Honestly, if you walked through Union Square last October, you couldn't escape it. The air was thick with more than just the usual marine layer; it was the smell of a city on the edge of a nervous breakdown. Every bus stop had a different face plastered on it, and every face promised the exact same thing: a "new" San Francisco. But when the dust finally settled on the San Francisco mayor race 2024, the person standing in the winner’s circle wasn’t the incumbent or a seasoned City Hall veteran. It was Daniel Lurie, a guy who had never held elected office in his life.
It was a vibe shift. Basically, the voters looked at the status quo and decided to burn the playbook.
The numbers are kinda staggering when you dig into them. We’re talking about a race where the top candidates burned through over $100 million in combined spending. Daniel Lurie, the Levi Strauss heir and Tipping Point founder, didn't just win; he dominated the final tally. In the 14th and final round of Ranked-Choice Voting (RCV), Lurie pulled in 182,364 votes (55.02%), leaving incumbent London Breed trailing with 149,113 votes (44.98%).
Why the San Francisco Mayor Race 2024 Was a Referendum on "The Doom Loop"
You’ve probably heard the term "doom loop" a thousand times by now. It’s that nasty cycle where people leave a city, businesses close, and the tax base shrinks, making things even worse. For Mayor London Breed, that narrative became a lead weight around her neck. Despite her attempts to pivot right on crime—doubling drug arrests in 2023 and backing the Supreme Court’s decision to allow clearing homeless encampments—it just wasn't enough to shake the feeling that the city was stuck.
Voters were frustrated. Really frustrated.
💡 You might also like: Why a Man Hits Girl for Bullying Incidents Go Viral and What They Reveal About Our Breaking Point
The 2024 Point-in-Time count showed 8,323 people experiencing homelessness in the city, and while the city helped 7,500 people exit homelessness through various programs, it felt like for every one person housed, three more appeared on the street. It’s a math problem that feels impossible to solve. Lurie capitalized on this by framing himself as the "accountability" candidate. He wasn't tied to the "City Hall bureaucracy" that critics blamed for the mess.
The Ranked-Choice Wildcard
Ranked-Choice Voting is weird. Some people love it, others think it’s a chaotic way to run a democracy. But in this race, it was everything.
In the first round, the field was tight:
- Daniel Lurie: 26.33% (102,720 votes)
- London Breed: 24.38% (95,117 votes)
- Aaron Peskin: 22.86% (89,215 votes)
- Mark Farrell: 18.48% (72,115 votes)
Notice how no one was even close to 50%? That’s where the "rankings" kick in. Mark Farrell, the former interim mayor and the darling of the more conservative "common sense" crowd, got eliminated in Round 12. His voters then had their second choices distributed. A huge chunk of those Farrell voters (about 55%, according to polling from GrowSF) went straight to Lurie. They weren't going to vote for Breed, and they certainly weren't going for the progressive Aaron Peskin.
📖 Related: Why are US flags at half staff today and who actually makes that call?
Basically, Lurie became the "second choice" for everyone who was tired of Breed but didn't want a hard-right or hard-left alternative. He was the safe middle ground.
Breaking Down the Demographics and the Money
One of the biggest surprises was how the map looked. Traditionally, San Francisco is divided into the "progressive" west side and the "moderate" east side (roughly). But Lurie managed to build a coalition that cut through some of those old lines. He did exceptionally well in the Marina and Pacific Heights—no surprise there—but he also snagged a lot of support from the Chinese-American community, a demographic that has become increasingly vocal about public safety and education.
Then there’s the cash. Lurie poured roughly $8 million of his own money into the race. But he wasn't the only one with deep pockets. Outside groups, like TogetherSF Action and GrowSF, spent millions more to shape the narrative. It was easily the most expensive local election in San Francisco history.
Some people call it "buying the mayoralty." Lurie’s supporters call it "investing in change."
👉 See also: Elecciones en Honduras 2025: ¿Quién va ganando realmente según los últimos datos?
The Identity Crisis of the Progressive Wing
Where does this leave the progressives? Aaron Peskin, the Board of Supervisors President, ran as the lone progressive in a sea of moderates. He finished with about 23% of the first-choice votes but was eventually eliminated. His loss, along with the defeat of high-profile progressives like Dean Preston in District 5 (who lost to moderate Bilal Mahmood), suggests that San Francisco’s "liberal" identity is undergoing a massive recalibration.
It’s not that the city became Republican. I mean, Kamala Harris still pulled over 80% of the vote in the city. It’s more that the "Progressive" brand of local governance—which focuses heavily on harm reduction and tenant protections—hit a wall with a public that just wants the streets to be clean and safe.
What Happens Now? Actionable Insights for the Lurie Era
Lurie took office in early 2025, and the honeymoon period is already over. If you’re living in SF or just watching from afar, here is what to look for as the results of the San Francisco mayor race 2024 actually start hitting the pavement:
- The 24-Hour Crisis Center: Lurie promised a centralized hub to handle mental health and drug addiction cases immediately. Watch the budget to see if this actually gets funded or if it’s just another layer of bureaucracy.
- Permit Reform: One of Lurie’s big business-friendly goals was to make it easier to open a shop in SF. Keep an eye on the Planning Department; if the "time to open" doesn't drop by late 2026, he’s going to face the same "do-nothing" accusations Breed did.
- The Police Staffing Gap: The city is still hundreds of officers short. Lurie has to find a way to recruit without alienating the civil rights crowd. It's a tightrope walk.
If you’re a resident, the best way to stay involved isn't just waiting for the next election. Check the San Francisco Department of Elections for upcoming neighborhood supervisor meetings. The mayor has the power, but the Board of Supervisors—which also saw a moderate shift this cycle—is where the real street-level battles happen.
The 2024 election proved that SF isn't a monolith. It’s a city that’s hurting, but it’s also a city that’s willing to take a massive gamble on someone new. Whether that gamble pays off depends on if a Levi’s heir can actually manage the most complicated city government in America.
To stay informed on how these policies are affecting your specific neighborhood, you should sign up for the city's official "DataSF" newsletters or follow local watchdog groups like the San Francisco Public Press. Staying engaged with the actual data on crime and housing starts is the only way to cut through the campaign rhetoric that’s bound to start up again sooner than we think.