General Discussion

haele

(15,523 posts)

1. He's not as actively vocal against Silicon Valley Tech Bros as I'd like.

Tue Apr 21, 2026, 01:55 PM

Apr 21

Otherwise, he's pretty much been a guy in California State Government who's done the jobs he's been elected to pretty well within the constraints of legislature and regulations.
He's not loud or flashy, rather like Padilla.
(Not making a stereotype here, just pointing out both are rather low-key and present well as "family guys" )
I'm not sure which of the myriad of California interest group players he's aligned with, so if I were looking at potential future downsides, I would pay attention to who endorses him during the primary.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

._.

40 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

CA: I think I will vote for , Xavier Becerra---Any scandals I don't know about that are out there or reason [View all] cally Apr 21 OP

He's not as actively vocal against Silicon Valley Tech Bros as I'd like. haele Apr 21 #1

Thanks cally Apr 21 #3

IIRC, Becerra was looked at as a possible running oasis Apr 21 #2

Is there any evidence that he knows cursive? Renew Deal Apr 21 #4

An obvious question mark is... ._. Apr 21 #5

I know about that one cally Apr 21 #6

This message was self-deleted by its author PeaceWave Apr 21 #7

What a joke. That's dated Nov 2025, and it states very clearly Nixie Apr 21 #8

This message was self-deleted by its author PeaceWave Apr 21 #9

His story is very inspiring. I got a flyer from Steyer's campaign and Nixie Apr 21 #12

Meaning it remains unanswered for all this time. ._. Apr 21 #10

Thoughtful voters would read the article and see that he Nixie Apr 21 #11

Then his efforts failed. It's really that simple. ._. Apr 21 #13

Try not to conflate lower standards and different standards. Two separate concepts. Torchlight Apr 21 #14

He has responsibility in this. To say otherwise is to hold a lower standard.. ._. Apr 21 #15

Just a quick Google shows that the Politico article is lacking Nixie Apr 21 #16

What's the first thing you'd point out from your post, that wasn't in the article? ._. Apr 21 #17

You should read the case summary. The politico article Nixie Apr 21 #18

Let me ask you something. ._. Apr 21 #19

It's also not against the law to delegate to staff. I actually read what he instructed his staff to find about Nixie Apr 21 #21

It was more than "a few thousand" and I'd hope you would know that. ._. Apr 22 #22

If you read the article, you would not misrepresent what the amount was. Go back and read it again. The monthly Nixie Apr 22 #23

It was 3x the going rate. THREE times. And the amount removed was $10,000 per month. ._. Apr 22 #24

It was $7,500 initially, which is a few thousand a month. Nixie Apr 22 #25

$10,000 was taken each month, with $7500 of that claimed as maintenance and... ._. Apr 22 #27

That's good you now take Becerra's word since your insinuations that Becerra somehow knew and allowed his Nixie Apr 23 #30

You say you've found "plenty" about this situation. ._. Apr 24 #31

Again, very simple Google searches of actual case documents Nixie Apr 24 #32

If you don't know, just say so. ._. Apr 24 #33

Such irony. Nixie Saturday #34

If Becerra approved the expense without ever looking at the written examples (if they exist), ._. Saturday #35

In your uninformed opinion and your own personal extrapolations. Nixie Saturday #36

Disregarding that benchmark in such a way is what's unethical. ._. Saturday #37

Now look at your agenda. Thanks for the reveal. Nixie Saturday #38

I've no idea what you're trying to say. ._. Saturday #39

lol Nixie Saturday #40

I just saw a poll today that both repubs lead in the race tishaLA Apr 21 #20

I don't know of any scandals. He has my vote. LoisB Apr 22 #26

Resident for 40+ years... WarGamer Apr 22 #28

Interesting cally Apr 23 #29