Majority of Calif. Voters Back Prop 50 in New Poll

Monday, October 06, 2025

They desperately need a counterweight to Republicans' redistricting in Texas, and California is the best positioned blue state to do so.

Posted by retort at 11:20 AM | 105 COMMENTS | permalink

Comments

Got my example ballot. There is only one proposition to vote on.

Prop 50.

To me it's not a difficult choice at all.

But we will soon see what Californians decide.

#1 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-10-06 11:52 AM

Fingers crossed for you and California, DB.

#2 | Posted by Yodagirl at 2025-10-06 02:51 PM

Conservative Billionaires are flooding California with "No on Prop 50" propaganda.

Fact is. Had Texas not opened this box. California wouldn't have to fight back.

Best of luck America.

#3 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-06 02:56 PM

Does any MAGA disagree with California following the example of Texas on this?

Or are you just surprised that if you punch someone in the face someone might punch back?

#4 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-06 02:59 PM

What does California hope to accomplish?

Specifically, how many more Democratic Party congressional districts can they expect to squeeze out of this?

#5 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-06 03:46 PM

What does California hope to accomplish?

#5 | POSTED BY EBERLY AT 20

To offset MAGA electoral cheating in Texas.

To set a practical limit on mendaciousness.

To remind stupid people of what they lose if they lose democracy.

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-06 03:50 PM

Specifically, how many more Democratic Party congressional districts can they expect to squeeze out of this?

#5 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Five.

#7 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-06 03:50 PM

I'm not defending anything states like Texas have done or are currently trying to do.

But currently Republicans in California represent 38% of all voters based on the last presidential election.

However, Republicans are only represented by 17% of the congressional districts.

#8 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-06 03:53 PM

Wait... and you do math for a living?

#9 | Posted by Corky at 2025-10-06 03:54 PM

Thank you, Zed.

#10 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-06 03:55 PM

Creative math, really.

Is my math wrong?
It's possible

#11 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-06 03:56 PM

"However, Republicans are only represented by 17% of the congressional districts."

Republicans like it that way. Republicans are the only ones who keep saying "We Are Not A Democracy."

#12 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-06 04:11 PM

"Does any MAGA disagree with California following the example of Texas on this?"

Not following the example of Texas. CA is putting it up for a vote. Texas did not do such a thing.

That will probably piss off "We live in a Republic not a Democracy" MAGA people.

Honestly, why do those people show up to vote if they think they don't live in a democracy?

#13 | Posted by dibblda at 2025-10-06 04:33 PM

But currently Republicans in California represent 38% of all voters based on the last presidential election.

However, Republicans are only represented by 17% of the congressional districts.

#8 | Posted by eberly

North Carolina is majority democrat but is majority republican in representation.

At least california isn't using gerrymandering to flip the direction of the state like that.

And dems had a bill to ban gerrymandering nationwide. It got zero republican support.

#14 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2025-10-06 04:39 PM

---- Texas and Missouri.

#15 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2025-10-06 05:03 PM

It'll fail.

Repubs will vote as a block against and the GOP will get the votes of useful idiot libs (Jill Stein 2028!) to put them over the top.

#16 | Posted by censored at 2025-10-06 07:01 PM

-North Carolina is majority democrat but is majority republican in representation.

Massachusetts is 37% Republican and has zero out of 9 reps in the US House.

Doesn't mean it's gerrymandering ... ..just unfair.

#17 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-06 07:09 PM

And dems had a bill to ban gerrymandering nationwide. It got zero republican support.
#14 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You can't ban gerrymandering, you can't legally describe it.

At least california isn't using gerrymandering to flip the direction of the state like that.

What do you mean? The new map could creates the opportunity for Democrats to pick up five additional seats, obviously reducing the number of Republican representatives from California by half.

#18 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-10-06 07:27 PM

Dems fight back to counter what TX is doing, even though Trump forced TX to do this... but now they are that bad guys?

Chinese logic like Chinese food; 30 mins later you hungry again.

#19 | Posted by Corky at 2025-10-06 07:37 PM

You can't ban gerrymandering, you can't legally describe it.

