The 2024 election politics

One of my previous employers opened a software development unit in Mumbai, India, circa 2000. It was cheaper than California, where our headquarters were located.

My next employer outsourced development work --electronics and mechanical design, and software development-- to Asia too, circa 2005.

One thing I remember was the dread folks here in the States felt thinking their jobs were being outsourced due to cost. I was a program manager at the time, so I had to deal with that frustration while keeping the team focused on the projects.

For many years now larger companies had operated R&D centers out of Asia, particularly India and China.

I think that when polling is what drives policy decisions, it is pandering.

I hope the Democrats nominee, after they push aside the old one, is Gavin Newsom. The ads write themselves. From the recent San Francisco mayoral debate. Recall that Newsom was the San Fran mayor. Also notice how their wacko ranked choice voting system plays into the election.

Second SF mayoral debate reveals who London Breed is most afraid of

Farrell is clearly the candidate Breed fears the most. Maybe it’s because a recent internal poll from his campaign showed him walloping her and winning the election once poll workers begin tallying second-place votes using San Francisco’s ranked-choice voting system. Maybe it’s because he’s the only candidate to the right of her.

Farrell was capable of batting most of her attacks away, but, in my view, Breed did real damage to Farrell in the debate’s second round.
That round allowed candidates to ask one prepared question to another candidate. Breed reserved hers for Farrell.

“You were at the Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club and couldn’t name any LGBT advisers to your campaign. You were at the debate last week and couldn’t name any drag queens on your own,” she said to Farrell. “… This is an opportunity to redeem yourself if you could name three LGBTQ advisers to your campaign and three drag queens in San Francisco.”

Do you mean to say that it’s a bad policy when the government does what the majority of the people want them to do?

In short, yes. Elected leaders shoud be making the tough decisions, not just parroting polls that tell them what chouce gains them the most votes. The majority of the people want the government to do what’s best for them, when the government should be doing what’s best for the country.


Got it. Then I think there should be some nuance in this case, because someone who has lived here for 10+ years and is married to a citizen may actually be good for the country. If the country makes it too difficult for someone who clearly likes living here and technically has a legal right to do so via the marriage to go through the bureaucratic process of obtaining legal residency, maybe fixing that problem is what’s good for the country.

I know someone who was a citizen and married a foreigner. Bringing the spouse here was an extremely time-consuming task. IIRC it took 3 or 4 years. It was unnecessarily time-consuming. The spouse should have been background-checked then allowed to enter the country to get a job and start contributing.

I was commenting solely on what I had quoted - that his reelection campaign reviewed polling to help finalize the plan.

I really do hope the Democrats make Newsom their candidate.

A Voter Revolt Grows in California

Gov. Gavin Newsom and Democrats in Sacramento try to block anti-tax and anti-crime initiatives from the November ballot.

A Voter Revolt Grows in California

We’ve told you about California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s lawsuit to block a citizen initiative from this November’s ballot that would make it harder to raise taxes. Now his Legislature is trying to sabotage another initiative that would toughen penalties for theft and drug crimes. Why do Democrats fear voters?

I think the majority of the people want not to have to pay taxes. Would it be the right thing to do to stop tax collection? Laws exist for a reason.

But going back to the marriage novo-DACA… This is going to be abused. I remember when I was fresh out of grad school, working as a post-doc for a professor in the UT-system. His wife -both of them were Mexican Americans-- recommended that I marry “any citizen” so I could get a quick green card. She was clearly suggesting fraud.

In some circles, fake marriages and marriages for economic gain are far more common than you imagine.


This isn’t a complaint … I’ve been out of the loop for a while, but didn’t President Donald Trump recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel six or seven years ago? I wonder how many of those other countries did the same prior to President Trump?

How about all circles? Marriage for love is a modern invention, in the past it was almost always an economic decision. If you can find someone willing to do this for you, good for you. Most people don’t take this lightly.

Not sure whether your “do this for you” is in reference to me. Why would “I” or any other legal immigrant be interested in a fake marriage?

And as for love marriage being a modern concept, what does that fact has to do with this discussion?

The generic “you”, not you personally.

You (personally) were the one who mentioned marriages for economic gain. I’m just reiterating that it’s the standard model for marriage practiced everywhere throughout history.

And I pointed out the marriage criteria the administration wants to introduce for its new version of DACA is bound to be abused. I think we’re both on the same page on that regard: it’s a misguided criteria because it’ll be abused as written by the WH.

I do not pretend to understand Canadian politics, such as, what is the difference between liberal and NDP? I know they’re both on the left and they both joined a coalition to elect Trudeau as PM. Also, I like the word ridings.

1 Like

Things are not well in Oakland, California. The news is so bad that even the NY times can’t spin it positively.

Oakland’s Mayor Had Enough Troubles. Then the F.B.I. Came Knocking.

Sheng Thao was already facing a recall election as residents remain frustrated over crime and homelessness. She said on Monday that she had committed no crimes.

1 Like

The equivalent of Washington State turning to the GOP. Goes to show you there is only so much crazy policies people will tolerate before they send a message voting against you.

Getting to be that time again.


The Squad and the house freedom caucus going opposite directions

Boebert switched to the 4th district to win. Should she had ran in her current 3rd district, she’d likely had gone the Bowman’s way too.

BTW, even in his concession speech, Bowman showed he doesn’t understand his constituents’ priorities.