It's a big long shadow to try to out run.

Told you so.

We wrote that the Fresh Prince of San Francisco would quit the Governor’s race by this fall Halloween.

People thought we were sniffing too much L’Oreal hair gel and that we were conspiracy theorists.

But we knew from the start that Gavin Newsom had no statewide political legs.

Plus, our sources were deep and proper. You wouldn’t believe how many of his former friends and supporters were willing to talk to us.

According to the San Francisco Chronicle, Gavin Newsom pulled out because of family.

Where have I heard that one before?

It’s all kind of bittersweet when you think about it.

Today, in celebration, all of us here at I Love You Gavin Newsom would like to dedicate this song to Gavin Newsom, whose decision to abandon his bid for governor has saved us from having to come up with at least seven more months of loving tributes.

I love you Gavin Newsom!

And the media just loves to report on Newsom’s tweets and his Twitter milestones.

Yes, the Newsom for California campaign has added hundreds of thousands of Twitter followers in the past several months.

Gavin Newsom Twitter stats provided by twittercounter.

This astonishing growth isn’t due to the Gavinator’s good looks and popularity, or the organic evolution of a real Internet audience.

Twitter actually gives these followers to Newsom when new Twitter users sign up.

They do it through their controversial Suggested User List (SUL) feature.

This is Gavin Newsom on Twitter's suggested user list.

You may have recently read some news stories and blog posts about Twitter’s SUL.

Through this feature, Twitter is aggregating and building an online audience that the Newsom for California campaign would otherwise have to pay to create, in the same way Newsom’s campaign today buys eyeballs and clicks from Google, Facebook, etc. to ultimately drive traffic to his campaign website.

But since Twitter is giving this non-monetary service to a registered political campaign without its value being disclosed, Gavin Newsom is violating California’s campaign finance law, you know, as he tweets.

California law states that a contribution can be defined as:

§18215(b)(3) Any goods or services received by or behested by a candidate or committee at no charge or at a discount from the fair market value, unless the discount is given in the regular course of business to members of the public.

Does being on Twitter’s SUL constitute a non-monetary contribution? YES.

Twitter is providing this free service to Gavin Newsom, a declared candidate for governor. Newsom uses Twitter to send his Twitter followers links to his campaign website and to campaign news stories promoting his candidacy.

Is this Twitter service discounted and given to members of the public in the regular course of business? NO.

The SUL is not for sale or accessible to the general public. Twitter is a private company so there is no knowing if they’ve been selling the service. Twitter publicly says they don’t charge for the service.

Recent news stories put Twitter’s SUL cash value around $250,000. And when you analyze Twitter’s SUL, it’s not random, and it doesn’t look like any member of the public can ask to be put on the list, or even pay to be on the list.

Essentially, being featured on the Twitter suggested user list is a corporate black box decision and benefit provided to select customers that is not available to the general public though Twitter’s regular course of business.

In the opinion of a campaign treasurer consultant:

Twitter is giving Gavin Newsom privileged access and promotion on its proprietary online network through the company’s suggested user list feature, an Internet media service that is not accessible or for sale to members of the general public. Therefore, the Newsom for California campaign is receiving a non-monetary contribution from Twitter that must be valued, declared and disclosed to come into compliance with California’s government code and Title 2 regulations as enforced by the FPPC.

When a non-monetary contribution like Twitter’s is received, the fair market value of the goods or service must be reported as required by California’s Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).

Has Newsom reported such a contribution from Twitter? NO.

Now all Newsom has to do is have Gary South send Twitter a missive, ask them how much their SUL contribution is worth, and then go file FPPC Form 460, which is required by all official candidates for public office to disclose monetary and non-monetary campaign contributions of value.

If not, this cozy business relationship will continue to violate campaign finance law.

So, what’s the big deal anyway — I mean besides all this stuff being illegal?

Newsom hasn’t raised enough money to stay competitive and he’s lagging in all polls.

But he claims a formidable “online following” as a testament to his campaign strength.

Newsom has been accumulating Twitter followers primarily due to his campaign accepting a non-monetary contribution from Twitter – a contribution with significant value that legally must be reported.

But if Twitter pulled Gavin Newsom off their SUL, he’d be in for a rude surprise.

That’s right.

No more weekly “earned” media stories about Gavin being tech-savvy.

The answer is 42.

DaniWeb — Remember Terry Childs?

He was the network administrator for the city of San Francisco who — claiming he was protecting the city government’s computer system from incompetent coworkers — changed the system’s passwords and then for more than a week refused to give them to anyone, even after being arrested.

Childs eventually did give the passwords to Gavin Newsom, and was charged with four felony counts.

Well, it’s more than a year later, and Childs is still in jail, without yet having been convicted of anything.

Due process is serving Childs well. But what about San Francisco?

Is the city’s IT system safer than it was one year ago?

The city spends $200 million a year on IT, and still has little to show for it.

