Elixir
Made in America
Or rather he got close enough to allow the SCOTUS to get away with handing the presidency to another Republitard.
-
Features
California Doing California Things
- Thread starter TSwizzle
- Start date
Gospel
Contributor
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2007
- Messages
- 7,630
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Ghetto Black Male
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic Atheist
Democrats are in serious trouble if they can’t tap into what Americans are actually living through right now. Jobs data, inflation, housing costs, Trump’s tariffs acting like an extra tax, Republicans are actively making life harder while claiming the opposite, and somehow Democrats still can’t capitalize.
Their entire political machine should be at full steam, hammering away every single day at what this means for people’s lives. What we got right now? Newsom? Nigga place. The message should be simple ‘We’re all feeling it. Businesses are getting squeezed by Trump’s tariffs, while the rest of us are stuck in a declining job market and high costs of living where it takes three or more incomes to survive.’ That’s where the fight is, and if Democrats don’t own it, they’ll lose it. Again.
Only thing I hear the most right now is..... Drum roll...
Their entire political machine should be at full steam, hammering away every single day at what this means for people’s lives. What we got right now? Newsom? Nigga place. The message should be simple ‘We’re all feeling it. Businesses are getting squeezed by Trump’s tariffs, while the rest of us are stuck in a declining job market and high costs of living where it takes three or more incomes to survive.’ That’s where the fight is, and if Democrats don’t own it, they’ll lose it. Again.
Only thing I hear the most right now is..... Drum roll...
The fucking Epstein files.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 46,316
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Gore actually won Florida. A newspaper consortium did a full recount (which was required by Florida law but not done) found Gore beat Bush by a small amount.
Bomb#20
Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2004
- Messages
- 9,448
- Location
- California
- Gender
- It's a free country.
- Basic Beliefs
- Rationalism
Not as important for what purpose? Winning a lawsuit isn't what we're on about here. Which hat were you wearing when you made your accusation about the purpose of California property law. your social scientist hat or your political demagogue hat? For purposes of rage-manufacture, the current status is what matters, but to evaluate whether
"Some of those who deny the California genocide are defending their own great-grandparent's actions, and they are certainly defending the real estate transferred to their families as a result of the genocide, from the Law of the River to the termination era to redlining, right down to Prop 13. The inheritors of the genocide do not want to give up an acre of what their forebears won for them, and we have developed one of the most elaborate, restrictive, and labyrinthine systems of property law on the planet to serve that end."
was truthful or trumped-up, ancient history matters. There's a reason cops don't investigate a murder by considering only the current status of who benefited from the murder, but also consider aspects of ancient history, such as, you know, determining time of death.
Yeah, that's true of anybody it's directed at no matter what topic is under discussion.
But the issue at hand is not complexity and idiosyncrasy per se, but what end they serve -- whether they were put in place to serve the end of inheritors of the California genocide not giving up an acre of what their forebears won for them.
But racialized housing covenants have been unenforceable for over half a century, and fire insurance coverage subsidies aren't even property law, and Prop 13 is not what stops courts from giving tribes' ancestral lands back to the Indians. What stops courts from giving an acre back is no doubt a pile of rules, but first and foremost among those is surely the statute of limitations. The genocide and the land grabs were a long time ago; in the U.S. land title suits are generally barred after some designated period, no longer than forty years.
The first statute of limitations for real estate lawsuits was enacted in 1166 AD.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 16,091
- Location
- Tauhalamme/Laquisimas
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
I'm not pressing a lawsuit, why all the vituperative rhetoric?
Harry Bosch
Contributor
Democrats are in serious trouble if they can’t tap into what Americans are actually living through right now. Jobs data, inflation, housing costs, Trump’s tariffs acting like an extra tax, Republicans are actively making life harder while claiming the opposite, and somehow Democrats still can’t capitalize.
Their entire political machine should be at full steam, hammering away every single day at what this means for people’s lives. What we got right now? Newsom? Nigga place. The message should be simple ‘We’re all feeling it. Businesses are getting squeezed by Trump’s tariffs, while the rest of us are stuck in a declining job market and high costs of living where it takes three or more incomes to survive.’ That’s where the fight is, and if Democrats don’t own it, they’ll lose it. Again.
Only thing I hear the most right now is..... Drum roll...
The fucking Epstein files.
