Current Events > Republicans: california is a mess! high cost of living! homelessness! wildfires!

(+) Yeah! (+)

"How do you plan to fix them if you're governor."
R: "Decrease taxes for the rich!"

genius! if state agencies have less money to fight wildfires, help homeless people, and address the housing crisis, california will just pull itself by up by its bootstraps!

---

dont most republican states literally bus their homeless problem to california?

---

monkmith posted...

dont most republican states literally bus their homeless problem to california?

Kinda yeah, most of the homeless in California are from out of state.

CommonStar posted...

Kinda yeah, most of the homeless in California are from out of state.

so then its like most of the issues the cons bitch about? where they actively cause them then point to the problem and start screaming about how huge a problem it is?

---

Republicans do not care and everybody knows this.

---

monkmith posted...

so then its like most of the issues the cons bitch about? where they actively cause them then point to the problem and start screaming about how huge a problem it is?

yes, and unfortunately it works with their base because they are better at messaging than the dems and people tend not to look deeper into the issues.

It's amazing how so many people on this website put so much effort into bashing Republicans without bothering to understand their stance/reasoning on issues. Cali's status as a one-party state has contributed to so much of its disfunction; it needs a stronger opposition, and many of the California Republican candidates have platforms that are specific to addressing the particular brands of disfunction you see in Cali.

---

Magyar15 posted...

It's amazing how so many people on this website put so much effort into bashing Republicans without bothering to understand their stance/reasoning on issues. Cali's status as a one-party state has contributed to so much of its disfunction; it needs a stronger opposition, and many of the California Republican candidates have platforms that are specific to addressing the particular brands of disfunction you see in Cali.

They don't make make any effort. All they do is misrepresent the other side in the worst way possible.

I don't want to kill babies.
"All you want to do is CONTROL women."



---

Magyar15 posted...

It's amazing how so many people on this website put so much effort into bashing Republicans without bothering to understand their stance/reasoning on issues. Cali's status as a one-party state has contributed to so much of its disfunction; it needs a stronger opposition, and many of the California Republican candidates have platforms that are specific to addressing the particular brands of disfunction you see in Cali.

can i come live in your fantasy world? where the republican party just stands in opposition to the democratic party on points of dysfunction that they've not spent decades intentionally creating? where their political stance isn't always to fuck over the poor?

---

decreasing the cost of rent would solve some of the issue for low income working people
but it won't happen.
---

monkmith posted...

can i come live in your fantasy world? where the republican party just stands in opposition to the democratic party on points of dysfunction that they've not spent decades intentionally creating? where their political stance isn't always to fuck over the poor?

Yup, that's the secret to Republican success. To screw over the poor. Totally. You got me convinced

---

I would love it if these Republican defenders could actually elaborate with substance if they're going to claim something. but they don't...

they'd rather move the goalposts or pretend no context has been framed when they make tone deaf responses.
---

RickyTheBAWSE posted...

I would love it if these Republican defenders could actually elaborate with substance if they're going to claim something. but they don't...

they'd rather move the goalposts or pretend no context has been framed when they make tone deaf responses.

You could try reading/doing some research yourself? It's not my job to educate folks on their beliefs/policies. Especially when it's clear that so many people are only really interested in hate, not understanding. But in the event that you are, here's a link to their platform.

https://cagop.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#3i000000CsCG/a/3i000000CcJw/n51HS0ybBBUItXs68wA_ydonniApC3HK0BlfOmBXDLM

---

Squall28 posted...

All they do is misrepresent the other side in the worst way possible.

I don't want to kill babies.

Misrepresent? Like calling a fetus a baby?

If anyone is fine with killing babies it is Republicans since they don't give a shit once it's born and we have the worst birth survival rates for first world nations.

Magyar15 posted...

RickyTheBAWSE posted...

I would love it if these Republican defenders could actually elaborate with substance if they're going to claim something. but they don't...

they'd rather move the goalposts or pretend no context has been framed when they make tone deaf responses.

You could try reading/doing some research yourself? It's not my job to educate folks on their beliefs/policies. Especially when it's clear that so many people are only really interested in hate, not understanding. But in the event that you are, here's a link to their platform.

https://cagop.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#3i000000CsCG/a/3i000000CcJw/n51HS0ybBBUItXs68wA_ydonniApC3HK0BlfOmBXDLM

actions > words

track record > rhetoric
---

RickyTheBAWSE posted...

actions > words

track record > rhetoric

What kinds of actions have the California GOP taken in the past 10 years?

