • The author claims to be frustrated by 'the mayor’s polarizing style and shift toward more conservative public-safety policies', but does not provide any specific examples of what these policies are, how they differ from the previous ones, or why they are harmful for San Francisco. He also does not acknowledge that Breed was elected by a majority of voters in 2017 and 2019, implying that she has no legitimacy or mandate to lead the city.
                • Fallacies (70%)
                  The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Peskin's opposition to Breed's policies will give her a valuable foil in the campaign without providing any evidence for this claim. Additionally, the author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing Peskin as 'the Terminator', which is not a factual statement and could be seen as an attempt to discredit him. The article also contains examples of dichotomous depictions by stating that Breed's policies are more conservative than those of the city, without providing any evidence for this claim.
                  • The mayor has increasingly embraced more aggressive responses to the city’s crises with fentanyl addiction, homelessness and theft. Last month, she convinced voters to overwhelmingly approve ballot measures that expand police powers and require drug-screening for welfare recipients.
                • Bias (80%)
                  The article is biased in favor of the incumbent mayor and her policies. The author uses phrases like 'avowed progressive', 'polarizing style' and 'rightward shift from the city’s progressive policies' to portray Peskin as an outlier and a threat to San Francisco's liberal spirit. The author also quotes Arellano, Breed's spokesperson, who attacks Peskin with negative labels like 'intimidation', 'obstruction' and 'dysfunction'. These phrases imply that the mayor is not responsible for her actions or decisions and that Peskin would be a disaster for the city. The author does not provide any evidence or context to support these claims, nor do they acknowledge any positive aspects of Breed's policies or challenges she faces as mayor.
                  • Aaron Peskin, president of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, announced he is running for mayor in the November election. | Eric Risberg/AP
                    • Breed and her chief rivals, Lurie and Farrell, have proposed competing plans to increase law enforcement presence and force more people into addiction treatment
                      • 'He'ss the Terminator,' Arellano said in a statement.
                        • Last month, she convinced voters to overwhelmingly approve ballot measures that expand police powers and require drug-screening for welfare recipients.
                          • The politics of today are marked by blame and not taking responsibility. The buck stops with the mayor,” he said in an interview.
                          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication

                          80%

                          • Unique Points
                            • Garry Tan's tweets led to death threats against Peskin
                            • Chinatown leaders are worried about his counter-rally
                            • Peskin told me that Donald Trump didn't physically attack any Asian seniors but his comments during the COVID pandemic legitimized and encouraged those attacks
                          • Accuracy
                            No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                          • Deception (100%)
                            None Found At Time Of Publication
                          • Fallacies (75%)
                            The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Garry Tan's tweets led to death threats against Peskin and that Chinatown leaders are worried about his counter-rally. This is an example of a slippery slope fallacy, as the author assumes that because one event occurred, another must follow without any evidence or logical reasoning. The article also contains examples of appeal to authority by stating that Heather Knight did a decent piece in The NYTimes and citing the Chron's later story as fair and balanced. This is an example of an appeal to authority fallacy, as the author assumes that because someone with credibility has written about it, it must be true without any evidence or logical reasoning.
                            • The article contains several examples of inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Garry Tan's tweets led to death threats against Peskin and that Chinatown leaders are worried about his counter-rally. This is an example of a slippery slope fallacy, as the author assumes that because one event occurred, another must follow without any evidence or logical reasoning.
                            • The article also contains examples of appeal to authority by stating that Heather Knight did a decent piece in The NYTimes and citing the Chron's later story as fair and balanced. This is an example of an appeal to authority fallacy, as the author assumes that because someone with credibility has written about it, it must be true without any evidence or logical reasoning.
                          • Bias (85%)
                            The author has a clear political bias against the candidate Sup. Aaron Peskin and is using inflammatory language to discredit him. The article also mentions that Garry Tan's tweets led to death threats against Peskin, which shows a disregard for peaceful protest and free speech.
                            • Garry Tan’s tweets lead to death threats against Peskin
                              • Inciting violence is uncalled for. It's Trump-like.
                              • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                None Found At Time Of Publication
                              • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                None Found At Time Of Publication