At least california isn't using gerrymandering to flip the direction of the state like that.

What do you mean? The new map could creates the opportunity for Democrats to pick up five additional seats, obviously reducing the number of Republican representatives from California by half.

#18 | Posted by oneironaut

You can't legally describe porn, but it's pretty obvious even to the untrained eye.

California's gerrymandering doesn't change it from a red to a blue state. It's a blue state that stays blue.

NC's gerrymandering changes it from a blue state to a red state.

#20 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2025-10-06 08:05 PM

Fingers crossed for you and California, DB.

#2 | POSTED BY YODAGIRL

Thanks!

Thoughts and prayers ... for America.

#21 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-10-06 08:18 PM

-California's gerrymandering doesn't change it from a red to a blue state. It's a blue state that stays blue.

correct.

-NC's gerrymandering changes it from a blue state to a red state.

incorrect. NC isn't a blue state.

and regardless, it's the same impact of gerrymandering. Voters in those states are underrepresented in congress.

California republicans lose seats......North Carolina democrats lose seats.

It's not different. It's the same impact.

#22 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-06 09:23 PM

Even if this passes......I'm still skeptical California actually goes through with it.

#23 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-06 09:25 PM

What are you talking about?

If it passes, California is obligated by California law to go through with this.

#24 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-06 09:30 PM

Is this a surprise? This is what Dems do and have been doing for a very long time. They gerrymandered like crazy in the 90s. Reps are still fighting to get things balanced again. So then Dems gerrymander even harder acting like it's a national emergency.

Again, this is just typical Dem behavior. Ego and emotions rule liberal minds. And while that provides many positives for the party, it also causes many damaging trends. And this is one of them. Try reading other outlets that don't stroke your ego and ideologies, try other outlets so that you hear balanced news.

#25 | Posted by humtake at 2025-10-07 11:54 AM

Here are some numbers someone just posted elsewhere. I'm not validating them but, from what I know regarding county lines, this is at least 80ish% accurate if not 100%. Please don't argue over the facts and resort to name calling or demonizing just because you don't like the facts. Argue over how we can make it right for the country and not do just what is best for the party. Both sides need to make changes but that won't happen if both sides are also doing everything they can to ignore why the changes are needed.

California:
Democrat votes: 60% 42 seats 83%
Republican votes: 40% 9 seats 17%

Texas
Republican votes: 58% 25 seats 65%
Democrat votes: 40% 13 seats 35%

For Texas to reach California's already gerrymandered level of proportional seats to votes,

Texas would have to have:
Republican Seats: 32
Democrat Seats: 6

#26 | Posted by humtake at 2025-10-07 11:59 AM

The people complaining about California putting redistricting up for a vote has zero to say when Gov Abbott single handedly eliminated 5 democratic districts and turned them into republican districts.

I suggest you all shut up and let Californians deal with the future of our state and country.

#27 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-07 12:20 PM

You're trying too hard to make this a both sides argument.

Texas is already one of the worst gerrymandered states.

California is not.

gerrymander.princeton.edu

ivn.us

#28 | Posted by jpw at 2025-10-07 12:27 PM

I suggest you all shut up and let Californians deal with the future of our state and country.
POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

It's not the first time nor will it be the last time outside agitators try to influence California elections. I expect lots of dark money will be spent to try and prevent California from deciding for itself what is best for California and the nation.

#29 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-10-07 12:28 PM

The handful of billionaires trying to influence this election proves that.

#30 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-07 12:30 PM

California can do what they want.

But something tells me that until now, you didn't know Californias representation in the US House was already very skewed in favor of the democratic party.

Texas is being transparent in what they are doing which certainly doesn't make it right. It's outright gerrymandering.

But the end result is a very disproportionate representation in DC.

But they all have to work hard to reach the level of this in Massachusetts....which is a 9-0 win for democrats.

But it's not considered gerrymandering in Mass because democrats are genuinely spread out throughout the state.

You can call it unfair....but it's legal.

Again, I'll believe it when I see California actually do what you want them to do.......all because "But but but....Texas" is their excuse.