---

they'd rather move the goalposts or pretend no context has been framed when they make tone deaf responses

you're dismissed.
---

It funny when Democrats try to pass the buck for the condition of their Democratic supermajority controlled state. They don't have the infrastructure and housing for its population. A quarter of its population is foreign born with millions given sanctuary here illegally. They also invite homeless people and criminality by decriminalizing hard drug use and opposing involuntary treatment for drug addiction and mental illness. Prop 47 made the problem worse by releasing drug offenders from jail without forcing them to get treatment. A quarter of Americas homeless live in California and they've encouraged it with their liberal approach to tackling addiction and mental health.

---

Magyar15 posted...

You could try reading/doing some research yourself? It's not my job to educate folks on their beliefs/policies. Especially when it's clear that so many people are only really interested in hate, not understanding. But in the event that you are, here's a link to their platform.

https://cagop.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#3i000000CsCG/a/3i000000CcJw/n51HS0ybBBUItXs68wA_ydonniApC3HK0BlfOmBXDLM

So their plan to solve homelessness is to cut environmental regulations and cut taxes.

And to boost the economy they just mumble some anti-union nonsense.

I can see why you refused to elaborate on this yourself lol


---

Squall28 posted...

They don't make make any effort. All they do is misrepresent the other side in the worst way possible.

I don't want to kill babies.
"All you want to do is CONTROL women."

Imagine saying this and doing exactly the thing you're accusing others of doing lmao

---

All you need for understanding republicans

https://old.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/oz6a16/another_angle_where_you_can_see_journalist/h7yp081/

Saying this as someone who listened to Rush and Glenn Beck daily as a college student

Krojen posted...

So their plan to solve homelessness is to cut environmental regulations and cut taxes.

And to boost the economy they just mumble some anti-union nonsense.

I can see why you refused to elaborate on this yourself lol

Holy strawman Batman!

I like how you interpreted "We support reform of the California Environmental Quality Act in order to reduce frivolous litigation that slows the speed and increases the cost of new housing construction"

as "cut environmental regulation." Again, it's clear so many people on this board are only interested in hate

---

Magyar15 posted...

Holy strawman Batman!

That's....not what a strawman is lmao

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

That's....not what a strawman is lmao

He invented an easier to refute argument and attributed it to the document without taking into account the actual content. Educate me how that is not a strawman

---

Getting rid of Prop 13 (or restructuring) would go a long way toward improving some of the conditions in CA. I guarantee you no Republican is going anywhere near Prop 13.

---

Sariana21 posted...

Getting rid of Prop 13 (or restructuring) would go a long way toward improving some of the conditions in CA. I guarantee you no Republican is going anywhere near Prop 13.

Probably, and their platform is supportive of Prop 13. Wikipedia calls it the "3rd rail" of California politics, so I don't see Democrats touching it either

---

Magyar15 posted...

Holy strawman Batman!

I like how you interpreted "We support reform of the California Environmental Quality Act in order to reduce frivolous litigation that slows the speed and increases the cost of new housing construction"

as "cut environmental regulation." Again, it's clear so many people on this board are only interested in hate

Reforming (aka making changes aka cutting) an environmental regulation to reduce the frivolous litigation (aka the government being aware of the environmental damage of your project) is exactly what I said it was. Sorry youre easily fooled by focused group tested ways of presenting it.

---

Krojen posted...

Reforming (aka making changes aka cutting) an environmental regulation to reduce the frivolous litigation (aka the government being aware of the environmental damage of your project) is exactly what I said it was. Sorry youre e

Uh, no, you have no idea what you're talking about. Educate yourself

https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2015/08/in-the-name-of-the-environment-litigation-abuse-un

---

Magyar15 posted...

Uh, no, you have no idea what you're talking about. Educate yourself

https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2015/08/in-the-name-of-the-environment-litigation-abuse-un

A study done by a lobbying firm that represents oil companies with similar vague GOP talking points as conclusions to numbers that dont even support their finding.

Like:
Were myth busting that environmental regulations are about big business vs the environmentalists. From 2010-2012, under CEQA, 49% of litigations didnt include private sponsors

So even then 51% of litigations are about business vs the environment? No wonder your wealthy clientele wants to get rid of it. And this is the best number they could come up with for their first key point.


---

Krojen posted...

A study done by a lobbying firm that represents oil companies with similar vague GOP talking points as conclusions to numbers that dont even support their finding.

