5 ms·
Rant BEGIN: Dean Preston is a maniac in my personal experience having talked with him on the street while he was first campaigning -- before he served his first
by ncr100 1y ago
Rant BEGIN: Dean Preston is a maniac in my personal experience having talked with him on the street while he was first campaigning -- before he served his first term. He laughed wildly at something frank and simple that I said, when he tried to talk to me about how he was so cool and how people should vote for him. I basically said no I don't want to talk to you and that I was busy. I remember it being an out of place kind of thing as if he sort of didn't care that I was busy? It was odd. Should I be happy that he laughed at me for being myself? Anyhow, Preston is is not someone who I have any reason to trust. END
San Francisco politics are complicated. There is a lot of appeasing and stuff that's done for show, to try and and curry favor from the various highly ideological and disunited, often impractical population segments. Getting nothing done while complaining about it seems to be an art in my opinion that ... what is it, city council, participates in. Boldly proposing impossible plans or shutting things down.
Just because ex-mayor Breed vetoed something doesn't mean that the moneyed rich are THE PROBLEM. SF during Breed's term had a lot of negative growth as the pandemic, extremely cheap fentanyl plus a very aggressive fentanyl user base, and work from home making ghost towns out of business and mixed business/residential neighborhoods, strangulated city operations, making for an extra stressful operations challenge for the mayor's office in my opinion.
This article is under-researched and / or highly opinionated, in my opinion.
The article could be much better, if it were more factually accurate about "conclusions" and less biased towards any particular political goal. I do like the the article is overtly biased and is not hiding its bias.
- lazyeye 1y agoCalifornia politics are what you get in any one-party state which California is as a result of immigration/demographic change. Politicians rise to the top not on the basis of accountability and the contest of ideas, but due to political favors and backroom deals. Its how you get someone like Gavin Newsom.
- StopDisinfo910 1y agoOne party being favoured by the majority of the population doesn’t make a state a one party state even if you yourself don’t like said party. If the republican had an agenda Californian found suitable and worthy, they would vote for them. They do have candidates at all elections.
- jerlam 1y agoHave we already forgotten The Governator?
- mrangle 1y agoYes, that's what it means.
- StopDisinfo910 1y agoNo, that’s not what it means. The USSR and China are exemple of one party states. There is literally only one party allowed. California has multiple legitimate candidates at each elections.
- mrangle 1y ago[flagged]
- StopDisinfo910 1y agoThere is no for Pete’s sake. A one party state has a precise commonly accepted definition which applies everywhere. There is no other definition in the USA which would make California one. The fact that the current Republican propaganda would make the USSR blush in how they consistently misuse terms doesn’t magically change that.
- lazyeye 1y agoI was using the term "one-party state" metaphorically. I thought that would be obvious. In any case the demographics in California are now such that it is close to impossible for a Republican governor to be elected. Which means that Dem politicians are now only really accountable to the people of influence in their own party, not so much the general public. And they have an entirely different set of interests to the general public. It doesn't matter what your political persuasion, a "one-party state" is in nobody's interest. For example if politics was not so dysfunctional in California you might have had a competent mayor in LA and the Palisades would still be standing....