What is the Political Geography of California?

[smoltchanov]

^ The Bay Area reminds me old Soviet Union in at least two aspects - both are (were) leftist and, essentially, one party....

[smoltchanov]

^ The Bay Area reminds me old Soviet Union in at least two aspects - both are (were) leftist and, essentially, one party....

In Soviet Russia, Opposition is driven out

In Bay Area, Opposition drives itself out

No, i disageee politely. In Bay Area opposition is, essentially, driven out too. No one listens to you, no one respects you and your opinion, a lot - despise you openly. Who would like to live under such conditions and stress? Somewhat milder then in USSR, but not by lot... Political sorting at it's best...

[smoltchanov]

Bay Area has plenty of disagreements and political fights, it's just that their Overton window is way to the left of the U.S. as a whole. Plenty of people register disagreement with the Dems by voting third party or abstaining from elections.

For greens and socialists? In Bay Area these "third parties" are, usually, to the left of Democratic, and almost all "disagreements" are between solid left and "far left". The most moderate are "business Democrats" - solidly liberal on all social issues, but with some fiscal conservative streak. These, for all practical purposes, are "conservatives" of Bay Area... But no one in his sane mind will call them genuine conservatives.. Quarter century ago there was a real competition between liberal Democrats and relatively progressive (but with the above mentioned fiscal conservative streak) Republicans. Sometimes (people like state Senator Peter Behr) the Republicans were even more progressive. No more... As (from memory) Henry Ford has said: "you can buy any car, provided it's a black colored Ford". The same situation in general...  And if the only "reasonable choice" for political opponents is to abstain from election - sorry, it's not a democracy, but a mild form of dictatorship...

[smoltchanov]

If people want to change the balance of power there, perhaps it is time to redesign the way we conduct elections, moving to one of the plenty of better designs that exist that would foster more, better choices. Of course, even then, there is no guarantee that you end up with anything but "far left" and "left" choices there. If those beliefs are the overwhelmingly consensus there, then it is what it is.

I always said that political polarization + "2-party system" will eventually lead this country to Balkanization, we already observe, which, in turn,  will threaten to break it apart (exactly what happened with Soviet Union or Yugoslavia). Wide areas of the country are "ruled" by one party - and it's bad, notwithstanding which one: Democratic in California's Bay Area or Republican in Northern part of Texas.. Two-party system was adequate for previous historic period, where both parties more or less subscribed under "broad tent" idea, where there were really conservative Democrats and really liberal Republicans who could successfully compete "on enemy's territory", and so on. Not now - where you can predict general political positions of 98% Democratic and Republican candidates knowing nothing about them, but letter after their names. And results of elections in 95% of congressional districts based on their geographic location and demographic composition. Right now polarization and political sorting led to a situation where there are, essentially, two Americas, hating each other to the utmost. This can't continue forever - either polarization will subside, or parlamentary multiparty system will be created. or - country will be torn apart. We will see, which variant prevails.

[smoltchanov]

^ The Bay Area reminds me old Soviet Union in at least two aspects - both are (were) leftist and, essentially, one party....

In Soviet Russia, Opposition is driven out

In Bay Area, Opposition drives itself out

No, i disageee politely. In Bay Area opposition is, essentially, driven out too. No one listens to you, no one respects you and your opinion, a lot - despise you openly. Who would like to live under such conditions and stress? Somewhat milder then in USSR, but not by lot... Political sorting at it's best...

Lol I live in the Bay Area. I don't find it particularly less tolerant than any other politically homogeneous region of the country. If you disagree from what most people believe, they're gonna dislike and be prejudice against you. That's true in essentially every polarized community. Now, the Bay Area is more ideologically diverse that it appears. We've got Bernie-types, actual communists, anarchists, moderate Democrats, conservatives and libertarians, even some Trump voters. We vote as a monolith, but when you dig down people are quite diverse. And don't forget, most people everywhere are actually not that political (almost half the country never votes, for example). But I'll grant that if you voted for Trump, 70% of the Bay Area immediately hates you.

Well, i am absolutely anti-Trump (at least in 99% of cases). But, as late president Truman has said, "show me!" (though i am not from the state of Missouri). Where are Republican congressmen or state Senators from Bay Area? In fact, until Catherine Baker (very moderate Republican) managed her feat and won 16th Assembly district - there was zero in Assembly too. Now there is exactly ONE!. And this is in a part of state that gave (in the past) such moderate or openly liberal Republican officeholders as Welch, Behr, Filante, Marks, McCloskey, Boro and other. How many Republicans hold posts in San Francisco? AFAIK - zero, the only one nominal Republican, who was one of the BART directors, was defeated in 2014 despite being supported by almost all Democratic establishment - probably because of this "nominal Republicanism". How many republican officeholders are in San Mateo or Marin? I don't know a single one, and i trace politics of this region with all possible attention. Everything is done in one party. Exactly as it was in USSR, i already mentioned (after all, in CPSU there were their own "reformists", like Gorbachev, and their own hardliners). Essentially Republicans don't even have  chances to pretend on winning election now - 20-25% (at most - 30) is their ceiling in almost all races - from President to dogcatcher.... One-party rule is bad! Always, be it Republican in Texas or Oklahoma, or Democratic here. It's a sort of axiom for me, who has rich experience of living under such rule.