Based on Gavin Newsom’s latest PR stunt, he’s more interested in the promise of peripheral user applications like Twitter to run his administration than improving the actual technological infrastructure of the government.

And you know, for once I agree with Gavin.

“Technology Nightmare” just isn’t a sexy headline. Unless it’s Halloween in San Francisco.

Whereas “San Francisco showcases free applications” is a super sexy press release headline. Hey, I want to win that prize money!

The truth is this: the Terry Childs incident should never have happened at an enterprise the size of the City & County of San Francisco.

It happened on Gavin’s watch, hasn’t been addressed, and is a perfect illustration of how the mayor with the gelled hair would rather focus on shiny new things, that actually fixing old and broken infrastructure while improving the lives of taxpayers.

No wonder the man-child mayor is so unpopular at home.

The circus tent taxpayers bought Oracle.

San Francisco Chronicle – A scheduling snafu involving the big annual Oracle party and the TV show “Trauma” has wound up costing San Francisco taxpayers $270,000.

The mega mix-up revolves around the party that Oracle tosses for 22,000 select clients.

For years, Oracle has rented out a big chunk of the eastern side of the island for its party, including an old airplane hangar.

That was the plan for this year’s Oct. 14 bash as well.

However, the city rented out the hangar to NBC’s “Trauma,” which, while filming in the city, has provided a number of people with jobs – including the mayor’s actress wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

Oracle – one of the biggest conventions of the year – found itself out in the cold.

Now, to keep everyone happy, the city is putting up a football-field-size tent on Treasure Island for the Oracle party. Cost: about $270,000.

Newsom didn’t try to explain away the mix-up or defend the ensuing costs.

How’s that?

The city is in an ongoing budget crisis and no explanation from the man-child mayor?

Network World is on the ball with a thoughtful analysis of the Newsom administration’s ineptitude, facilities mismanagement and callous response to the scandal.

Now times are tough in the high-tech industry, but Oracle last year made a profit of $5.6 billion on revenue of $23.2 billion. Not bad. They’re willing to spend $7.4 billion to buy Sun. And, of course, Oracle head honcho Larry Ellison is among the most ostentatiously rich people on the planet; Forbes has him pegged at No. 4, worth a sweet $22.5 billion.

Meanwhile, San Francisco’s municipal finances have been anything but rosy given the destitute state of that state.

Under the circumstances, couldn’t the company — or Ellison himself — have picked up the tab for that tent instead of sticking it to the already traumatized taxpayers of San Francisco?

If not, the least the mayor’s office could have done is apologize for the costly screw-up.

Don’t hold your breath.

Time to go back to bartending?

Sources inside San Francisco City Hall and close to the Newsom campaign say it’s just a matter of time before Gavin Newsom quits his bid for the Democratic Party nomination in the 2010 California governor’s race.

Citing poor results in polls both statewide and locally and little fundraising traction, supporters and detractors alike say the Newsom campaign is a ship about to sink.

They point to over-the-summer stories of key long-time aides jumping ship and the fact that Gary South, his paid statewide campaign consultant, is failing to build team chemistry between remaining loyalists, as well as inspiring new people to join the team.

Additionally, sources close to Alex Tourk (the former best friend and campaign manager of Gavin Newsom) cited that renewed and damaging sex scandal allegations were privately presented to the Newsom campaign team.

Tourk allies, upset over Newsom’s attempt to rewrite history in recent interviews with national publications, told the Newsom for California campaign through intermediaries that more details of Newsom’s past would be leaked to national media.

Differences in strategy on how to continually message and spin Newsom’s sordid past was one major reason given as to why Eric Jaye, Gavin’s former long-time political advisor and consultant, left the struggling gubernatorial campaign.

As to the timing of his announcement to quit the governor’s race, sources close to Jaye say that Newsom will wait until the birth of his child and cite that major life event as the excuse for withdrawing from the race.

These anonymous sources say that there will be an “I am quitting the governor’s race so I can spend more time with my family” press release, sometime this fall around Halloween.

At least Gavin has a fall-back job — he can finally be mayor of San Francisco.

More likely, he’ll run for a less competitive statewide office or just go back to being a bartender at Plumpjack.

More flash than fashion sense?

Los Angeles Times – The LA Times just printed a Gavin Newsom profile piece that ain’t no fluff.

Angelinos now know the Newsom that San Francisco knows – an absentee mayor lacking substance who governs by press releases.

“Once he’s said it and it’s printed in the newspapers, it’s done in his mind,” said Jim Ross, a political consultant who ran Newsom’s 2003 campaign for mayor. “Then it’s on to the next big announcement.”

Would-be allies say they rarely hear from the mayor. Department heads complain about a lack of guidance. Newsom perpetually wars with the 11-member Board of Supervisors, raising the question of how he would deal with Sacramento’s querulous 120-member Legislature.