I agree with you. Forget Epstein. But what do you mean about Newsome? He's fighting. He's fighting against the tarriffs; vote rigging, economic issues, housing, ice, inflation, and etc. He's one of the few dems that is fighting. But yea, the dems are done if they can't articulate a winning economic message.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 46,316
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Congressional Democrats plan red district tours for August recessDemocrats are in serious trouble if they can’t tap into what Americans are actually living through right now. Jobs data, inflation, housing costs, Trump’s tariffs acting like an extra tax, Republicans are actively making life harder while claiming the opposite, and somehow Democrats still can’t capitalize.
Their entire political machine should be at full steam, hammering away every single day at what this means for people’s lives. What we got right now? Newsom? Nigga place. The message should be simple ‘We’re all feeling it. Businesses are getting squeezed by Trump’s tariffs, while the rest of us are stuck in a declining job market and high costs of living where it takes three or more incomes to survive.’ That’s where the fight is, and if Democrats don’t own it, they’ll lose it. Again.
Only thing I hear the most right now is..... Drum roll...
The fucking Epstein files.
I agree with you. Forget Epstein. But what do you mean about Newsome? He's fighting. He's fighting against the tarriffs; vote rigging, economic issues, housing, ice, inflation, and etc. He's one of the few dems that is fighting. But yea, the dems are done if they can't articulate a winning economic message.
Sorry, you are wrong. Many Dems are taking that exact fight nationwide.
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
Dude, Newsom has done much of that to us Californians. Highest unemployment rate, highest taxes, highest gas and energy prices, increased the number of homeless despite having billions of dollars lobbed at it, more people living at or below poverty levels. Newsom is not the answer.
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
Ffs, have you not seen what the insufferable prick Newsom has done to the state of California? He’s obsessed with Trump and meanwhile the state gets ignored unless it’s something he thinks will raise his profile.
The dems are done for a generation at least.
Harry Bosch
Contributor
Which economy in the country is stronger than California?
Fact Check: Which US state has the largest GDP and how does it com...
California has the largest GDP among US states, with a nominal GDP of $4.1 trillion [1] [2]. This economic powerhouse has achieved a remarkable milestone b...
California is beating Texas and Florida. It's beating most of the world. It's kinda funny and ironic, but you make a lot of inadvertent arguments for Newsome!
TSwizzle
I am unburdened by what has been.
ffs, take out three maybe four of the Bay Area tech companies and the picture looks a little different and Newsom had fuck all to do with bringing on these companies in California.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 46,316
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
Washington DC, under the control of Trump, has a higher unemployment rate. Significantly higher.
Derec
Contributor
Newsom taking on Trumpian style is really something to behold. Does he really think this helps him in 2028?
Washington DC is run by the mayor and the city council.
Only recently has Trump called in National Guard to police DC. You can't seriously claim that the unemployment rate is due to that?
Last edited:
TV and credit cards
Contributor
You'd think the Dems with their massive liberal media machine and the endearment of Hollywood celebs and pop music icons this would be a cakewalk. So why do I get this mental image:
Bomb#20
Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2004
- Messages
- 9,448
- Location
- California
- Gender
- It's a free country.
- Basic Beliefs
- Rationalism
Why do you think that? Is it because you think "terminate a tenancy" means "break a lease", and doesn't include leases simply ending when their time limits expire? If that's what you think, it seems you're not convinced by my above reasoning, which is fine, but here's somebody with actual domain expertise:
What is termination of tenancy?
Termination of tenancy means ending a rental agreement between a landlord and a tenant. It can happen for many reasons—like the lease reaching its end, one party giving notice, or someone breaking the terms of the lease. Once the tenancy is terminated, the tenant is no longer allowed to live in or use the property, and the landlord can take back possession.
...
Termination of tenancy means ending a rental agreement between a landlord and a tenant. It can happen for many reasons—like the lease reaching its end, one party giving notice, or someone breaking the terms of the lease. Once the tenancy is terminated, the tenant is no longer allowed to live in or use the property, and the landlord can take back possession.
...
Or do you think they can evict after the lease ends because one of the fourteen legal grounds for terminating tenancy listed in the ordinance linked above says they can? If so, which one?
The landlord doesn't have to offer a new lease, provided one of the other clauses applies. For instance clause I-1 says they can refuse to renew the lease if they're going to demolish the house. But what I don't see is any indication that the lease ending is enough all on its own to imply they can evict after the lease ends.
