For this reason, combined with the enormous sums of money you can expect the corrupt unions to pour into the election, he has little chance of winning the election. Still, if voters want to see any sort of improvement in Oakland's governance, they should vote for him.
I strongly urge my readers to take a look at Tuman's blog, where he answers a host of questions about the future of the city. You'll notice that he appears to have a grip on our problems, and he's offering to do a set of things that seem like those a reasonable person would undertake.
Voters should immediately reject Jean Quan and Rebecca Kaplan as candidates. Both candidates are part of the existing liberal power structure within the city. Quan, in particular, has presided over the city's fiscal destruction.
While Kaplan is a relative newcomer, she has failed to take on the public-employee unions to any significant degree. The one positive about Kaplan appears to be that she is favored by the city's lesbian community. I am all for Oakland becoming a gay-friendly city, as the average per-capita income of gays significantly exceeds that of Oakland's current average resident. So, to the extent gays and lesbians displace our existing poor residents, this is a good thing.
Some conservatives might consider voting for Don Perata because of his pro-development stances. The key thing to understand with Perata is that he received the endorsement of the police officers' union.
This union is pure evil, as should be obvious to anyone familiar with Oakland's ongoing flirtation with bankruptcy. So, anyone they endorse should immediately be eliminated as a viable candidate.
This year, Oakland is using ranked-choice voting. I recommend the following choices. I suggest not ranking any more than two candidates, because all other candidates would be a disaster, so it is best not even to offer them the illusion of a mandate:
1. Joe Tuman
2. Rebecca Kaplan