I think cooler heads will prevail in the end. But maybe I'm too optimistic. I'm accused of that routinely.

#31 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-07 12:30 PM

"Both sides need to make changes but that won't happen if both sides are also doing everything they can to ignore why the changes are needed."

Why are changes needed?

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-07 12:31 PM

"But something tells me that until now, you didn't know Californias representation in the US House was already very skewed in favor of the democratic party."

Somethnng tells me you didn't know California's current congressional districts were drawn by a non-partisan commission:

In California, a non-politician commission draws both congressional and state legislative district lines. Established in 2008 by ballot initiative, the commission comprises 14 members: five Democrats, five Republicans, and four belonging to neither party. ballotpedia.org

#33 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-07 12:35 PM

"I think cooler heads will prevail in the end."

Did cooler heads prevail in Texas?
You're a stupid -------.

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-07 12:37 PM

Californias representation in the US House was already very skewed in favor of the democratic party.

Up until this election, California had used an independent commission to determine the districts.

Are you saying the independent commission was intentionally skewing our districts? Citation necessary.

Also, new districts are set to be drawn in 2030, so whatever happens as a result of this election will be redrawn by an independent commission in 4 years.

Texas is being transparent

About the fact Trump told Abbott to redistrict Texas and he did?

And you're okay with this?

the end result is a very disproportionate representation in DC.

Actually. It ends up balancing out.

Texas gains 5 Republican representatives in Congress

California gains 5 Democratic representatives in Congress.

#35 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-07 12:41 PM

"But but but....Texas" is their excuse.

Texas is not an "excuse". Saying it is an excuse implies that California would have done this anyway.

That is clearly not true.

"This is in RESPONSE to and is BECAUSE of Texas "mid-decade partisan congressional redistricting, this measure TEMPORARILY requires new congressional district maps, as passed by the Legislature in August 2025, to be used in California's congressional elections through 2030."

"It retains California's independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and directs the Commission to resume enacting congressional district maps in 2031 and after the 2030 census and every ten years thereafter"

These 2 quotes were taken directly from my California official voter information guide. (Emphasis mine)

#36 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-10-07 12:49 PM

all fair points and I'm not okay with what Texas is doing.

-Are you saying the independent commission was intentionally skewing our districts?

That's the job of the various organizations who are qualified to sue the State for gerrymandering and let the courts rule. See North Carolina

The absence of any kind of litigation tells us that argument is hard to make.

IOW, it's unfair.....but it's not illegal.

What California is seemingly trying to do will likely be called illegal.....and I hope Texas is sued over this.

#37 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-07 12:49 PM

-Texas is not an "excuse". Saying it is an excuse implies that California would have done this anyway.

agreed.

#38 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-07 12:50 PM

"The absence of any kind of litigation tells us that argument is hard to make."

And yet you proclaimed it true.

Go ---- yourself.

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-07 12:53 PM

Is this a surprise? This is what Dems do and have been doing for a very long time. They gerrymandered like crazy in the 90s. Reps are still fighting to get things balanced again.

#25 | Posted by humtake

400k dirtkickers in wyoming have as many senators as 40 million californians and you still whine that the system isn't fair for republicans.

#40 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2025-10-07 02:13 PM

Honestly, why do those people show up to vote if they think they don't live in a democracy?

#13 | POSTED BY DIBBLDA

This is a an excellent question that I am certain you will never get an honest answer to.

#41 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-10-07 02:14 PM

Eberly Is MAGA.

He's always got a cute little excuse for siding with the --------.

But he always does even when he denies it.

He's not Posting Anything in Good Faith.

Liar.

#42 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2025-10-07 02:33 PM

"Eberly Is MAGA"

-Effetetrumpvoter

#43 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-07 03:05 PM

-Are you saying the independent commission was intentionally skewing our districts?

That's the job of the various organizations who are qualified to sue the State for gerrymandering and let the courts rule. See North Carolina
#37 | POSTED BY EBERLY

I'm not too sure what North Carolina has to do with answering my question. I have heard they're pretty skewed, but I haven't looked into how North Carolina's districts were drawn up.

Regardless.

