5 ms·

Newsom deserves the heat he got for the dinner; Even if it's a close enough group that you or I would feel comfortable, the Governor of course has to model not

by rconti 6y ago

Newsom deserves the heat he got for the dinner; Even if it's a close enough group that you or I would feel comfortable, the Governor of course has to model not just "good enough" behavior, but the best behavior. The schools thing is a just a stupid political twitter troll from that SD Mayor. Lots of schools in CA are (or were) doing hybrid in-person models. CA is #2 in covid-19 cases statewide, but #41 in cases per 100k population. I credit, in part, the leadership of many state officials who are at least saying the right things, and modeling the best behavior helps.

Shivetya 6y ago
The politicians doing what they please and trying to justify it as some have done is just par for the course. Few are giving real thought to how it really impacts the average person because they have long lived above them economically to the point all they can do is pay lip service. Fear is an incredible political weapon and its being used adeptly. The real issue is with schools is we have a perfect scenario for real education reform but we are doing everything but that. Instead we are leaving an incredible number of students behind because everyone is thinking of their political power under the guise of their health and that of the children. Parents are frustrated because many of them have to work because either their job is deemed essential or apparently not as much of a risk; as if the cashier at a grocery store is not more at risk than a teacher. If anything the pandemic is further reducing the trust people have in their elected officials and one can hope it pans out in upcoming elections both local and national. This won't be gone even through the majority of next year.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  > If anything the pandemic is further reducing the trust people have in their elected officials and one can hope it pans out in upcoming elections both local and national. It has certainly caused a loss of trust for me but I don't think it will pan out as change in upcoming elections because COVID has become a political issue, with political outcomes at stake. The leveraging of a crisis for political gain is a classic pattern, but we don't seem to be acknowledging it is happening right now. Some examples: COVID is being used as a vague justification for universal healthcare, for permanent closure of streets to vehicular traffic, for increased low-income housing, for increased taxes to fund safety nets (like homeless shelters), for normalizing deeper state involvement in business practices (like evictions), and so on. Obviously, COVID was also a big factor in the presidential election, since it hurt an otherwise strong economy, enabled the George Floyd incident to turn into months-long protests and riots (employed/busy citizens would not have the time or energy to do things like block highways daily), etc. The political underpinnings of lockdown policies are clear when you see how heavy the pushback is against any transition to remote learning or decentralized learning or school choice. We're being told at once that even saving a single life is worth shutting down the entire country, but also being told that in-person public school education is an essential service (this is the position of the Biden COVID task force). Anything that might enable alternative education models is off the table since it goes against the politics of teacher unions and the Democratic platform, particularly with education increasingly becoming a vehicle for early political indoctrination (for example introducing gender politics or the factually-incorrect 1619 project into schools). How can all this be taken except as partisan exploitation of a crisis? But in the US, with people as divided as they are, I expect everyone to just stick to their tribe. So it goes...
  - baumandm 6y ago
