Why is the Bay Area so Liberal? (Los Angeles, San Diego: transplants, neighborhoods)

[californio sur]

Been wondering what makes the San Francisco Bay Area the most liberal region in California? Any ideas? Has it always been liberal? I believe that at one time San Francisco had many prominent conservative families [wealthy & educated people]; what happened to them? Did they move away or become liberal? Appreciate any feedback.

[Pretzelogik]

Because if it so far out on the left coast?

[majoun]

Originally Posted by californio sur

Been wondering what makes the San Francisco Bay Area the most liberal region in California? Any ideas? Has it always been liberal? I believe that at one time San Francisco had many prominent conservative families [wealthy & educated people]; what happened to them? Did they move away or become liberal? Appreciate any feedback.

The massive wave of transplants in the last 40 years or so made the entire Bay Area as left as it is now. When Barbara Boxer (a NYC transplant) was elected to the Marin Board of Supervisors in the early '70s (the beginning of her political career), the rest of the Supes were all Republicans. Well into the '70s most of the Bay Area was Republican except for SF. SF was very Republican for most of the first two thirds of the twentieth century. The GOP establishment of San Francisco were moderates, not conservatives, and when the GOP moved right, they drifted into the moderate wing of the Democratic Party. Likewise, the hippie and gay migrations brought in people who made SF further left than it was before.

Also keep in mind that SF's development was more along the lines of the Eastern cities than SoCal's development - port city, plenty of immigrants from the get-go, a strong Irish tradition, traditional white ethnic neighborhoods in the old days, a traditional tolerance, etc. SF did not enforce Prohibition. And likewise, Bay Area Republicans tended to be like Northeast Republicans. Elmer Robinson or George Christopher today, if they were in the GOP, would be smeared as "RINOs" ironically by people who were most likely Dems before Reagan came along.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by californio sur

Been wondering what makes the San Francisco Bay Area the most liberal region in California? Any ideas? Has it always been liberal? I believe that at one time San Francisco had many prominent conservative families [wealthy & educated people]; what happened to them? Did they move away or become liberal? Appreciate any feedback.

It's the water!

[Mvn2nc]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

It's the water!

Ha ha ha now thats funny!

[hsw]

Many highly educated, self-made affluent people anywhere (esp quants like engineers or financiers) are economic libertarians and fairly indifferent about social issues...very similar ethos in Woodside vs Dallas' Preston Hollow or Manhattan's UES or SF's PacificHts

Top 1% of earners in places like CA or NYC pay ~50% of all taxes, but I suspect many/?most of that top 1% never bother voting, let alone respond to political polls...and I suspect many of most active voters pay trivial taxes (and/or work for government, so prefer BigGovernment with lots of >$100K/yr gvt jobs)

If someone in top 1% is bothered by a specific issue, easier to write a check to their favorite lobbyist or community organizer to listen to their viewpoint; one man-one vote is a massive waste of time for those taxpayers with higher opportunity costs

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

It's the water!

Maybe it is the by-product of the "water": wine! The vineyards north of San Francisco produce the finest wine in California. Or another crop depending on regular water: marijuana

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by majoun

The massive wave of transplants in the last 40 years or so made the entire Bay Area as left as it is now. When Barbara Boxer (a NYC transplant) was elected to the Marin Board of Supervisors in the early '70s (the beginning of her political career), the rest of the Supes were all Republicans. Well into the '70s most of the Bay Area was Republican except for SF. SF was very Republican for most of the first two thirds of the twentieth century. The GOP establishment of San Francisco were moderates, not conservatives, and when the GOP moved right, they drifted into the moderate wing of the Democratic Party. Likewise, the hippie and gay migrations brought in people who made SF further left than it was before.

Also keep in mind that SF's development was more along the lines of the Eastern cities than SoCal's development - port city, plenty of immigrants from the get-go, a strong Irish tradition, traditional white ethnic neighborhoods in the old days, a traditional tolerance, etc. SF did not enforce Prohibition. And likewise, Bay Area Republicans tended to be like Northeast Republicans. Elmer Robinson or George Christopher today, if they were in the GOP, would be smeared as "RINOs" ironically by people who were most likely Dems before Reagan came along.

