By Paul Krueger
In their recent, pay-wall protected analysis of City Council District 4 candidate Martha Abraham’s campaign, Voice of San Diego editors opined that “conservatives” constitute a significant base of Abraham’s support.
I responded by email to VOSD editor Scott Lewis and assistant editor Will Huntsberry, and acknowledged that some “conservatives” do in fact support Abraham’s campaign.
But that one-word description overstates their influence, ignores important political differences among those supporters, and understates the non-partisan nature of the support for Abraham’s challenge to incumbent Henry Foster.
It’s true that Abraham’s supporters include some political activists who skew to the political “right.” Some of them are outspoken — even vitriolic — critics of some Democratic officeholders, including Todd Gloria and Gavin Newsom. And, yes, some also support Republican candidates.
They also helped organize “San Diego United Communities,” and have prominent — if not outsized-roles — in that group’s actions.
(For the record, while I share their posts and respect their opposition to the Mayor’s hyper-development policies, I’m not a member of San Diego United Communities. That group was formed by activists who were disillusioned with the apolitical, non-partisan and non-confrontative stance taken by the San Diego Community Coalition, which Kate Callen, Frank Gormlie, and I organized.)
I support Martha’s campaign. I’ve known her since she made her first public comments during council meetings opposing the controversial “Footnote 7” policy that enabled developers to greatly increase density in Encanto and adjoining neighborhoods. I recognized her leadership skills, her independence, her willingness to challenge the Building Industry Association/ Chamber of Commerce/ YIMBY Dems narrative on land-use and housing. I admired her independence, her speaking ability, and her upbeat personality. I encouraged her to challenge Henry Foster and elevate the political conversation in District 4.
I’ve attended Martha’s events, contributed to her campaign, and am walking a precinct for her.
From my vantage point, these so-called “conservatives” have an extremely limited role in Martha’s campaign. I think they’re motivated primarily by their intense opposition to the mayor and council majority’s support for high-density, mega-development projects on small parcels in neighborhoods built for single-family homes. They’re also fed up with the mismanagement and financial chaos that define the current administration. And they’re expressing that understandable anger with an anti-incumbent rage that targets Henry Foster and Kent Lee in District 6. (And yes, most if not all of these “conservatives” support Richard Bailey in District 2.)
But I think Foster’s campaign knowingly overstates any possible influence these “conservatives” have on Martha to create the false impression that this small group of mostly Republican, mostly white, mostly non-District 4 residents are carpetbaggers intent on imposing their political agenda on District 4 residents.
It’s a false and very cynical narrative, but I understand that it’s also how politics is done.
The Voice does get one thing right in its description of another group of Martha’s supporters. These are the long-time District 4 residents “…(who) believe the area has never gotten its fair and equitable share of resources.”
The Voice also correctly notes that “Many of those people are, in theory at least, more on the left of the political spectrum.”
But this is a non-partisan race. And this sizable group of Martha’s D-4 supporters shares with the “conservative” outsiders an intense anger about city hall’s willful disregard for neighborhood opposition to high-density apartment construction that ignores community concern and serves the financial interests of developers and investors who have no connection with — and no consideration for — the quality of life in District 4.
On a personal note, I’m admittedly conflicted about opposing Henry Foster’s re-election.
My colleagues and I across the city who have pushed for moderate, smart, sustainable development are forever indebted to Henry for his leadership role in securing council approval of limits on multi-unit ADU projects.
I also applaud Henry’s strong criticism of the Mayor’s mismanagement of city finances and operations, and his insistence that the mayor and city attorney do a better job of limiting taxpayer liability for personal injury and other lawsuits tied to our failing infrastructure.
Henry also spoke out forcefully for reforms and better training for police officers, following the officer-involved shooting death of 16-year-old Konoa Wilson.
