SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calpoly said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Latest poll shows Baccerra's lead is down to 5.5% from over 15% pre-debate. Woah. Even Gold likes Hilton's ads. I tend to view this as a Republican can never win statewide office in CA and a Democratic can't win in Texas. Well buckle-up cause I think Texas mayhave a Democratic senator. Still can't see Hilton beating Baccerra no matter that fact Baccerra went to Stanford and he is a bad candidate.

---

Do you think Hilton is a good candidate? Why do you thin Baccerra is a bad candidate?

---

Becerra: He is a Furd. Media reports point to shaky debate performances, evasive or muddled policy responses, and a an overly passive or detached style, at a time polls indicate voters are unhappy with the way CA is going. Way too many former federal colleagues and high-profile Democrats have withheld public support or offered critical remarks regarding his management style and readiness for the governorship. He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests.

Hilton: He has run a good and clever campaign, as I think as Gold has alluded to. He has the highest number of individual donors and he draws large crowds which suggests a cult following. Is he a strong candidate? He has strong ties to Trump which is a big negative in CA. He certainly doesn't have strong ties to the State, His desire to slash bureaucracy, (shades of the Elon disaster) and roll back environmental/development regulations, may be a misread of a liberal State.

I think that people are concerned about the direction of the State and view Bacerra as boring retread of the same policies and Hilton represents something different, but Hilton, while a much more dynamic personality, may not be the answer for a majority of voters.

---

This is a fair read of things, even I am heavy in the Becerra support

---

You do know he basically called Becerra a fake Democrat and a really poor candidate and you agree with what he said and still want to vote for him?

Somebody posted recently asking if critical thinking skills are dead. This should confirm that question.

---

What you state here is WAY overstated re: Becerra.

---

You said it was a fair read of things

ChudBear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

San Jose Mercury News, Oct. 8th, 2026

---

Becerra is running on a singular issue, Trump. Hilton has real ideas.

---

Those ideas are just to bow to Trump and to not advocate for California at all

VOTE BECERRA

---

Are you always this wrong. Don't answer that, its rhetorical.

Hilton's campaign's current "Califordable" agenda includes $3 gasoline, cutting utility bills roughly in half, eliminating state income tax on the first $150,000 of earnings, reducing housing fees and regulations to revive starter-home construction, and abolishing California's $800 annual minimum franchise tax on small businesses.

He's only not advocating for Californians if you don't actually pay attention to his campaign.

---

More of the something for nothing that conservatives have offered us for 50 years now which has gotten us into our current mess

---

Democrats have controlled both chambers of the California Legislature since 1996. Democrats have had a super majority in California for almost eight years straight. Democrats have had a super majority in California for 12 of the last 14 years. Time to stop blaming their faults on everyone but them

---

Hilton is offering to wreck California finances like the conservatives have wrecked America's finances

---

In its December 2025 fiscal outlook, the LAO projected structural deficits approaching $35 billion annually beginning in 202728. That was an earlier forecast, not a confirmed deficit in the subsequently enacted budget, but it illustrates the scale of the underlying risk.

California Democrats have been wrecking finances all on their own.

---

That is less than 1% of California's GDP. It's a rounding error. The Federal Government could only dream of such an outcome after 50 years of conservative tax policy

dajo9 said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

San Jose Mercury News, Oct. 8th, 2026

---

Becerra is running on a singular issue, Trump. Hilton has real ideas.

---

Those ideas are just to bow to Trump and to not advocate for California at all

VOTE BECERRA

---

Are you always this wrong. Don't answer that, its rhetorical.

Hilton's campaign's current "Califordable" agenda includes $3 gasoline, cutting utility bills roughly in half, eliminating state income tax on the first $150,000 of earnings, reducing housing fees and regulations to revive starter-home construction, and abolishing California's $800 annual minimum franchise tax on small businesses.

He's only not advocating for Californians if you don't actually pay attention to his campaign.

---

More of the something for nothing that conservatives have offered us for 50 years now which has gotten us into our current mess

---

Democrats have controlled both chambers of the California Legislature since 1996. Democrats have had a super majority in California for almost eight years straight. Democrats have had a super majority in California for 12 of the last 14 years. Time to stop blaming their faults on everyone but them

---

Hilton is offering to wreck California finances like the conservatives have wrecked America's finances

---

In its December 2025 fiscal outlook, the LAO projected structural deficits approaching $35 billion annually beginning in 202728. That was an earlier forecast, not a confirmed deficit in the subsequently enacted budget, but it illustrates the scale of the underlying risk.

California Democrats have been wrecking finances all on their own.