Well, apart from the whole "You have to renew the lease if we don't think you have a good enough reason not to" policy, the ordinance is packed with micromanaged tenant protections that could perfectly well be negotiated between the tenant and the landlord -- included in the lease if the tenant wants them and is willing to pay what they cost the landlord, or waived if the tenant would rather get a break on rent than have the protection. For example, clause B-2 says the tenant can bring in a roommate. An extra occupant costs the landlord something in increased wear-and-tear, more utilities usage, more noise annoying the neighbors, etc. To make it worth her while she needs to charge higher rent, even from a single renter, in order to protect herself in case he brings in a roommate six months into the lease. If he could make an enforceable promise to be the only occupant then she could charge him lower rent in return for the promise, and both parties would be better off. Dictating the terms of contracts like that typically results in Pareto-suboptimal outcomes, because the renter knows a lot better than the government whether he's going to want a roommate.
Corporate buyers don't offer butt loads of money out of generosity. So if they're offering more than mom-and-pop landlord, and more than somebody who just wants a house to live in, why are they doing that? What's the corporation's incentive? They must expect to make a bigger profit on the house than mom-and-pop would make, and that's probably because the regulatory system favors them somehow. The forced renewals is one way it can; but I'll bet a pro economist could read that ordinance and spot half a dozen ways it hurts mom-and-pop more than it hurts corporations.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 46,316
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
See the bolded and italicized. Where is the discrepancy in what I said?
So post the clauses you think apply, not your interpretation like "'You have to renew the lease if we don't think you have a good enough reason not to' policy".
Are you a pro economist?
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
All very true. OTOH, Biden ran as a moderate and won because people were fed up with Trump's incompetent boobery. Biden was the right guy at that time.
I think we're screwed but for the sake of discussing who's viable to run against... I just can't do it this morning. Will Trump even leave the White House? If so, who will his successor be? How deeply has the GOP infected the voting process?
As an aside, credit to you for reminding me when I knew the country was fucked. It was the birth of gaslighting by Rove and Co. who sold stupid Americans on the idea that Dubbya was a war hero and Kerrey was a coward. Also, after the debacle in Iraq when it was well known just how poorly it was planned for and what a disaster it was, there was no way Americans would vote for Dubbya again. No fucking way.
We had 8 years of respite from humiliating international and economic disasters. That shit was over and now we were moving on.
Yet here we are.
Colonel Sanders
Veteran Member
That's my perspective as well. At least he's doing something. Meanwhile the Dems are sending out Bernie and AOC to play to packed houses designed to be full of people who already agree with them.Democrats are in serious trouble if they can’t tap into what Americans are actually living through right now. Jobs data, inflation, housing costs, Trump’s tariffs acting like an extra tax, Republicans are actively making life harder while claiming the opposite, and somehow Democrats still can’t capitalize.
Their entire political machine should be at full steam, hammering away every single day at what this means for people’s lives. What we got right now? Newsom? Nigga place. The message should be simple ‘We’re all feeling it. Businesses are getting squeezed by Trump’s tariffs, while the rest of us are stuck in a declining job market and high costs of living where it takes three or more incomes to survive.’ That’s where the fight is, and if Democrats don’t own it, they’ll lose it. Again.
Only thing I hear the most right now is..... Drum roll...
The fucking Epstein files.
I agree with you. Forget Epstein. But what do you mean about Newsome? He's fighting. He's fighting against the tarriffs; vote rigging, economic issues, housing, ice, inflation, and etc. He's one of the few dems that is fighting. But yea, the dems are done if they can't articulate a winning economic message.
What's the goal?
Newsom's going to be The Guy if elections are legitimate in 2028. There is no other Dem at this time who can compete with him. He's hated in the red states, but so what? That's nothing new. It's the battleground states that matter, and he can win there. We're fucked anyway because of SCOTUS, but if Newsom can do two terms it would at least stay the disastrous road we're on for some time.
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,122
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
Gretchen Whitmer would be near the top of the list. Gavin Newsom has been running for President for a while now. With no way in heck a Democrat gets elected Senator in Kentucky, Andy Beshear is a name that rises to the top, at least for VP consideration. I'd say the Democrats have options, but 2028 is so far out that picking candidates is a bit nuts. Obviously these people need to start fishing for money for the run, but the general populace is making it hard to feel how they want to vote (other than punishing an elected candidate over the economy, and of that, it is a relatively small group of people).
Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 50,122
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
No. That isn't why he is doing it. If anything, it is an attempt to diffuse the ridiculousness that has been these stupid AI generated images in the first place. The one with Newsom being praised by Hogan, Carlson, and a third dipshit who's name is escaping me was quite genius.
No, the unemployment would be from the firing of local Federal employees and decentralization of other Federal jobs to other states.