California is a high density state. A lot of republicans live in areas where there's simply more democrats.

Hell. There are 9 Republicans representatives in California. Should prop 50 pass, Newsom could eliminate all their seats. The fact he's only going for 5 points to the fact he's responding to the actions of Abbott flipping 5 seats to appease Trump.

#44 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-07 05:36 PM

The Dems are not going to get the votes they think they are out of this. Trump will ensure secure elections so Dems won't be able to cheat and drive fake turnout.

#45 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 10:06 AM

#45 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

You heal slowly from humiliation.

But here you are back, anyway.

#46 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:21 AM

The Dems are not going to get the votes they think they are out of this.

#45 | POSTED BY SCOTTS A

They're getting Districts, not votes.

#47 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:21 AM

Trump will ensure secure elections

#45 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Sure. And he'll start with Texas.

I crack myself up.

#48 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:22 AM

"You heal slowly from humiliation.
#46 | Posted by Zed"

What humiliation? I got suspended from this site for stating the guy that killed Charlie Kirk was a ---- before they actually caught the suspect. Apparently, accurately predicting the future on this site is against the rules.

#49 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 10:34 AM

I got suspended from this site

#49 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Yeah. Like I said, an humiliation.

#50 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:36 AM

#49 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

You do know that a large part of MAGA now thinks that Trump had something to do with the Kirk thing?

#51 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:37 AM

Trump's refusal to release the Epstein Files has the MAGA imagination churning up a plethora of conspiracy theories that he is involved in.

When you lose trust it's gone forever.

#52 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:38 AM

"You do know that a large part of MAGA now thinks that Trump had something to do with the Kirk thing?
#51 | Posted by Zed"

Sure they do -------. Did you read that hot take on Pedo-Twitter (Bluesky)? Did they tell you how MAGA is putting testosterone in the drinking water to make the gay frogs straight too?

#53 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 10:39 AM

What is MAGA after Trump becomes the Chief Conspirator?

A zombie movement that does not yet recognize that it is dead.

#54 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:40 AM

"Apparently, accurately predicting the future on this site is against the rules."

Not true at all: I predicted the preliminary jobs numbers didn't pass the smell test, and we should wait for the updated numbers.

You excoriated me, and then DISAPPEARED when the updated numbers came out, and proved me right. I never got banned for that. However, the truth-teller got fired by Trump for releasing the REAL numbers.

"I got suspended from this site for stating the guy that killed Charlie Kirk was a ----"

Don't be silly. You call EVERYONE a ----, like A LOT of closet cases.

#55 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-10-08 10:41 AM

#53 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Squawk as much as you like.

But, while you're at it....

Why WON'T trump release the Epstein files?

Your thoughts?

#56 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:42 AM

"I got suspended from this site for stating the guy that killed Charlie Kirk was a ----"

That was a really sad day for us. you getting suspended. please, don't go.

#57 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2025-10-08 10:44 AM

"Not true at all: I predicted the preliminary jobs numbers didn't pass the smell test, and we should wait for the updated numbers.
#55 | Posted by Danforth"

You mean the 800K Biden jobs that disappeared overnight? Yep, they were fake but I don't ever recall you stating that. As for the actual jobs numbers, we have had about 2M illegals (all working) sell deport in the last 8 months which has cratered the foreign born employed numbers while the native born numbers continue to perform great. 2M more native born Americans are working now compared to when Trump took office. It is a great accomplishment.

#58 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 10:46 AM

2M more native born Americans are working now compared to when Trump took office.

#58 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Trump lies about that.

#59 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:57 AM

"2M more native born Americans"

What difference does it make if they're native born?
You'd call it a net plus if a foreigner got fired and an American took their job?

That's not how the economy works. Or a respected civilization works.

#60 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 10:59 AM

AI Overview
There was an increase of over 2 million employed native-born Americans between January and June of 2025, according to White House statements based on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

However, this figure is considered a statistical illusion by many economists, and a comparison with the start of the Trump administration in 2017 shows a much smaller change.

www.google.com

#61 | Posted by Corky at 2025-10-08 10:59 AM

Why WON'T trump release the Epstein files?