Like:
Were myth busting that environmental regulations are about big business vs the environmentalists. From 2010-2012, under CEQA, 49% of litigations didnt include private sponsors

So even then 51% of litigations are about business vs the environment? No wonder your wealthy clientele wants to get rid of it. And this is the best number they could come up with for their first key point.

It's hard to tell if this lack of reading comprehension is deliberate. The quote from the study is "CEQA litigation is not a battle between business and enviros 49 percent of all CEQA lawsuits target taxpayer-funded projects with no business or other private sector sponsors."

So 49% of the lawsuits targeted taxpayer efforts projects without other sponsors. The summary does not state who the target of the 51% of the lawsuits are; it can include taxpayer/business partnerships, taxpayer private partnerships, business alone, private alone, or business/private ventures put together.

Furthermore, it's clearly not environemnt vs business. Again, from the summary: "Projects designed to advance Californias environmental policy objectives are the most frequent targets of CEQA lawsuits: transit is the most frequently challenged type of infrastructure project, renewable energy is the most frequently challenged type of industrial/utility project, and housing (especially higher density housing) is the most frequently challenged type of private sector project"

It's ok to take the L man. And again, more on topic, the summary suggests modest reforms such as more transparency in the process and eliminating duplicative lawsuits. The CA GOP platform emphasizes that protecting the environment is worthwhile and a priority; the criticism is that the process has been abused substantially to the detriment of residents as well as the environment and wants to reform it to maintain protections but reduce this abuse.

---

little to no self awareness...
---

Californias issue is that we need more affordable housing. I definitely do not trust the GOP with that.

---

How is building more housing the answer? There are plenty of houses. Let people live in them.

---

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Imagine saying this and doing exactly the thing you're accusing others of doing lmao

I'm not misrepresenting. Y'all really say that bullshit.

---

I4NRulez posted...

Californias issue is that we need more affordable housing. I definitely do not trust the GOP with that.

I'm of the opinion that a more competitive GOP would motivate the CA Dems to be held more accountable, which is a worthwhile goal in and of itself

---

Sariana21 posted...

Getting rid of Prop 13 (or restructuring) would go a long way toward improving some of the conditions in CA. I guarantee you no Republican is going anywhere near Prop 13.

Gutting Prop 13 would turn California into a very large Illinois, grossly accelerating the corporate exodus to Nevada and Texas.

If republicans actually understood how Cloward-Piven works, they'd be all over repealing it in the name of "local control" or something.

MorbidFaithless posted...

How is building more housing the answer? There are plenty of houses. Let people live in them.

This actually is not true. There is not enough housing in the places people want/need to live, affordable or not. There are myriad reasons for this, some more insurmountable than others.

---

Magyar15 posted...

It's hard to tell if this lack of reading comprehension is deliberate. The quote from the study is "CEQA litigation is not a battle between business and enviros 49 percent of all CEQA lawsuits target taxpayer-funded projects with no business or other private sector sponsors."

So 49% of the lawsuits targeted taxpayer efforts projects without other sponsors. The summary does not state who the target of the 51% of the lawsuits are; it can include taxpayer/business partnerships, taxpayer private partnerships, business alone, private alone, or business/private ventures put together.

So 51% does include private/business sponsors. Because it stated that 49% do not. And youre just repeating that, confirming what I said.

Infrastructure projects, building densely, etc frequently have the largest environmental impacts so it would make sense these broad categories have the most litigations. There a lot of lobbying firms out there that push for these projects to be done in environmentally destructive ways to pocket a few extra bucks.

All of your active posts are itt and it feels like a proudclad alt. So lets talk about how much money we made on Tesla instead.

---

Sariana21 posted...

This actually is not true. There is not enough housing in the places people want/need to live, affordable or not. There are myriad reasons for this, some more insurmountable than others.

If people were given a home to live in no strings attached you think they'd say no? That's the biggest drain of any person's funds. Imagine a world where everyone worked part time!

---

Krojen posted...

So 51% does include private/business sponsors. Because it stated that 49% do not. And youre just repeating that, confirming what I said.

Infrastructure projects, building densely, etc frequently have the largest environmental impacts so it would make sense these broad categories have the most litigations. There a lot of lobbying firms out there that push for these projects to be done in environmentally destructive ways to pocket a few extra bucks.

All of your active posts are itt and it feels like a proudclad alt. So lets talk about how much money we made on Tesla instead.

I mostly lurk because I don't care enought to post regularly, although I was grumpy enought to post this time haha. I have nothing to do with proudclad I assure you and have never invested in Tesla; right now I'm more of an AMC guy.

