San Francisco, California — Political commentator Bill O’Reilly credited the city’s new Democratic Mayor Daniel Lurie with dialing back “progressive nonsense” as the metropolis shows early signs of improvement in tackling entrenched problems of crime and homelessness, though significant challenges remain.
During a recent discussion, O’Reilly noted that the city had temporarily enhanced its appearance for Super Bowl weekend, moving homeless individuals into overnight shelters out of public view, deploying visible beat cops on nearly every corner—an uncommon sight—and presenting a cleaner image for tourists and television cameras. “It’s wonderful,” he said, but stressed that residents deserve such conditions every day, not just for special events.
Lurie, who took office in January 2025, has begun shifting away from certain prior policies. By some metrics, conditions are improving, according to O’Reilly. He attributed part of the momentum to grassroots activists like Tom and Gina, who formed their group in 2021 out of desperation after their own children became severely addicted and homeless on San Francisco streets. Feeling voiceless, they organized protests and built a coalition of people in recovery to advocate for change.
The activists worked to elect Lurie as mayor and to shift the balance on the Board of Supervisors toward a more moderate stance, with a shared focus on addressing the crisis. “We came together and protested and kicked and screamed and yelled until they would listen to us,” one of the activists recounted.
Despite these efforts, O’Reilly highlighted the scale of the problem: an estimated 37,000 people struggling with drug addiction in the city—a figure he described as a “legion” causing daily damage. “I don’t see it getting a lot better,” he remarked, pointing to ongoing issues in areas like the Tenderloin.
Just this month, Lurie’s motorcade faced an attack by individuals in the Tenderloin shortly after the mayor delivered a speech criticizing the city’s broken government. The incident underscored the persistent dangers, even as the city attempts reforms.
O’Reilly observed that San Francisco did not reach its low point overnight. It took roughly a decade to slide to “rock bottom,” which he said the city hit in 2024. “There’s really kind of nowhere to go from there but up,” he added. He criticized billions of dollars spent on what he called flawed ideology, including radical harm reduction approaches and “Housing First” models. These efforts, he argued, failed to resolve homelessness and may have exacerbated the situation, as evidenced by approximately 650 overdose deaths in San Francisco last year (with official preliminary figures for 2025 showing around 621–625 deaths, down slightly from prior years but still tragically high).
The activists acknowledged the depth of the crisis but expressed cautious optimism rooted in recent political shifts.
O’Reilly pressed for concrete solutions during the conversation. He argued that addressing the problem will require federal guidance—already emerging from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Office of National Drug Control Policy—as well as state-level legislative changes in California regarding housing policies and drug use regulations. Progressive approaches, he contended, have prioritized “virtue signaling” that allows individuals to destroy themselves and harm others, while some users openly reject societal norms with an attitude of indifference.
“Some people feel sorry for them. I’m on the fence about it,” O’Reilly said. He concluded that the only viable path forward is mandatory substance abuse rehab. “Most of the people here in the Tenderloin in San Francisco, they want to be here. They want this. And they are dangerous not only to other people, but to themselves.”
He described walking the Tenderloin himself recently, noting the visible chaos, and expressed incredulity that such conditions persist in the United States. “It has to stop,” he declared, calling for decisive intervention combining treatment mandates, enforcement, and policy reform at multiple levels of government.
The discussion reflects broader debates in San Francisco as the Lurie administration confronts a legacy of visible disorder while residents and activists push for sustained, practical improvements beyond temporary cleanups.