Your thoughts?

#62 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 10:59 AM

"I got suspended from this site for stating the guy that killed Charlie Kirk was a ----"

It's extremely common that men who have sex with men don't consider themselves ----sexual.
I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm talking about.

#63 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 11:03 AM

"You'd call it a net plus if a foreigner got fired and an American took their job?
#60 | Posted by snoofy"

An illegal gets fired/deported and an American takes their job? You are damn right I would call that a net plus.

#64 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:04 AM

You are damn right I would call that a net plus.

#64 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Why WON'T trump release the Epstein files?

Your thoughts?

#65 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 11:06 AM

"#61 | Posted by Corky"

fred.stlouisfed.org

There are 2M more native born Americans working now than when Trump took office in January - it is just a FACT - and yes, that is a great thing for our country.

#66 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:06 AM

"An illegal gets fired/deported and an American takes their job?"

No, not an illegal. A longtime US citizen, after going through the line, and passing the test 20 years ago.

A net plus, or not? Because it's a net plus in Trump's equation.

#67 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-10-08 11:06 AM

"It's extremely common that men who have sex with men don't consider themselves homosexual.
I'm pretty sure you know exactly what I'm talking about.
#63 | Posted by snoofy"

Yes I do - but you calling out Alexandrite and Danforth like that is a bit uncalled for. Let them enjoy the closet.

#68 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:07 AM

"An illegal gets fired/deported "

No. A foreigner. Your stat says nothing about immigration status.
I'll give you another try since you've stayed up very late and must be tired.

#69 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 11:07 AM

Danforth I swear we owe each other so many Cokes.

#70 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 11:08 AM

"No, not an illegal.
#67 | Posted by Danforth"

Don't tell me you are one of the ------- stupid liberals that thinks illegals were not counted in the employment numbers under Biden - are you?

#71 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:09 AM

Let them enjoy the closet.

#68 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

With the Epstein files?

#72 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 11:09 AM

#68 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Come on, Man. I'm just asking for your thoughts. You've never been a shy man before this.

#73 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 11:12 AM

68 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Why should Trump, a man credibly accused of at least abetting child sexual predation, be trusted to say anything about the economy?

#74 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 11:15 AM

POSTED BY SCOTTS

You do about as well with hard questions as Pam Bondi.

#75 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 11:21 AM

Don't tell me you are one of the ------- stupid liberals that thinks illegals were not counted in the employment numbers under Biden - are you?
#71 | Posted by ScottS

And they used to be included in Trump's numbers.
And now we don't have job numbers.
You still haven't even addressed the central question here -- how does America benefit from deporting naturalized citizens?
You can't answer that question because you don't really know.

#76 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 11:26 AM

"You still haven't even addressed the central question here -- how does America benefit from deporting naturalized citizens?
#76 | Posted by snoofy"

If they committed immigration fraud like say - marrying their own brother - then they should be stripped of citizenship and shipped back to Somalia.

#77 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:36 AM

"With the Epstein files?
#72 | Posted by Zed"

The Epstein files or whatever else ----- use while in the closet. I am not part of that lifestyle so I don't know what they do. If I ever meet Lindsey Graham, I will ask him.

#78 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:38 AM

"#72 | Posted by Zed"

If you are trying to ask about releasing the Epstein files in general, I am all for it. I think Bondi, Kash and Bongino have turned out to be total clowns.

But, given the government is slow walking that, I 100% support the victims releasing the list of names. They said they were going to do that and now NOTHING. Seems kinda sus to be honest.

#79 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:40 AM

If you are trying to ask about releasing the Epstein files in general

#79 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

I asked you why you thought that Trump was not releasing them, specifically.

Bondi, Kash and Bongino are creatures of Trump.

#80 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 11:44 AM

I 100% support the victims releasing the list of names. They said they were going to do that and now NOTHING.

#79 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

We have already had at least one "suicide" among that group.

We live in an environment where political murder is a real threat, as you'd expect in a regime modeled after Putin's Russia.

