Probably Not ….
But he HAS issues…
California is coming out of a bad few months of the pandemic ….
The virus has made people, sick, caused deaths, beat up government economics…
In dealing with the virus?
American Governor’s were on then…
The American President ignore them….
The Federal government also…
The Governor’s became the ‘cops’….
Having to tell people to do things they did NOT want to do….
(Most Governor’s are easing virus restriction’s as the infection rates decline)
It was a rough political time for them…
The California Governor is now looking at a possible recall vote because of his actions to get control of the pandemic in his state and a very stupid personal action that spilled into the media …..
The campaign to oust Newsom went from unlikely to unavoidable this week as pervasive frustration with Newsom’s pandemic management cut sharply into his approval numbers. The longer businesses have been closed, hospitals full and school campuses shut, the more the movement has gained traction beyond conservative social media circles.
The nation’s biggest Democratic vulnerability after a score of blue victories has become an irresistible nightly feature on Fox News. Should the effort qualify, look for money to pour into the state and celebrities to add their names to the ballot, if only for the promotional benefits.
Newsom still deflects questions about the opposition effort by saying he is singularly focused on vaccinating Californians and reducing Covid-19 spread. He has adamantly denied that his abrupt decision to reverse stay-at-home orders last month was an attempt to quell voter frustration. And he seems determined to avoid legitimizing the effort by acknowledging it.
But California Democrats and their political backers are bracing for a campaign nevertheless as recall organizers turn in hundreds of thousands of signatures. State lawmakers are proclaiming their support for Newsom, seeking to tamp down any signs of disunity. Interest groups and donors who would be called upon to fund a recall defense are quietly ramping up, with one union launching the first public counteroffensive.
“Are we getting prepared to oppose it? Of course,” said Joe Cotchett, a longtime ally and donor to Newsom….
image…Yahoo
No.
Meanwhile,the Texas Republican Party want the voters of Texas to decide whether Texas should revert back to an independent nation.
The announcement was made by the Allen West,State Party Chairman.Yeah the same Right Wing nutjob who served as a Congressman from Florida awhile back.
What’s funny about this is some Republicans out there really support this lunacy and it will force Republican politicos there to take a stand.
Good move Republicans!
More of the crazies ….
Trump has made it ok fir them come out from under the rocks
I’ve been given to understand that — at least in some other states — the Republican Party’s history had something to do with Unionism.
NY Times Op-Ed….
When Republicans and Unions Got Along
In September 1952, Dwight D. Eisenhower spoke to a convention of labor leaders and told them that before joining the Army, he took a job at a dairy plant where “I worked 84 hours a week on the night shift from 6 to 6, seven nights a week.” Recognizing how extreme that was, Eisenhower said, in a nod to labor, “In the years since, unions, cooperating with employers, have vastly improved the lot of working men and women.”
It is often forgotten that Eisenhower and many other Republicans used to support labor unions, if not always enthusiastically. In that speech, Eisenhower noted that the first federal law giving workers a right to organize and bargain came under a Republican, Calvin Coolidge — that was the Railway Labor Act, passed in 1926.
“Only a handful of unreconstructed reactionaries harbor the ugly thought of breaking unions,” Eisenhower told labor leaders that day. “Only a fool would try to deprive working men and women of the right to join the union of their choice.” In that era, Republicans often praised unions for fighting Communism and lifting living standards to help them make the case that American capitalism was delivering more to workers than Soviet communism was….
More…
You’ve completely and totally missed my point, James.
That topic, though fascinating and instructive in itself, has absolutely nothing to do with the Unionism I was writing about.
I just meant that it was ironic that Texas Republicans are leaning towards Disunion (i.e. Secession) when the classic Grand Old Party was pre-eminently the Party of Union (as in the boys in blue; and “vote the way you shot”, and the Grand Army of the Republic).
