As mentioned previously, the race for mayor of Los Angeles features a non-leftist candidate, Rick Caruso, who is polling well and just might win. LA badly needs some adult supervision. The city has around 40,000 homeless, rampant crime, and a corrupt culture at city hall. The main leftist candidate is Rep. Karen Bass, who is more a Leninist than a “progressive.”
Given the seriousness of the issues and discontent of LA voters, what does the Los Angeles Times think is most important for voters to learn about Caruso? I kid you not—here is their headline:
Many Angelenos have already submitted their ballots ahead of the June 7 primary election. And they’ve cast their votes without knowing much of anything about how the leading candidate for Los Angeles mayor would tackle the climate crisis. . .
It’s bizarre that Caruso would spend tens of millions of dollars persuading Angelenos to vote for him while largely ignoring one of the most pressing challenges facing the city.
OMG! I’m sure the first thing on the mind of LA voters stepping over human feces, used needles, and picking driving routes to lower carjacking risk is, “Yeah, but what’s his climate plan?” What’s “bizarre” about this “news” is obvious.
P.S. Separately the LA Times reports:
Violent crime is up 81% on the [metro subway] system for the first three months of the year, compared with the same period in 2021. Patrons complain of soiled seats and elevators reeking of urine.
But I am certain the mass transit program in LA government has a climate plan.
I’m so old I can remember when the Los Angeles Times resembled a real newspaper.