CA is shocking me a LOT lately.

Loren Littlejohn

Loren Littlejohn

Lover of all boobage.
Aug 20, 2006
11,737
38
48
Auburn NY- we grow em you listen
www.myspace.com
I think the possibility of state level republicans being elected is a lot more common because they are (in bluer state mind you) forced into being significantly more rational than the political mockery that is the tea party.

Nevertheless, I am surprised about San Diego as well. But the navy base does sway political opinion a lot...
 
Vice//Versa said:
I think the possibility of state level republicans being elected is a lot more common because they are (in bluer state mind you) forced into being significantly more rational than the political mockery that is the tea party.
Click to expand...

Not quite true - The OC was a Tea Party hotspot and always voted deep red until prop 20 passed and it was re-districted and un-gerrymandered.
 
Good to see that second article. I have my CCW permit from when I lived in Utah, but the chances of getting one here in San Diego were near zero. I doubt they'll ever get reciprocity here so my Utah permit is good, but at least now maybe we'll be able to take the class and get a Cali one.
 
The OC was a Tea Party hotspot and always voted deep red until prop 20 passed
Click to expand...

Totally agree but that is to be expected anywhere with such a high concentration of wealth. And yes, the border/military presence/less urban culture up in the mountains make SoCal a lot more conservative. In fact, I would say that there us a slight misconception that all of California is nearly as liberal as San Francisco or Sacramento but there where I live there's all kinds of facepalm inducing bumper stickers about a certain you-know-who and a certain African country :Smug:
 
I sort of figured Southern CA would be more conservative just in the reality that it's down there with AZ and TX so I figured political affiliations would spill over.

What almost always surprises me is when a major city votes Republican. Now granted from what I read the former mayor was a fucking POS surrounded by other corrupt POS kind of like ours is right now in NYS so that probably helped out his opponent quite a bit.

It's funny if you chop up New York into the conservative vs. progressive areas most of upstate (talking about north of Westchester county) falls on the conservative side (Tomkins and Albany counties being the exceptions). But there are so many more people in that little tail of ours who vote and vote progressive any hope anyone has of taking this state blue is pure fail.

Of course with the amount of people we have getting the fuck out of this state it won't matter anymore pretty soon anyway. I read that NYS is set to have a smaller population than FL at the rate they are having people bail.
 
mva801 said:
Good to see that second article. I have my CCW permit from when I lived in Utah, but the chances of getting one here in San Diego were near zero. I doubt they'll ever get reciprocity here so my Utah permit is good, but at least now maybe we'll be able to take the class and get a Cali one.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah I agree. The idea of having to come up with a reason that someone else deems worthy to exercise any of the bill of rights is nonsense.
 
The reality is California is mostly conservative, its the small pockets of SF and LA that swing over that 51%. Sacramento is very 50/50, however you get either extremely uneducated outspoken progressives or bigot gay hating, racist wannabe rednecks. The outskirt suburb area where I live on the very north end of the Sacramento area is pretty relax, more right leaning for the most part, hell we don't even have a local police department and no one gives a hoot.

It feels good though every now and then to see more Progressive areas of California turning more Classical Liberal. Maybe if our politicians starting using their brains, some logic and solid facts/statistics to make lawmaking decisions we will be in a better place.
 
Loren Littlejohn said:
Oh yeah I agree. The idea of having to come up with a reason that someone else deems worthy to exercise any of the bill of rights is nonsense.
Click to expand...

It's not your free exercise of the bill of rights that anyone is arguing over. It's the language in those articles and what exactly is meant by "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
 
TheWinterSnow said:
The reality is California is mostly conservative, its the small pockets of SF and LA that swing over that 51%.
Click to expand...
Let's try real reality. Obama took 60% in Ca in 2012. Yes, urban areas tend to be left of rural areas but that's nearly universal in the US. CA's rep as being left of center has been earned. You are right the the conservatism leans libertarian but that sort of proves the point.
 
egan. said:
Let's try real reality. Obama took 60% in Ca in 2012. Yes, urban areas tend to be left of rural areas but that's nearly universal in the US. CA's rep as being left of center has been earned. You are right the the conservatism leans libertarian but that sort of proves the point.
Click to expand...

True, maybe I don't see left and right in California the same though. Like you mentioned, conservative being more libertarian, I also see more educated folk who ask questions and don't cling to a political ideology that may lean left as not being really left, and I also feel more that a lot of people who do lean left and in most cases extreme left including politicians either have a financial incentive to be that way or simply haven't read a book/educated themselves on the topic. As such I feel that the common liberal is more savable in the grand scheme of things compared to the ol' southern religious conservative types when it comes to real non-progressive, liberal ideologies, the lack of education on the topic is really the only obstacle, I would say most left leaning voters in California did there research and asked questions most of them would be more "libertarian".

I do think that California will be the place where the revival of Classical Liberal platform will take place, and like I said earlier, its really hopeful to see that shift taking place.

As for Obama taking such a high percentage, look at who he was up against. We still live in a country were most voters still think you only have two options and the GOP option was lackluster at best. A heavily religious, medieval traditional Mormon who worked for Goldman Sachs wasn't going to get any sway in California by any means.
 
JeffTD said:
It's not your free exercise of the bill of rights that anyone is arguing over. It's the language in those articles and what exactly is meant by "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Click to expand...

Heller v DC stated you have the right to keep and bear arms inside the home. It never addressed the outside the home issue. This case pretty much settled it at this level, I'm fairly certain it will make the SCOTUS eventually though and then who knows.

It would be nice if gun control had some logic to it. I can't imagine this kind of shit going down well with any of the other bill of rights.

1st: You must ask the government permission before you blog on the internet and your subject must be approved by a ruling body.
2nd: You must give good cause to carry a gun outside the home, the reason shall be determined to be good enough by the ruling body (in the case of CA and NY a Cop or Judge)
3rd. You must give good cause not to have a cop stay at your home without permission.
4th. You have to have a good reason for the cops to not search your home, "I don't want them to without a warrant" will not work.

Seriously this "I feel like your reason for wanting to keep and bear arms outside the home isn't warranted" is bullshit. If you fallow the law then you fallow the law, no reason should be necessary.
 
Loren Littlejohn said:
Heller v DC stated you have the right to keep and bear arms inside the home. It never addressed the outside the home issue. This case pretty much settled it at this level, I'm fairly certain it will make the SCOTUS eventually though and then who knows.

It would be nice if gun control had some logic to it. I can't imagine this kind of shit going down well with any of the other bill of rights.

1st: You must ask the government permission before you blog on the internet and your subject must be approved by a ruling body.
2nd: You must give good cause to carry a gun outside the home, the reason shall be determined to be good enough by the ruling body (in the case of CA and NY a Cop or Judge)
3rd. You must give good cause not to have a cop stay at your home without permission.
4th. You have to have a good reason for the cops to not search your home, "I don't want them to without a warrant" will not work.

Seriously this "I feel like your reason for wanting to keep and bear arms outside the home isn't warranted" is bullshit. If you fallow the law then you fallow the law, no reason should be necessary.
Click to expand...




That's not what I meant. The whole premise for argument on the 2nd Amendment hinges on definitions of a "well regulated militia" and what is "necessary for the security of a free state."

You said that you think it's bullshit to have to ask for permission to exercise what's contained in the Bill of Rights. What I'm saying is that nobody is curtailing your ability to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights but rather they have a different interpretation of what the 2nd Amendment actually calls for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back