---

That is less than 1% of California's GDP. It's a rounding error. The Federal Government could only dream of such an outcome after 50 years of conservative tax policy

---

Are you comparing running a state to running a country? Apples to oranges.

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calpoly said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Latest poll shows Baccerra's lead is down to 5.5% from over 15% pre-debate. Woah. Even Gold likes Hilton's ads. I tend to view this as a Republican can never win statewide office in CA and a Democratic can't win in Texas. Well buckle-up cause I think Texas mayhave a Democratic senator. Still can't see Hilton beating Baccerra no matter that fact Baccerra went to Stanford and he is a bad candidate.

---

Do you think Hilton is a good candidate? Why do you thin Baccerra is a bad candidate?

---

Becerra: He is a Furd. Media reports point to shaky debate performances, evasive or muddled policy responses, and a an overly passive or detached style, at a time polls indicate voters are unhappy with the way CA is going. Way too many former federal colleagues and high-profile Democrats have withheld public support or offered critical remarks regarding his management style and readiness for the governorship. He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests.

Hilton: He has run a good and clever campaign, as I think as Gold has alluded to. He has the highest number of individual donors and he draws large crowds which suggests a cult following. Is he a strong candidate? He has strong ties to Trump which is a big negative in CA. He certainly doesn't have strong ties to the State, His desire to slash bureaucracy, (shades of the Elon disaster) and roll back environmental/development regulations, may be a misread of a liberal State.

I think that people are concerned about the direction of the State and view Bacerra as boring retread of the same policies and Hilton represents something different, but Hilton, while a much more dynamic personality, may not be the answer for a majority of voters.

---

This is a fair read of things, even I am heavy in the Becerra support

---

You do know he basically called Becerra a fake Democrat and a really poor candidate and you agree with what he said and still want to vote for him?

Somebody posted recently asking if critical thinking skills are dead. This should confirm that question.

---

What you state here is WAY overstated re: Becerra.

---

You said it was a fair read of things

---

It was a fair read of things by Wifey. I don't think that he stated that Becerra was a fake Dem, just that he has some issues to overcome and not everyone in his party is a fan or believes in him.

I SURE AS HELL DO THOUGH AND WILL PUT IT IN CAPS!

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE BECERRA

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calpoly said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Latest poll shows Baccerra's lead is down to 5.5% from over 15% pre-debate. Woah. Even Gold likes Hilton's ads. I tend to view this as a Republican can never win statewide office in CA and a Democratic can't win in Texas. Well buckle-up cause I think Texas mayhave a Democratic senator. Still can't see Hilton beating Baccerra no matter that fact Baccerra went to Stanford and he is a bad candidate.

---

Do you think Hilton is a good candidate? Why do you thin Baccerra is a bad candidate?

---

Becerra: He is a Furd. Media reports point to shaky debate performances, evasive or muddled policy responses, and a an overly passive or detached style, at a time polls indicate voters are unhappy with the way CA is going. Way too many former federal colleagues and high-profile Democrats have withheld public support or offered critical remarks regarding his management style and readiness for the governorship. He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests.

Hilton: He has run a good and clever campaign, as I think as Gold has alluded to. He has the highest number of individual donors and he draws large crowds which suggests a cult following. Is he a strong candidate? He has strong ties to Trump which is a big negative in CA. He certainly doesn't have strong ties to the State, His desire to slash bureaucracy, (shades of the Elon disaster) and roll back environmental/development regulations, may be a misread of a liberal State.

I think that people are concerned about the direction of the State and view Bacerra as boring retread of the same policies and Hilton represents something different, but Hilton, while a much more dynamic personality, may not be the answer for a majority of voters.

---

This is a fair read of things, even I am heavy in the Becerra support

---

You do know he basically called Becerra a fake Democrat and a really poor candidate and you agree with what he said and still want to vote for him?

Somebody posted recently asking if critical thinking skills are dead. This should confirm that question.

---

What you state here is WAY overstated re: Becerra.

---

You said it was a fair read of things

---

It was a fair read of things by Wifey. I don't think that he stated that Becerra was a fake Dem, just that he has some issues to overcome and not everyone in his party is a fan or believes in him.

I SURE AS HELL DO THOUGH AND WILL PUT IT IN CAPS!

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE BECERRA

---

"He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests."

You said you agreed with this. Why do you support him?

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calpoly said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Latest poll shows Baccerra's lead is down to 5.5% from over 15% pre-debate. Woah. Even Gold likes Hilton's ads. I tend to view this as a Republican can never win statewide office in CA and a Democratic can't win in Texas. Well buckle-up cause I think Texas mayhave a Democratic senator. Still can't see Hilton beating Baccerra no matter that fact Baccerra went to Stanford and he is a bad candidate.

