California’s governor is being touted as a successor to the Biden throne. Though he’s often imagined as a beacon of progress, his feckless record shows otherwise.
Newsom was sworn in by his father and pledged to bring his business experience to the board.[23] Brown called Newsom “part of the future generation of leaders of this great city”.[23] Newsom described himself as a “social liberal and a fiscal watchdog”.[23][24] He was elected to a full four-year term to the board in 1998. San Francisco voters chose to abandon at-large elections to the board for the previous district system in 1999. Newsom was reelected in 2000 and 2002 to represent the second district, which includes Pacific Heights, the Marina, Cow Hollow, Sea Cliff and Laurel Heights, which had San Francisco’s highest income level and highest Republican registration.[25] Newsom paid $500 to the San Francisco Republican Party to appear on the party’s endorsement slate in 2000 while running for Supervisor.[26] He was reelected.[27]
He only ran as a dem because he is in California and Republicans have no chance there
-and you cannot. Therefore what is happening is you are positioning an opinion as fact. This means it can easily be dismissed as irrelevant to the topic.
Can you show your work on this?
You want me to go though his entire polical history to show how he’s only on the side of whatever he thinks is popular instead of being principled?
Proof goes hand-in-hand with credibility.
So yes you do on a thread about this article?
https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2023/11/gavin-newsom-is-not-a-progressive
Or you just want it from other sources?
You said this:
Prove it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Newsom
You want more?
That in no way supports your argument. Try again.
Why?
I asked you to prove this:
-and you cannot. Therefore what is happening is you are positioning an opinion as fact. This means it can easily be dismissed as irrelevant to the topic.