---

Magyar15 posted...

I mostly lurk because I don't care enought to post regularly, although I was grumpy enought to post this time haha. I have nothing to do with proudclad I assure you and have never invested in Tesla; right now I'm more of an AMC guy.

We were an unlikely duo against the world buying Tesla stock at its 2019 lows.

Ah, gorilla gang, you know a firm like h&k is filled with dudes that greedily shorted stocks like AMC. Ditch em.

It includes taxpayer funds being directed by private sector, sure. Lobbying firms are pretty powerful and get their clients some juicy contracts without enough oversight.

---

Magyar15 posted...

"We support reform of the California Environmental Quality Act in order to reduce frivolous litigation that slows the speed and increases the cost of new housing construction"

You want to build collapsing Miami towers in earthquake prone California?
---

Magyar15 posted...

Yup, that's the secret to Republican success. To screw over the poor. Totally. You got me convinced

It is if you have a read a fucking book or an article or a newspaper

"So you're saying we shouldn't defund the police? Haha take that liberals! Taxation is theft! Government is oppression! Discrimination should be legal!"

---

monkmith posted...

dont most republican states literally bus their homeless problem to california?

Yeah, they have a lot of programs for free greyhound tickets as long as it's 50+ miles away from where they are. So most of them end up on the west coast.

---

Kolibri X posted...

It funny when Democrats try to pass the buck for the condition of their Democratic supermajority controlled state. They don't have the infrastructure and housing for its population. A quarter of its population is foreign born with millions given sanctuary here illegally. They also invite homeless people and criminality by decriminalizing hard drug use and opposing involuntary treatment for drug addiction and mental illness. Prop 47 made the problem worse by releasing drug offenders from jail without forcing them to get treatment. A quarter of Americas homeless live in California and they've encouraged it with their liberal approach to tackling addiction and mental health.

The only "solution" Republicans have is a final "solution".

monkmith posted...

dont most republican states literally bus their homeless problem to california?

Yes.

I used to work acute psych, and literally admitted people to my hospital who were given a 1 way ticket to California as a "discharge plan".

---

Kolibri X posted...

It funny when Democrats try to pass the buck for the condition of their Democratic supermajority controlled state. They don't have the infrastructure and housing for its population. A quarter of its population is foreign born with millions given sanctuary here illegally. They also invite homeless people and criminality by decriminalizing hard drug use and opposing involuntary treatment for drug addiction and mental illness. Prop 47 made the problem worse by releasing drug offenders from jail without forcing them to get treatment. A quarter of Americas homeless live in California and they've encouraged it with their liberal approach to tackling addiction and mental health.

Republicans are well known for favoring rehabilitation in prison, and publically funding healthcare after all...

---

Magyar15 posted...

It's amazing how so many people on this website put so much effort into bashing Republicans without bothering to understand their stance/reasoning on issues.

Oh, I understand their stance perfectly.

90% of the party still sucks up to Donald Trump, the only instigator of a coup attempt against the United States government because he couldn't accept losing an election that he blew so badly it feels like he did it on purpose.

They're all traitors, period.

Or were you talking about the republican party's regressive, exclusionary policies, like stripping rights from gays, transgenders, women, and minorities?

Or perhaps their desire to strip a woman's bodily autonomy from them?

Or perhaps their continued fumbling of the Covid football?

Or perhaps their complete and utter disdain for the working man in america?

Or perhaps how they close ranks around anyone who is caught in a scandal (Matt Gaetz, etc) instead of ousting them from the party (Cuomo, Franken, etc)

Which of their policies do I need to understand better? Enlighten me.

Edit: inb4 "educate urself, hurr hurr"

---

mybbqrules posted...

Oh, I understand their stance perfectly.

90% of the party still sucks up to Donald Trump, the only instigator of a coup attempt against the United States government because he couldn't accept losing an election that he blew so badly it feels like he did it on purpose.

They're all traitors, period.

Or were you talking about the republican party's regressive, exclusionary policies, like stripping rights from gays, transgenders, women, and minorities?

Or perhaps their desire to strip a woman's bodily autonomy from them?

Or perhaps their continued fumbling of the Covid football?

Or perhaps their complete and utter disdain for the working man in america?

Or perhaps how they close ranks around anyone who is caught in a scandal (Matt Gaetz, etc) instead of ousting them from the party (Cuomo, Franken, etc)

Which of their policies do I need to understand better? Enlighten me.

He's not going to answer

---