---

Do you think Hilton is a good candidate? Why do you thin Baccerra is a bad candidate?

---

Becerra: He is a Furd. Media reports point to shaky debate performances, evasive or muddled policy responses, and a an overly passive or detached style, at a time polls indicate voters are unhappy with the way CA is going. Way too many former federal colleagues and high-profile Democrats have withheld public support or offered critical remarks regarding his management style and readiness for the governorship. He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests.

Hilton: He has run a good and clever campaign, as I think as Gold has alluded to. He has the highest number of individual donors and he draws large crowds which suggests a cult following. Is he a strong candidate? He has strong ties to Trump which is a big negative in CA. He certainly doesn't have strong ties to the State, His desire to slash bureaucracy, (shades of the Elon disaster) and roll back environmental/development regulations, may be a misread of a liberal State.

I think that people are concerned about the direction of the State and view Bacerra as boring retread of the same policies and Hilton represents something different, but Hilton, while a much more dynamic personality, may not be the answer for a majority of voters.

---

This is a fair read of things, even I am heavy in the Becerra support

---

You do know he basically called Becerra a fake Democrat and a really poor candidate and you agree with what he said and still want to vote for him?

Somebody posted recently asking if critical thinking skills are dead. This should confirm that question.

---

What you state here is WAY overstated re: Becerra.

---

You said it was a fair read of things

---

It was a fair read of things by Wifey. I don't think that he stated that Becerra was a fake Dem, just that he has some issues to overcome and not everyone in his party is a fan or believes in him.

I SURE AS HELL DO THOUGH AND WILL PUT IT IN CAPS!

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE BECERRA

---

"He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests."

You said you agreed with this. Why do you support him?

---

Please read what I posted re: Hilty.

Aussie aussie aussie oy oy oy

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE BECERRA

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

ChudBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

calpoly said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Latest poll shows Baccerra's lead is down to 5.5% from over 15% pre-debate. Woah. Even Gold likes Hilton's ads. I tend to view this as a Republican can never win statewide office in CA and a Democratic can't win in Texas. Well buckle-up cause I think Texas mayhave a Democratic senator. Still can't see Hilton beating Baccerra no matter that fact Baccerra went to Stanford and he is a bad candidate.

---

Do you think Hilton is a good candidate? Why do you thin Baccerra is a bad candidate?

---

Becerra: He is a Furd. Media reports point to shaky debate performances, evasive or muddled policy responses, and a an overly passive or detached style, at a time polls indicate voters are unhappy with the way CA is going. Way too many former federal colleagues and high-profile Democrats have withheld public support or offered critical remarks regarding his management style and readiness for the governorship. He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests.

Hilton: He has run a good and clever campaign, as I think as Gold has alluded to. He has the highest number of individual donors and he draws large crowds which suggests a cult following. Is he a strong candidate? He has strong ties to Trump which is a big negative in CA. He certainly doesn't have strong ties to the State, His desire to slash bureaucracy, (shades of the Elon disaster) and roll back environmental/development regulations, may be a misread of a liberal State.

I think that people are concerned about the direction of the State and view Bacerra as boring retread of the same policies and Hilton represents something different, but Hilton, while a much more dynamic personality, may not be the answer for a majority of voters.

---

This is a fair read of things, even I am heavy in the Becerra support

---

You do know he basically called Becerra a fake Democrat and a really poor candidate and you agree with what he said and still want to vote for him?

Somebody posted recently asking if critical thinking skills are dead. This should confirm that question.

---

What you state here is WAY overstated re: Becerra.

---

You said it was a fair read of things

---

It was a fair read of things by Wifey. I don't think that he stated that Becerra was a fake Dem, just that he has some issues to overcome and not everyone in his party is a fan or believes in him.

I SURE AS HELL DO THOUGH AND WILL PUT IT IN CAPS!

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE BECERRA

---

"He seems to offer no new ideas to the huge issues Ca fact and is only response to any issues seems to be Trump. He has a lot of skeletons in his closet that are going to come out when he is looked at nationally, and a lot of criticism is going to come from fellow Dems. And if GOP somehow manages to remain in control is Congress expect at lot of investigations. Personality wiser, he is bland/boring technocrat, which after the last two Governor may make him a bad candidate, though you can debate if that makes him a bad governor. And for those who this matters, he isn't really very progressive, and is in the pocket of a lot of big money vested interests."

You said you agreed with this. Why do you support him?

---

Please read what I posted re: Hilty.

Aussie aussie aussie oy oy oy

VOTE BLUE AND VOTE BECERRA

---

You're not even a funny troll.