    There's a lot to respond to in your post, but let me address a single point: In-person public school education is an essential service because our society is not setup to allow every child to stay home all day with a parent or caregiver. 64.2% of married-couple families with children have both parents employed.[1] That's 33.4 million families as of 2019. It's not an issue about alternative education models or indoctrination. It's about who is going to stay home with the kids and help them with their remote learning. Which parent is going to quit their job, and how to deal with the financial impact of that. Closing a school means that everyone in that district has to immediately adapt, and that hits some people much harder than others. Additionally, 22 million children rely on free or reduced-price lunch at school.[2] Many schools made those same lunches available for pickup earlier this year, but they're not going to be able to reach all of those children. [1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/famee.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/famee.nr0.htm [2] https://www.businessinsider.com/free-school-lunch-kids-summer-hunger-2019-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/free-school-lunch-kids-summe...
jeffbee 6y ago
It doesn't feel like Newsom should get any credit for California outcome. His policies have been irrational and "reopening" plans intended to mollify alcoholics and commercial landlords led directly to resurgence of the disease. The credit should fall generally on the people of California, not their government.
- asciident 6y ago
  Politicians are constantly claiming credit for positive outcomes. In our state, the governor was celebrated for early success in keeping rates low due to their policies enacted (one of the best in the nation). They didn't change any of the policies or have a major change in heart about anything, yet the pandemic then got drastically worse (and now we're one of the worst in the nation). They're now trying all sorts of policy changes, none of which have any effect on the real data. What's more likely, that them staying the course led to a drastically opposing outcome all of a sudden, or that their policies have minimal effect in the first place, and it's really about human social nature in the state?
  - jeffbee 6y ago
    > it's really about human social nature I agree completely, and this is why I think it is futile to argue about aspects of the pandemic in Sweden, because the behavior of people is much more important than the policies of their government. So unless your state is actual populated by Swedes, arguing about those policies makes no sense. This also, in my opinion, accounts for the great variety of outcomes between jurisdictions within California.
    - ethbr0 6y ago
      > state is actual populated by Swedes Minnesota isn't looking so great right now. https://rt.live/us/mn https://rt.live/us/mn
      - jeffbee 6y ago
        That dashboard has both North and South Dakota with Rt < 1.0. Is that congruent with your understanding of the situation?
dimator 6y ago
I was really disappointed in Newsom going to that dinner. I don't understand how no one pointed out the optics to him beforehand. The fact that it was a lobbyists birthday is even worse. There will definitely be attack ads around this next cycle, that's for certain. And aside from politics, his bad example will definitely influence people who were on the fence about Thanksgiving gatherings. A human toll, for such a frivolous action.
- pm90 6y ago
  Newsom didn’t really strike me as a strong candidate or Governor. He seems to do the least possible thing required of the office, and in this incident, even less than that. I’m not sure how progressive CA elects centrists like him, Feinstein and Pelosi (although Pelosi is to her credit very savvy politically).
  - jeffbee 6y ago
    I personally favored Villaraigosa because I lived in San Francisco throughout Newsom's terms on the city council and as mayor, and I view him as a petty self-dealer with no policy ambitions other than his own election. On the other hand, people from L.A. told me the same things about Villaraigosa, and in any case he failed to even beat Cox to get on the general ballot so the point was moot. I don't know why anyone would be disappointed by Newsom going to dinner with some lobbyists, unless they had simply adopted a default-neutral view of the man. Newsom only knows lobbyists.
    - Decade 6y ago
      I lived in San Francisco through Newsom’s terms as supervisor and mayor, and heard about Villaraigosa, too. My choice was Delaine Eastin.
- Decade 6y ago
  Not just any lobbyist, but a fossil fuel lobbyist. He even dragged the CEO and a SVP of the California Medical Association to the dinner. Along with his veto of SB-127 (2019), Newsom’s just killing people left and right through casual neglect.