But my admiration for his stance on those and other issues can’t overcome my feeling that we need radical change at city hall. We need new voices, not encumbered by the legacy of mismanagement and the failure of council members to stand-up early and demand the significant changes we need to get this city back on track with its finances and operations.
Most importantly, we must begin the very difficult task of restoring voters’ trust in city government. And I think electing new representatives in District 4 and 6 is a crucial step in this process.
Your campaign should have been we need more Henry Foster’s! Clearly your rational should have pivoted instead of pushing someone on us who brings absolutely nothing to the table to help our district.
Honestly I respect what you’ve said about Councilmember Foster and you of all people should understand why we’re fighting so hard to get him re-elected.
I agree with all of Paul’s points. It is time for change and Martha is the smart, ethical and the public servant for the people that San Diego desperately needs and deserves.
I will acknowledge that often the dynamics of political coalitions are hard to define in brief paragraphs. And we could be more careful to capture nuances. But it’s interesting how noting her support among conservatives is seen as such an attack.
You write that she stood up to the Chamber, but she just touted the endorsement of the Chamber. I don’t think it’s bad to be supported by conservatives. It’s certainly not the insult you’re acting like it is.
Scott,
I don’t think the objection is to being identified as conservative. Rather, political labels can oversimplify what brings people together on local issues. Residents across the political spectrum can share legitimate concerns about housing policies, infrastructure, fiscal responsibility and meaningful public participation. These are not inherently conservative or progressive issues. I appreciate Paul’s effort to bring greater nuance to that distinction. Ultimately, I hope the conversation focuses more on the substance of people’s concerns than on the political affiliations of those raising them.
I don’t know about you, Scott, but my avatar pic is way old; I have much more gray hair and not as full of a beard now.
Yeah I’m definitely grayer now. If I start hanging out here more I’ll figure out how to update it.
Thx for acknowledging my email, Scott, and for contributing to the conversation. To clarify, I didn’t interpret VOSD’s labeling Martha’s supporters as an “attack,” I just thought the three or four segments of her support that you highlighted gave a very incomplete picture of her base of support, and omitted what I think is the main motivation for most of her supporters, which is the serious lack of trust in local government, which is fueling an anti-incumbent surge.
And after I wrote my response, I realized the irony of including the Chamber in the trinity of groups that Martha would stand up to if elected. (But I’m still unsure if the Chamber has formally endorsed her. AI says no, I can’t find an endorsement on the Chamber’s webpage or a Google search) But assuming the Chamber has endorsed her (which is interesting, because I can’t think of anything Henry Foster has done to trigger their opposition to his candidacy, and he is a known quantity), I’d still say that my sense of Martha is that she would not be beholden to supporting the Chamber’s positions, and most importantly, would continue to strongly oppose the construction high-density apartment complexes in D4 neighborhoods that the Chamber has uniformly supported.
“Ai says no …”
https://www.instagram.com/p/Dduip_syvIy/?stkn=NGd1Y2ZoZTYweWtt
I share Scott’s comment as to why a conservative is a bad word. Why do we even need to use such labels?
I also thought it was interesting that you only stipulated a change in Districts 4 & 6. Is change not needed in D2 that has an open seat? Or is it that the change candidate is who you would call a conservative or ‘other than Democrat.’
I hope we can put labels away and just vote for the person on Nov 3rd.
I’ve been conflicted about Henry Foster’s re-election, too, for all the points this author has cited but his role in the Footnote 7 debacle was a bridge too far. I’m definitely for Martha at this point.
That’s exactly, what I think too. I find it interesting that the Fosterites are so adamant about his “accomplishments” but leave out his involvement with footnote 7. No questions were asked about it at the last forum either. The deception cannot be countenanced. He claims he didn’t know about it, but emails show him clearly describing what it is. He’s flip flopped several times on the issue.