#81 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 11:47 AM

"I asked you why you thought that Trump was not releasing them, specifically.
#80 | Posted by Zed"

1.) To protect large donors (likely Jewish)
2.) To protect Mossad as they were running Epstein

All indications are that Trump did nothing wrong. Thus, the above 2 points are the reason.

#82 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 11:54 AM

All indications are that Trump did nothing wrong.

Only if you live in an alternate reality.

Which I suspect you do.

#83 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-08 11:57 AM

-Why WON'T trump release the Epstein files?

are you remotely interested in considering a viewpoint on this other than your own?

You've already decided what's in the files and why they aren't released.

You are not interested in another viewpoint on those facts (they are facts to you)

So why are you continuing to ask?

BTW, let's assume you're correct about what's in the files.

And those facts lead to the eventual resignation and prosecution of Donald Trump.

Happy? Because the happiness will be very short-lived......you understand that, right?

You'll get about 15 minutes of joy, then Vance takes the oath of office and you're back to being just as miserable as you were before those files were released.

You might actually admit to yourself privately that you wished those files had never been released.

#84 | Posted by eberly at 2025-10-08 12:00 PM

'If they committed immigration fraud"

That's not a factor in Trump's equation. It INCLUDES jobs where a native born citizen takes the job of a 20-yr legal citizen.

That's a NET PLUS in Trump's numbers.

#85 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-10-08 12:02 PM

"All indications are that Trump did nothing wrong.
#83 | Posted by ClownShack"

We have the O'Keefe leaks, we have Maxwell's testimony, we have the victims saying Trump did nothing wrong, and we have the fact that the Dems had the files for years under Biden didn't leak anything about Trump - which they would have done.

So, at this point, we HAVE DIRECT REFUTING EVIDENCE that Trump did nothing wrong.

As for you - what do you have? You have 1 and only 1 thing - they he didn't release the files.

You are embarrassing yourself at this point.

#86 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 12:04 PM

"That's not a factor in Trump's equation. It INCLUDES jobs where a native born citizen takes the job of a 20-yr legal citizen.
That's a NET PLUS in Trump's numbers.
#85 | Posted by Danforth"

What in the blue hell are you talking about?

#87 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 12:05 PM

"What in the blue hell are you talking about?"

You moving the goalposts. First, you changed foreigner to illegal, meaning you had no answer to a native-born taking the job of a longtime legal citizen who went through the process 20 years ago. Then, when asked about HIM SPECIFICALLY, you made up another caveat, this time committing illegal immigration fraud when he entered. So that's TWICE you've ignored the specific question, and made up a different one to avoid an answer.

Back to the original question: is it a NET PLUS when a native-born takes the job of a longtime legal US citizen, who came through all the steps you require to become a citizen two decades ago? Net plus or not?

Because you and Trump are currently saying that's a plus.

#88 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-10-08 12:11 PM

"You'll get about 15 minutes of joy, then Vance takes the oath of office and you're back to being just as miserable as you were before those files were released."

This is like saying why send criminals to jail, they'll just be more criminals that come along and commit the same crimes later.

There's always people committing murder, right?

#89 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 12:11 PM

"...we HAVE DIRECT REFUTING EVIDENCE that Trump did nothing wrong"

All evidence to the contrary:
19thnews.org

#90 | Posted by Danforth at 2025-10-08 12:14 PM

"#88 | Posted by Danforth"

This is what you posted -------:

""That's not a factor in Trump's equation. It INCLUDES jobs where a native born citizen takes the job of a 20-yr legal citizen.
That's a NET PLUS in Trump's numbers.
#85 | Posted by Danforth"

Now, again, what in the blue hell are you talking about?

#91 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 12:15 PM

If they committed immigration fraud
#77 | Posted by ScottS

Your answer is not responsive to the question.

#92 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 12:15 PM

There are 2M more native born Americans working now than when Trump took office in January - it is just a FACT - and yes, that is a great thing for our country.

#66 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Not likely. Especially if the "data" comes exclusively from WhiteHouse.gov

A statement from: www.whitehouse.gov

Where you are obviously getting your information from.

Let's see if you can find the math error from these first two sentences right at the top of his webpage.

President Trump has created over half a million new jobs since he took office " all of them coming in the private sector.