Thanks for your thoughtful response instead of just making jokes like some other posters! I think unions also have an influence on voting but what came first: the unions creating liberal voting or liberals who formed unions?

I been fascinated to discover that California was once a conservative state and some of the most prominent families in San Francisco were Republican. But like you point out. The kind of conservatism in California in those days was also the same kind of conservatism in the Northeast. So I think the Republican party left the people and not necessarily the other way around.

[majoun]

Originally Posted by californio sur

Thanks for your thoughtful response instead of just making jokes like some other posters! I think unions also have an influence on voting but what came first: the unions creating liberal voting or liberals who formed unions?

SF has had a long tradition of labor activism since the 1870s when Denis Kearny, an Irish immigrant who was one of the framers of the California Constitution, formed a Workingman's Party that was tied to Karl Marx's First International. I doubt the leftists here would want to celebrate Kearny, though ; he was a vicious bigot who led anti-Chinese pogroms and race riots.
Ironic that Kearny St., which was named after him, runs through Chinatown....

Not to mention everything that went down in the '30s with Harry Bridges and the ILWU and Gov. Merriam and Mayor Rossi calling out the national guard (it's a wonder that only one person got killed in that).

SF had stronger unions earlier because of its large white ethnic population in the late 19th and early 20th centuries just like the eastern cities, whereas L.A. in the same time period was dominated by WASPs from the Lower Midwest, Upper South, and North Texas and very anti-union. If not for the movie industry coming L.A. would've been Dallas on the Pacific. SF was THE major destination on the west coast for immigrants during the 19th and early 20th centuries while L.A. was quite hostile to immigrants ; even as late as 1950, L.A. had a higher percentage of white Protestants than any US city outside of the former Confederacy (and definitely a higher percentage than New Orleans, San Antonio, El Paso, or the Florida cities, maybe higher than Austin also)

I been fascinated to discover that California was once a conservative state and some of the most prominent families in San Francisco were Republican. But like you point out. The kind of conservatism in California in those days was also the same kind of conservatism in the Northeast. So I think the Republican party left the people and not necessarily the other way around.

I would agree with that, although in rural parts of the state the political landscape was different. And some of those more conservative politicians from rural California and from small cities were Dems as well as Repubs. The Bay Area had all the power, though.

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by majoun

SF has had a long tradition of labor activism since the 1870s when Denis Kearny, an Irish immigrant who was one of the framers of the California Constitution, formed a Workingman's Party that was tied to Karl Marx's First International. I doubt the leftists here would want to celebrate Kearny, though ; he was a vicious bigot who led anti-Chinese pogroms and race riots.
Ironic that Kearny St., which was named after him, runs through Chinatown....

Not to mention everything that went down in the '30s with Harry Bridges and the ILWU and Gov. Merriam and Mayor Rossi calling out the national guard (it's a wonder that only one person got killed in that).

SF had stronger unions earlier because of its large white ethnic population in the late 19th and early 20th centuries just like the eastern cities, whereas L.A. in the same time period was dominated by WASPs from the Lower Midwest, Upper South, and North Texas and very anti-union. If not for the movie industry coming L.A. would've been Dallas on the Pacific. SF was THE major destination on the west coast for immigrants during the 19th and early 20th centuries while L.A. was quite hostile to immigrants ; even as late as 1950, L.A. had a higher percentage of white Protestants than any US city outside of the former Confederacy (and definitely a higher percentage than New Orleans, San Antonio, El Paso, or the Florida cities, maybe higher than Austin also)



I would agree with that, although in rural parts of the state the political landscape was different. And some of those more conservative politicians from rural California and from small cities were Dems as well as Repubs. The Bay Area had all the power, though.

Very impressed with the historic info, majoun. San Francisco was "the City" in California for more than a century [maybe even 2 centuries]. When did the Spanish make San Francisco the largest city? Was San Diego the largest city during the Spanish era? Suppose most of San Francisco's growth occurred during the Gold Rush [when a lot of Europeans immigrated by way of the East Coast]. Los Angeles seems to have become liberal during the last few decades when unions became strong. Strangely, but cities with large Catholic populations also tend to be liberal but I have no idea why.