If I lived in D4, I would vote for Martha. Henry Foster hasn’t speak up, until election time. He was going along to get along, and in my opinion did not support his D4 constituents for his duration UNTIL, just a few weeks ago. Then he took a stand against the mayor. Why didn’t he support his D4 people from the get go? Makes me think he’s doing it now because he wants to keep his job, and I question if he’ll go right back to do nothing, say nothing for the remainder of Toddlers term, until he terms out in 2028. I think he’s playing the role of a wolf in sheep’s clothing…. for now.
Everyone who is voting should read this:
https://obrag.org/2026/07/footnote-7-the-truth-the-corruption-the-timeline/
So anyone that supports San Diego United Communities is white and conservative – HUH I wasn’t aware of that Paul.
So i guess that means that anyone who supports Frank, Kate & your San Diego Community Coalition is a person of color and liberal?
That is just nonsense.
ALL the grassroots groups out here are working to make San Diego a better place for its citizens and that is what the message should be.
Paul I think it would be best if we work together not pit our groups against each other don’t you?
I firmly support both groups and ALL the grassroots group out there trying to make this a better City for all of us.
And I support all you do too Paul
I greatly respect and admire Paul and Pam. Their tireless efforts to make San Diego a better place to live are truly remarkable.
My concern is that our politics have become so polarized that Democrats who take more moderate or independent positions can sometimes be characterized as Republicans or conservatives, even when those labels do not accurately reflect their overall views. Similar labeling can also affect other moderates negatively, as it did with Independent candidate Larry Turner during the last mayoral race.
That kind of labeling makes it harder to have thoughtful disagreements within a party or community without turning them into questions of political identity. I believe we should focus more on the substance of people’s positions and less on the labels we attach to them. That applies to political organizations, candidates, journalists, and the rest of us.
I value both Paul and Pam, and I know they share the same concerns about the land-use policies currently being promoted by the city and our Democratic leaders. Regardless of Martha’s political affiliations, she shares those concerns as well. Thank you, Martha, for having the courage to run for office. We need you on the City Council.
Thx for your insightful comment, Laura.
Pam, I in no way intended to infer (and didn’t write specifically) that “anyone that supports San Diego United Communities (SDUC) is white and conservative.”
What I wrote was: “But I think Foster’s campaign knowingly overstates any possible influence these “conservatives” have on Martha to create the false impression that this small group of mostly Republican, mostly white, mostly non-District 4 residents are carpetbaggers intent on imposing their political agenda on District 4 residents.”
My use of the term “conservatives” and my description of them was not meant to single out SDUC. I was referring to a generic group of Martha’s supporters; some of whom my belong to SDUC, and others who don’t.
My main point in that sentence was that Foster’s campaign is “overstating any possible influence” those “conservatives have on Martha’s” campaign, and falsely characterizing them as “carpetbaggers.”
I abhor racial and other stereotypes, but the fact is, race is an issue in the D4 campaign, as much as we wish it weren’t.
More to the point, I offer my sincere apologies to anyone who was offended by my phrasing of that sentence.
Thank you Paul for rephrasing the article.
As I said I think it is best when we ALL work together not against each other.
See ya at the next “thing” :))
And thank you Frank for allowing my comment.
Race is an issue in the D4 election because Mr. Foster’s campaign has made it one. Absent a record of accomplishments to promote his reelection, the campaign descended into the she “not like us” strategy which is unfortunate, but on some level, predictable.
I voted for Mr Foster in the previous election, but honestly, I don’t care who promotes a good idea that protects and enhances my community, however, I do care about mendacity and betrayal, Footnote 7 falls squarely into that category. And now as his campaign is faltering and being held accountable for previous his actions, they have circled the wagons and resorted to casting Ms Abraham as “not like us”. It is unfortunate, but predictable.
Well said Kymberlee! This strategy of demonizing the other for not being “like us” has been used in San Diego politics for a long time. It needs to be called out for what it actually is…a distraction from the real issues of betrayal and poor governance.
Hi Laura, could you send me your street address via my gmail: obragblog@gmail.com
frank