Employment for native-born Americans has grown by 2.4+ million since January, accounting for ALL net job gains in President Trump's second term.

One of these statements cannot be true.

I've said it before: Nothing coming from this White House can be trusted without verification from at least two trusted sources.

#93 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-10-08 12:15 PM

"There are 2M more native born Americans working now than when Trump took office in January"

At how many more part time jobs that don't offer health care?

#94 | Posted by snoofy at 2025-10-08 12:17 PM

You are embarrassing yourself at this point.
#86 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

You win the self retorting retort of the day.

The MAGA party is nothing more than a bunch of pedophiles and their supporters.

#95 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-08 12:18 PM

"Not likely. Especially if the "data" comes exclusively from WhiteHouse.gov
A statement from: www.whitehouse.gov

#93 | Posted by donnerboy "

Try harder -------. The numbers are the numbers.

fred.stlouisfed.org

#96 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 12:20 PM

The numbers are the numbers.

Except when Trump doesn't like the numbers, so he fires the people who reported them.

Face it, Trump's administration is nothing more than criminals and liars.

If you're not a criminal and a liar, you will be replaced with someone who is.

#97 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-08 12:23 PM

"Except when Trump doesn't like the numbers, so he fires the people who reported them.
#97 | Posted by ClownShack"

The woman was fired because she lied about 800k Biden jobs - she got fired because she was horrible at her job.

#98 | Posted by ScottS at 2025-10-08 12:25 PM

The numbers are the numbers.
fred.stlouisfed.org

#96 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

The number I saw in your link was 132,000.

Yup. Thats a number.

Please explain to the class how 2.4 million Americans can get employed when only 500,001 jobs have been created since January.

Or it's it just how it's worded to look like 2.4 million new jobs. When it's actually 2.4 million old jobs.

Hard to say when the source is just flat out lying. You will have fo provide two trusted sources to verify your data or it's just another Trumpified lie.

#99 | Posted by donnerboy at 2025-10-08 12:30 PM

The woman was fired because she ...
#98 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

Because she reported numbers that proved Trump is destroying America.

#100 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-08 12:37 PM

Please explain to the class

He can't.

All he can do is regurgitate Trump approved propaganda.

#101 | Posted by ClownShack at 2025-10-08 12:38 PM

At how many more part time jobs that don't offer health care?
#94 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Thats what Obamacare was meant to solve, helping the sole proprietor, the gig worker.

#102 | Posted by oneironaut at 2025-10-08 12:39 PM

1.) To protect large donors (likely Jewish)

2.) To protect Mossad as they were running Epstein

All indications are that Trump did nothing wrong.

#82 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

You just explained exactly what Trump is doing wrong.

Donald Trump is NOT ALLOWED to cover for child sex predators.

That makes Donald a criminal, and of the worst sort.

#103 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 12:56 PM

82 | POSTED BY SCOTTS

What is this black hole that you use to vanish Trump's depravity?

Given your apparent anti-semitism and known general fascism, what come to my mind is the Fuhrerprinzip.

Which basically means that the man at the top gets to do anything.

Twisted.

#104 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 12:59 PM

You'll get about 15 minutes of joy, then Vance takes the oath of office and you're back to being just as miserable as you were before those files were released.

#84 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Fifteen minutes of joy is a good thing.

#105 | Posted by Zed at 2025-10-08 01:08 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Republicans Scramble for Health Care Plan (59 comments)

Trump Withdraws Support for MTG (43 comments)

Megyn Kelly Eviscerated over Epstein Remark (42 comments)

At Trump's Urging, DOJ Seeks Probe of Epstein Ties with Democrats (24 comments)

Atmospheric River Hits Southern California (17 comments)

Activists Take to Mexico's Streets, Accusing Leaders of Protecting Cartels (15 comments)

Tucker Carlson: Trump Shooter Was a Trump-Backing Radical (14 comments)

Trump TACOs on Bananas and Coffee (14 comments)

Faith Leaders on the Frontlines (13 comments)

The Misleading Story Fox News Told About Portland Before Trump Sent Troops (13 comments)