Having lived in Texas, I can say that Texans have a state identity that is nor even remotely comparable to any other state I have lived. For example, a person from Illinois might describe themselves as an American, a conservative and a Catholic, but no one would describe themselves as an Illinoisan. People from Texas almost all think of themselves as Texans.
In the King of the Hill Cartoon, the Hill family own a clock that is on the map of Texas. You might actually see such an item in Texas!
There has been an independence streak in Texas for years – probably since it became part of the US. But the party of the Union is no longer part of the GOP’s DNA.
Although they’re not passionate or belligerent about it, Rhode Islanders do think of themselves as Rhode Islanders, often citing being (arguably) first to declare independence (May 4, 1776; cf. ¿ North Carolina in 1770? ) and last to ratify the Constitution (1790), as well as, since Roger Williams founded the colony in 1636, a haven for religious freedom.
National independence for R.I. alone is an absurd idea in the way that restoring the Lone Star Republic of Texas of 1836-45 (bearing the same flag as the present State’s) is not. However Rhode Islanders (given Rhode Island’s history) have always been emphatic and proud in avoiding any hint of takeover by Massachusetts.
Very similar things can be said of Vermont (only free in 1791 from all claims by New York), Maine (only independent of the Bay State in 1820). and New Hampshire.
Very occasionally — when national policy seems quite intolerable — the vague idea has been (as was about to be posited by the abortive, anti-war Hartford Convention of 1814) of New England seceding as a whole, perhaps to join Canada instead.
Sorry DSD.
I totally disagree that restoring Texas as an independent nation “is not(an absurd idea).”
It is.
Jack, I meant that national independence for RHODE ISLAND (as opposed to Texas, or arguably the once-independent or quasi-independent California and Hawaii) is absurd.
I have no doubt that Texas would be able to function once again as an independent country, provided that she didn’t undergo a total blockade of trade and travel.
Californians are not nationalistic in the way that Texans are, but every now and then — comparing California’s population, area, resources, economy, diversity and intellectual life with those of notable independent countries like Canada or Australia — and when California’s differences with the rest of the U.S. (e.g. on the Vietnam War) seem intolerable, Californians do speculate, in a rather theoretical way, about independent nationhood, although far, far less serioulys than the also-hypothetical division of Northern from Southern California (a proposal that even appeared a recent official state ballot).
Welcome to my world DSD….
Exactly which “world” are you in James?
He, he, he…
Jack?
U SO FUNNY!
james, It is not fair to Dave to compare yourself to him. You don’t have much in common with him other than that you both don’t like Trump.
Dave doesn’t make stuff up, he understands what he reads, he is well educated (even though he doesn’t think so), he has a social conscience, he doesn’t insult people, he writes well and he thinks before he writes.
Thank U for ur point of view Z
We’re all adults here….
We’ll be fine….
Well there are many states that “could” function as independent countries.That still doesn’t mean it’s not an absurd notion for a host of reasons.
What kind of “countries” would they be?
The seperation itself would require the new “countries “ to reimburse their former country billions(if not trillions” of dollars ) to accomplish it.
Establishing a military force?Diplomatic relations?Social services?Entitlement programs?The absurdity of the idea actually boggles the mind.Billions and billions of dollars.
I know you enjoy history.I do too.However this has Nothng to do with things that happened almost two hundred years ago.
Seperation of any state from the United States in this day and time is an absurd idea.
May I point to the cluster fuck-up of Brexit as prime example of what a break up should NOT BE…
Texas is NOT going anywhere…
Those boys from Carolina
They sure enough could sing
But when they came on down to Texas
We all showed them how to swing….
I said, “That’s right, you’re not from Texas
That’s right, you’re not from Texas
That’s right, you’re not from Texas
But Texas wants you anyway”
— Lyle Lovett
Independence is far, far harder now than in the 19th century, because society and interdependent economies are so much more complex.
Plus, of course, a revived California (Bear-Flag) Republic or the Lone Star Republic would have to face the vastly more difficult task of defending herself. JPL or the Johnson Space Center might be on your soil, but defending yourself even against a small power like Cuba requires more than a few schooners, cannon and cavalry troops.
