145

What?

"the 1940's wasn't technologically capable of sorting people out quickly."

I would think they made it pretty simple.....if you looked like a ---....you were detained.

-Now the narrative has changed to him not having enough power to implement his policies.

I suppose that explains a lot of dolts who predicted such mayhem as a result of that election.

Pretty normal election drama.

Kind of like the celebrities who promise to leave if the republican on the ticket wins.

....And then make the same promise the next election.....LOL

132

Admit it...she was hot.

-Not because they would feel the effect of having 5% less wealth.

True. It's not that the 5% would impact them in any real way.

-So now Newsom is panicking that the hand that feeds him is upset.

panicking? how so? He didn't have anything to do with writing this bill and he's not supporting it.

Does he have his fingerprints on bill somewhere?

-Difference being Mamdani isn't owned by billionaires, Newsom is.

There are more differences than that. Top of the list is what power Mamdani has to affect the billionaires in NYC. Next would be Mamdani isn't a candidate for anything else outside of NYC.

The billionaire donor class is the billionaire donor class.

When they commit 7 or 8 or 9 figures to a political cause/candidate....they expect adherence to their wishes in exchange.

Is it possible there is anybody here who's confused about that?

I know there are folks here who pretend to be confused about it....and a couple have raised their hands.

But I'm going to take the high road and assume they're just kidding.

"Both parties are not the same."

Thanks, Capt. Obvious. I already pointed that out and you know that.

But I guess you just can't accept that you're still going to force feed yourself with meaningless distinctions.

The truth is that this issue where Newsom has to come out against this is where folks convince themselves there isn't a difference between the 2 parties when there most certainly are.

But the presence of this massive wealth in our political system diminishes the appearance of such differences.

but let me me clear about this....Gavin Newsom has to distance himself from this kind of bill for the same reason any republican has to. The donors.

-Billionaires own this country and they won't have their authority questioned.

Including those who support democrats? Something tells me you can't square yourself to accept that.

116

So you think there is a point to manufacturing a meaningless distinction to make yourself feel better for being a partisan?

There are plenty of good reasons to be a liberal, a democrat, a progressive, etc.......this just isn't one of them.

but I guess you can't make the distinction yourself. Instead, you're obligated to force feed yourself no matter how absurd it is.

-Those are part of the proposal, yes.

That's not a reality for billionaires due to how their wealth is represented so it's a nice deflection but let's return to how you'd react to having a State take 5% of your estate while leaving most of your neighbors alone.

-Most billionaires won't notice the 5%.

They're paying huge attention to it and it's not even likely to happen.

-Newsom doesn't have the minerals to stand up to the people who own him.

LOL......I always love this framing of people in a way you can tolerate rather than just rip the -------- bandaid off and accept it for what it is.

People who support democrats are just as demanding and ruthless as those who support republicans.

You're deciding there is a meaningful difference between being corrupt (a republican who's going to run for president who wouldn't support this) and being spineless (a democrat who's going to run for president who won't support this).

What a waste of energy force feeding such meaningless distinctions.