That's all i wanted to say on this subject. And it portends big problems in the future. After all -  talks about splitting California into up to 6 states arose mostly because of existing political situation, and they may be a harbringers of what will come...

[smoltchanov]

Dictatorship in the Soviet Union meant police breaking down your door and sending you to a prison camp in Siberia for 10 years for rumors that you said something objectionable. Leftism in San Francisco means you get dirty looks if you were a MAGA cap in public and you don't have enough power to get elected officials who agree with you. Not really the same.

I lived in the Soviet Union for almost 35 years since my birth. Who of us knows life there better?)))))

[smoltchanov]

Dictatorship in the Soviet Union meant police breaking down your door and sending you to a prison camp in Siberia for 10 years for rumors that you said something objectionable. Leftism in San Francisco means you get dirty looks if you were a MAGA cap in public and you don't have enough power to get elected officials who agree with you. Not really the same.

I lived in the Soviet Union for almost 35 years since my birth. Who of us knows life there better?)))))

I'm sure you know it very well, and the analogy is still very hard to sustain.

Not so hard. Soviet Union (Brezhnev's, not Stalin's) is what strongly one-party areas like Bay Area (or Texas, Alabama, Oklahoma - you choose) may become in 20-25 years, if polarization will continue. Where only one point of view is respected and even tolerated... It's a warning about what must be avoided in any case...

[smoltchanov]

Dictatorship in the Soviet Union meant police breaking down your door and sending you to a prison camp in Siberia for 10 years for rumors that you said something objectionable. Leftism in San Francisco means you get dirty looks if you were a MAGA cap in public and you don't have enough power to get elected officials who agree with you. Not really the same.

I lived in the Soviet Union for almost 35 years since my birth. Who of us knows life there better?)))))

I'm sure you know it very well, and the analogy is still very hard to sustain.

Not so hard. Soviet Union (Brezhnev's, not Stalin's) is what strongly one-party areas like Bay Area (or Texas, Alabama, Oklahoma - you choose) may become in 20-25 years, if polarization will continue. Where only one point of view is respected and even tolerated... It's a warning about what must be avoided in any case...

So, what's the solution? Force people in the Bay Area to become more conservative? Force more conservatives to move to the bat area?

Try to learn to respect the views, which are opposite of yours. As French philosophers of 18th century have said "i may hate your views, but i am ready to give my life for your right to express it". I never saw so much "dirt", and direct hatred in electoral campaigns of 1970-80th, when i began to study American politics, as i see now. It was normal then for a candidates to have dinner together after election day, and now, if one would believe everything one candidate says about another the second would be minimum serial killer (and in many cases - more than that). The simple phrase "my opponent is a good honorable man, but we disagree on .... (this and that)" is a BIG rarity in present day campaigns. No understanding that your opponent may be right on something, while you are not. And so on... If people will relearn mutual respect i mentioned above, and decrease the overwhelming level of polarization we have now - then my "apocalyptic scenario" may never happen. Otherwise - not so sure.

[smoltchanov]

That's all i wanted to say on this subject. And it portends big problems in the future. After all -  talks about splitting California into up to 6 states arose mostly because of existing political situation, and they may be a harbringers of what will come...

An initiative to divide California into 3 states has been submitted for review by the Attorney General. It is much simpler than the 6 California proposal, and would simply give California's legislative consent to be divided into three states (when Kentucky, Maine, and West Virginia became states, Virginia, Massachusetts, and Virginia legislatures gave consent).

Virginia had given consent for the formation of Kentucky while the Constitution was being ratified. The Continental Congress decided not to act while the Constitution was pending. When Maine split off, a very large share of the population was in Maine, and one might have even conceived that a majority of the population would be in Maine. Consent for formation of West Virginia was given by the remnant of the legislature that was meeting in Wheeling. After West Virginia became a state, the Virginia legislature was dormant.

The three proposed states are:

California: Los Angeles to Monterey + San Benito.

Northern California: Everything else north of Merced/Mariposa, except Mono.

Southern California: Everything else south of Fresno/Madera, including Mono.

In such case "California" and "Northern California" will surely be Democratic, "Southern California" - probably swing...