Of course every one should be familiar with the
Questions about some of the New York accent….
Texas pride is a real thing. But it shouldn’t be confused with the small band of right wingers who want secession.
From my experience you see quite a few “Native Texan” bumper stickers on cars in the Austin Whole Foods parking lot. Driven by web designers with tattoos who consider themselves Democratic Socialists.
True THAT Scott….
Have you ever been to Texas James? I was under the impression that you don’t travel much. Am I wrong?
Never been there
Ain’t in a hurry to go there..
Well Scott is right, although I am not sure you would know that unless you spent at least some time there.
There is not just one Texas culture. Austin is enormously different than Houston or Dallas (those two cities have a similar vibe to me) and they are quite different than San Antonio. But the real Texas stereotype comes from the rural areas of the state. Can’t say I spent much time in the rural areas, but enough to get a good feel of the local culture. I assume that El Paso is also enormously different, but I have never been there.
I enjoy going back to Texas on occasion to visit. I last was in Texas on a business trip to Plano about 16 months ago.
My trips to Texas have been pretty much along the I-35 corridor. Dallas Ft. Worth, Waco, Austin, the Hill Country ( visited LBJs ranch there) and San Antonio. Never spent time in East or West TX other than both Houston airports. It is a tough state to pin down other than the overall Texas pride that seems to cross all lines of politics, race, ethnicity, etc.
Overall it is a state that is trending blue due to more growth in it’s cities and suburbs than the rural areas. But even that has it’s nuances as seen with rural counties on the border going slightly redder last November thought in part due to Trump’s supposed “machismo” appeal among young male Hispanics.
Considering that the state has roughly been halving it’s GOP margin each presidential election over the past decade I would say all things being equal it’s jump ball for 2024 and may be the hottest battleground state in 3 yrs
Newsom and legislative leaders announce $9.6-billion economic package, including $600 checks for low-income Californians
Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders announced that they have agreed to provide low-income Californians a $600 state stimulus payment to help them weather financial hardships during the COVID-19 pandemic, part of a $9.6-billion economic recovery package that also includes $2.1 billion in grants for small businesses….
More…
“You’ve completely and totally missed my point, James”
Well that is odd.
Well then my bad DSD….
But i did find it interesting that the GOPer’s. DID have the unions support back in the day…
Sorry about that….
But thanks…
Actually, there are some quite interesting books on this subject, such as David Montgomery’s Beyond Equality: Labor and the Radical Republicans, 1862-1872 .
Although John L. Lewis has a justifiable radical reputation as the leader of the United Mine Workers of America, he didn’t endorse FDR in 1940; he gave a national radio address endorsing Wendell Willkie.
And, as I understand it (not having reviewed the historical scholarship), it was just as likely for a 19th-century American workingman to be a Republican than to be a Democrat (and far more likely either than to be a Socialist). Since most of industry, transport and extraction, and thus most of the industrial working-class and its unions, were in the North and outside the Confederacy, that workingman himself, and his relatives, partners and friends, may very well have borne arms in the War to Preserve the Union.
[On the other hand, one often has to make a New York exception for Tammany Hall — the white workers in who rioted against the draft and lynched Negroes in Manhattan in 1862 were most definitely not Republicans.]
Samuel Gompers’ American Federation of Labor (partly looking back to the failure of political-industrial movements such as the Knights of Labor) formally adopted a stance of strict non-partisan Business Unionism: Reward your Friends and Punish your Enemies).
However, the AF of L did veer to an unspoken preference for the Democrats after the Supreme Court’s 1911 ruling (as I understand it) that labor organizations’ boycotts of employers were not exempt from Anti-Trust law. (Buck’s Stove & Range Company vs Gompers).
[As a completely-irrelevant aside, the similar and contemporary Taff Vale decision in Britain, exposing union officials to personal liability for union strikes, led to the birth of an Independent Labour Party distinct from the Liberals in 1906.]