Why hasn’t a CA governor become President since President Reagan?

@jackjjackson And? The fuck is that supposed to mean? You like big economies, go live in China.

Tempting offer but no thanks 😀 @BlueMetalChick

@jackjjackson I know. Though UK has recovered somewhat so it's back to 6th I believe.

I was pointing out that Texas does not have the largest land mass.

@WoodyAq He would have been a fucking disaster if elected.

@QuixoticSoul I don't disagree.

CA seems to mirror the country. Lousy candidates xo aidering t huge talent pool. @WoodyAq

@jackjjackson Is that really a positive? Hasn't California had more than its share of fiscal irresponsibility?

That’s for sure. In fact I can’t think of a CA or NY governor since Reagan that I would vote for. @eli1601

@eli1601 Every state has more than its share of fiscal irresponsibility - but unlike many, CA is a donor state that funds itself, pays into the system, and keeps its shit in order. That already puts it on a very very short list.

Hey sweetie! Yes, you are right and he’s the only good thing that came out of Hollywood! @gregloa

@Slappaho the public sector is spending a ton of capital. the private sector is generating a ton of capital.

very different entities.

public sector liabilities are state-wide. private sector capital production is global and pays for a good part of that state spending with high state income tax.

personally every aspect of my work in both the private and public sectors (not california)-- depends on ip and capital generated in that shit hole.

i don't see how the fucked up public sector at all takes away from the success of the private sector that generates like 3T$ of capital with a 70K$ GDP per capita.

I think you may have gone over his head 😲 @CopperCicada

@CopperCicada Having a large economy prevents somewhere from being a shithole? Hell, go live in Beijing, rucka. Must be the least shitty place on Earth. Never mind the overbearing smog and toxicity or the low pay and high work hours. It's a huge economy.

You need to study more@BlueMetalChick

@Slappaho No, I really don't. You'd be the one who needs to study more. Reagan was an abomination of a president, his deregulatory practices caused enormous harm to the US economy, he intentionally increased the price of secondary education, he wasted an asinine amount of money on the utter disaster that was the Contras scandal involving Nicaragua and later Iran. He allowed predatory financial actions to run rampant. He shut down sanitariums and asylums, resulting in the mentally insane being forced into homelessness.

Or, perhaps I should say, his administration did all those things. A lot of people say Reagan was losing his cognitive abilities to Alzheimer's disease far sooner than anyone realized and had no idea what he was doing, and those around him were manipulating him to their interests.

I made no fiscal responsibility reference. My thoughts related solely to population and economic size. Another reader pointed out the same thing about NY not having a presidential candidate. I’m thr end it’s probably because the policy is of a a Cabot NY governor couldn’t win a national race? @Northwest

@jackjjackson Deukmejian was not nationwide material. Wilson was not nationwide material. They could not even balance the California budget.

People can say what they want about Jerry Brown, but all those who were California when he was Governor, know that for this first stretch, the Silicon Valley, materialized, leading the world and the school system was top notch. During his second stretch, he took the state from a near bankruptcy and produced a surplus, and California was back on top.

No doubt. Both Jerry and Arnold did surprisingly well during their governor stints. @Northwest

Good point. Neither NY or CA are exactly known for political diversity lol. @MistyCee

@jackjjackson Yeah, that's a good point, too, but I was thinking more about the downsides of making more enemies as governor of a big state.

THATS A POINT lol. @beckyromero