by rconti 6y ago

Shivetya 6y ago

The politicians doing what they please and trying to justify it as some have done is just par for the course. Few are giving real thought to how it really impacts the average person because they have long lived above them economically to the point all they can do is pay lip service. Fear is an incredible political weapon and its being used adeptly. The real issue is with schools is we have a perfect scenario for real education reform but we are doing everything but that. Instead we are leaving an incredible number of students behind because everyone is thinking of their political power under the guise of their health and that of the children. Parents are frustrated because many of them have to work because either their job is deemed essential or apparently not as much of a risk; as if the cashier at a grocery store is not more at risk than a teacher. If anything the pandemic is further reducing the trust people have in their elected officials and one can hope it pans out in upcoming elections both local and national. This won't be gone even through the majority of next year.

throwawaysea 6y ago
> If anything the pandemic is further reducing the trust people have in their elected officials and one can hope it pans out in upcoming elections both local and national. It has certainly caused a loss of trust for me but I don't think it will pan out as change in upcoming elections because COVID has become a political issue, with political outcomes at stake. The leveraging of a crisis for political gain is a classic pattern, but we don't seem to be acknowledging it is happening right now. Some examples: COVID is being used as a vague justification for universal healthcare, for permanent closure of streets to vehicular traffic, for increased low-income housing, for increased taxes to fund safety nets (like homeless shelters), for normalizing deeper state involvement in business practices (like evictions), and so on. Obviously, COVID was also a big factor in the presidential election, since it hurt an otherwise strong economy, enabled the George Floyd incident to turn into months-long protests and riots (employed/busy citizens would not have the time or energy to do things like block highways daily), etc. The political underpinnings of lockdown policies are clear when you see how heavy the pushback is against any transition to remote learning or decentralized learning or school choice. We're being told at once that even saving a single life is worth shutting down the entire country, but also being told that in-person public school education is an essential service (this is the position of the Biden COVID task force). Anything that might enable alternative education models is off the table since it goes against the politics of teacher unions and the Democratic platform, particularly with education increasingly becoming a vehicle for early political indoctrination (for example introducing gender politics or the factually-incorrect 1619 project into schools). How can all this be taken except as partisan exploitation of a crisis? But in the US, with people as divided as they are, I expect everyone to just stick to their tribe. So it goes...
- baumandm 6y ago
  There's a lot to respond to in your post, but let me address a single point: In-person public school education is an essential service because our society is not setup to allow every child to stay home all day with a parent or caregiver. 64.2% of married-couple families with children have both parents employed.[1] That's 33.4 million families as of 2019. It's not an issue about alternative education models or indoctrination. It's about who is going to stay home with the kids and help them with their remote learning. Which parent is going to quit their job, and how to deal with the financial impact of that. Closing a school means that everyone in that district has to immediately adapt, and that hits some people much harder than others. Additionally, 22 million children rely on free or reduced-price lunch at school.[2] Many schools made those same lunches available for pickup earlier this year, but they're not going to be able to reach all of those children. [1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/famee.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/famee.nr0.htm [2] https://www.businessinsider.com/free-school-lunch-kids-summer-hunger-2019-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/free-school-lunch-kids-summe...

jeffbee 6y ago

It doesn't feel like Newsom should get any credit for California outcome. His policies have been irrational and "reopening" plans intended to mollify alcoholics and commercial landlords led directly to resurgence of the disease. The credit should fall generally on the people of California, not their government.

asciident 6y ago
Politicians are constantly claiming credit for positive outcomes. In our state, the governor was celebrated for early success in keeping rates low due to their policies enacted (one of the best in the nation). They didn't change any of the policies or have a major change in heart about anything, yet the pandemic then got drastically worse (and now we're one of the worst in the nation). They're now trying all sorts of policy changes, none of which have any effect on the real data. What's more likely, that them staying the course led to a drastically opposing outcome all of a sudden, or that their policies have minimal effect in the first place, and it's really about human social nature in the state?
- jeffbee 6y ago
  > it's really about human social nature I agree completely, and this is why I think it is futile to argue about aspects of the pandemic in Sweden, because the behavior of people is much more important than the policies of their government. So unless your state is actual populated by Swedes, arguing about those policies makes no sense. This also, in my opinion, accounts for the great variety of outcomes between jurisdictions within California.
  - ethbr0 6y ago
    > state is actual populated by Swedes Minnesota isn't looking so great right now. https://rt.live/us/mn https://rt.live/us/mn
    - jeffbee 6y ago
      That dashboard has both North and South Dakota with Rt < 1.0. Is that congruent with your understanding of the situation?

dimator 6y ago

I was really disappointed in Newsom going to that dinner. I don't understand how no one pointed out the optics to him beforehand. The fact that it was a lobbyists birthday is even worse. There will definitely be attack ads around this next cycle, that's for certain. And aside from politics, his bad example will definitely influence people who were on the fence about Thanksgiving gatherings. A human toll, for such a frivolous action.

pm90 6y ago
Newsom didn’t really strike me as a strong candidate or Governor. He seems to do the least possible thing required of the office, and in this incident, even less than that. I’m not sure how progressive CA elects centrists like him, Feinstein and Pelosi (although Pelosi is to her credit very savvy politically).
- jeffbee 6y ago
  I personally favored Villaraigosa because I lived in San Francisco throughout Newsom's terms on the city council and as mayor, and I view him as a petty self-dealer with no policy ambitions other than his own election. On the other hand, people from L.A. told me the same things about Villaraigosa, and in any case he failed to even beat Cox to get on the general ballot so the point was moot. I don't know why anyone would be disappointed by Newsom going to dinner with some lobbyists, unless they had simply adopted a default-neutral view of the man. Newsom only knows lobbyists.
  - Decade 6y ago
    I lived in San Francisco through Newsom’s terms as supervisor and mayor, and heard about Villaraigosa, too. My choice was Delaine Eastin.
Decade 6y ago
Not just any lobbyist, but a fossil fuel lobbyist. He even dragged the CEO and a SVP of the California Medical Association to the dinner. Along with his veto of SB-127 (2019), Newsom’s just killing people left and right through casual neglect.