Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown (D) has been open about his past romantic relationship with current Democrat presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA).

He’s apparently not a fan, however, as he’s published an article in which he calls for twice-failed Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to run against President Trump in 2020.

Back in February, Brown penned a piece for the San Francisco Chronicle about his relationship with Harris and about his helping her politically.

USA Today reported at the time:

Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown addressed his past relationship with Sen. Kamala Harris in a letter to the San Francisco Chronicle on Saturday and acknowledged giving her appointments that furthered her career.

“Yes, we dated. It was more than 20 years ago,” wrote Brown, who said he had “been peppered with calls from the national media about my ‘relationship’ with Kamala Harris, particularly since it became obvious that she was going to run for president.”

Harris’ office did not immediately respond to USA TODAY’s request for comment on Brown’s letter to the Chronicle.

Brown was married at the time he and Harris dated, but – because he had been “estranged from his wife” Blanche Brown since 1981, according to People magazine –the relationship was not kept secret. A Sacramento Bee reporter told People that Brown “had a succession of girlfriends” and would “go to a party with his wife on one arm and his girlfriend on the other.”

. . . .  “Yes, I may have influenced her career by appointing her to two state commissions when I was Assembly speaker,” Brown wrote Saturday.  Brown was the speaker from 1980 to 1995, prior to his stint as San Francisco mayor.

Brown appointed Harris to the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board and then to the Medical Assistance Commission – positions that paid her more than $400,000 over five years, according to SF Weekly. Brown also gave Harris a BMW.

“And I certainly helped with her first race for district attorney in San Francisco,” he said in his Chronicle letter Saturday.

Fast forward to Saturday, and Brown has decided that Hillary, who is not even in the race, is the best person to take on President Trump next year.

In his latest San Francisco Chronicle piece entitled “Who should run against Trump? How about Hillary Clinton?,” Brown writes:

It’s time for Hillary Clinton to come out of retirement, lace up the gloves and get back in the ring with President Trump for what would be the biggest political rematch ever.

Call me crazy, but from what I’ve seen so far, Clinton is the only candidate short of Barack Obama who has the brains, the battle-tested brawn and the national presence to take out Trump. And Obama can’t run.

Bernie Sanders was fading even before his heart started acting up. Joe Biden has become Trump’s main talking point in the whole Ukraine-China impeachment mess, which hardly helps him. And he wasn’t exactly running away with it before that.

Elizabeth Warren has a following, but it’s not that much broader than Sanders’. If he drops out, she might pick up some of his votes. But there’s the big question of whether she appeals to anyone besides the furthest left element of the Democratic Party.

Having decided none of the current frontrunners have what it takes, Brown skips over the rest of the field and pitches Hillary as “the smartest of the bunch,” tough in that “she can take a punch,” and “loose.”

Think about it. Hillary is still the smartest of the bunch. She’s also better known than any of the candidates, so she doesn’t need a lot of money.

Most of all, she can take a punch. Heck, she can take a 2-by-4 over the head and stay standing.

Clinton beat Trump by nearly 3 million votes nationally in 2016, but of course lost the Electoral College. That’s not bad for one of the worst-run campaigns ever. You’ve got to think she and the party learned something.

She sure seems loose. Clinton has been making the media rounds to promote the book she wrote with her daughter, Chelsea Clinton, “The Book of Gutsy Women.” She’s come off as funny, smart and natural.

Funny, smart, and natural?  One out of three isn’t bad, I guess.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.