Homelessness remains a problem; the city’s official tally shows that more than 6,500 people lack permanent shelter, a slight rise over the last four years after a big decline. Portions of Market Street, the city’s grand boulevard, reek of urine. Muni, the city’s public transit system, is a constant source of complaint. Bayview-Hunter’s Point, the historically poor, black neighborhood, appears as isolated and desperate as ever. Affordable housing is, for many, an oxymoron.

And some of Newsom’s biggest backers – in civic groups and policy circles, among political activists and campaign donors – have in the last few years become some of the mayor’s sharpest critics.

In a series of interviews, they expressed disappointment and accused Newsom, in words oft-repeated, of focusing more on self-aggrandizement and personal publicity than solving the city’s problems.

Of course the man-child mayor denied all of these criticisms in the Times’ story, because afterall, Gavin Newsom lives on Fantasy Island.

Daily Kos

In fact, as time goes on, he gets even more unpopular as a gubernatorial candidate among likely statewide voters.

As Swing State Project reports:

San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom doesn’t fare as well in head-to-heads — Whitman edges him out by 1, while he beats the other GOPers by 1 — and that’s reflected in his favorables. He’s the only one of the five gubernatorial candidates who’s in negative favorability territory….”

Wow.

In a room with Jerry Brown, Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner, and Tom Campbell, Gavin Newsom is hated the most.

Back in March, a CBS 5 by SurveyUSA showed that Gavin was viewed as “completely unqualified by 27 percent of voters.”

And in November 2008, a Field Poll revealed that Gavin “had the highest unfavorable rating of all the potential candidates — 41 percent.”

What does this say about Gavin’s future?

It means he’s only going to get more unpopular because the trends lines are pretty clear.

The more voters get to know Gavin, the less they like about him.

It’s time to start calling him Mr. Unfavorable.

Voter Beware!

SF Chronicle — This newspaper headline says it all:

Newsom just lost his brain.

Lots of people are now leaving Gavin Newsom’s campaign for governor. It seems there might not be much of a future riding the SS Gavin Newsom.

And while Gavin decided to go South for a new brain, he’s showing his spending habits by burning cash like there’s no tomorrow.

Newsom, who has a full staff working the campaign, has only $1.1 million left in the bank.

Perhaps it would just be cheaper to post a craigslist personal ad — wanted: new brain.

Gavin’s long-time advisor and campaign consultant, Eric Jaye, has left the campaign over “a fundamental difference in how to run a campaign.”

Like many City Hall observers who are used to spin from political consultants, I thought to myself — “Holy shit, did Gavin sleep with Eric Jaye’s wife too?!?”

Gavin slept with his last campaign manager’s wife so I couldn’t help but wonder if Gavin has done it again — you know, creating an uncomfortable situation forcing a top campaign aide to resign.

"Was that an iceberg or loyalty we just hit?"

Eric Jaye’s departure is big news because, quite frankly, he deserves credit for taking an empty suit like Gavin and transforming him into a two-dimensional candidate.

That’s hard to do.

Essentially, Eric Jaye took a lemon and turned it into voter lemonade for low-information voters who don’t have the time or inclination to research Gavin Newsom’s record.

And then we hear that even more of Gavin’s long-time, loyal aides are abandoning ship.

It’s obvious to me that these aides don’t see much of a future by sticking around to watch Gavin implode in his race for Governor.

Seriously, if these aides saw a chance to ride Gavin’s speed boat to the Governor’s mansion, they would have stayed on. But apparently, all they see in Gavin is a broken-down cruiser that will eventually sink.

Wait and see. More “loyal” aides will soon be jumping off the SS Gavin Newsom.

Ahoy matey — abandon ship!

Deleted, not forgotten.

Late yesterday while drinking a burning hot café macchiato, I opened up the San Francisco Chronicle.

On page A11, Phil Bronstein tore Mayor Gavin Newsom a new one in his most excellent Opinon piece entitled, “Where is our next generation of leaders?”

Gavin Newsom is our shining hope? Really? Beyond his own self-generated image of brilliant wonkiness and charm, where’s the list of Gavin’s young contemporaries who might actually fill out those size 14 public service shoes in interesting and effective ways with help from the pros?

I couldn’t wait to get home, get the story link from SFGATE, and post a story right here in this very spot. Because in the very same piece, Bronstein went on to compare Newsom with Twitter co-founder, Biz Stone:

In Twitter, Stone has created a profound new platform that inspires people, unlike Newsom, whose own platform is like cotton candy and who leases space on Twitter to spin it.

But I could not link to this awesome quote. Why?

Because the San Francisco Chronicle deleted the story from their website, SFGATE.

Don’t believe me?  Here is the Google search result:

Now you see it, now you don't.

This cool blog posted part of the story before it was deleted. So I’m not going crazy. It was online and public, and then it vanished.

I guess Gavin Newsom’s PR machine will go any length to bury a story they don’t like — it’s no secret that Newsom’s shills regularly berate Chronicle reporters and editors.

I guess that sinking ship called the San Francisco Chronicle has no integrity left.

Sigh.

The cover-up is always worse than the crime.