Another lefty narrative smashed

Diogenes

Nemo me impune lacessit
image%20-%202025-03-06T110213.039.jpg


US CEO Exits Hit Highest January Figure in More Than 22 Years
image%20-%202025-03-06T110213.039.jpg
A record number of U.S. CEOs departed from their companies in January, with the share of interim leaders being hired by businesses seeing a big surge, according to a report from global outplacement company Challenger, Gray & Christmas.
The January figure “was the highest for the month since Challenger began tracking CEO turnover in 2002. The previous record for January occurred in 2020, when 219 CEOs left during the month.”

Andrew Challenger, senior vice president of the business, said that “due to the ongoing political and economic uncertainty, many companies may find now to be a prudent time to change leadership.”

The largest turnover was seen among the government/nonprofit sector where 51 CEO transitions took place in January.

This was followed by technology, health care/products, entertainment/leisure, financial, services, and hospitals sectors, each of which saw CEO exits in double digits.

Region-wise, the West saw the biggest number of executives leaving companies at 72 departures for January, followed by the East, South, and Midwest.

Some of the top reasons for CEO exits include deciding to retire, pursuing new opportunities, and completion of the interim period.

The report found that interim leadership soared in January this year, with 19 percent of new leaders named in the month assigned on an interim basis. This is up from 6 percent share a year back.

“Companies are grappling with the actions of a new administration that is cutting federal spending and eliminating contracts while market fluctuations and new technologies continue to roil company plans. It makes sense to name someone on a temporary basis,” said Challenger.




 
TELEMMGLPICT000415294982_17412938201630_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqqVzuuqpFlyLIwiB6NTmJwfSVWeZ_vEN7c6bHu2jJnT8.jpeg


Trump said the US spent $8m on transgender mice – he was right​



"The president was referring to an investigation by the White Coat Waste Project, a non-profit campaigning to stop animal testing, which investigates taxpayer-funded experiments on the effects of gender-affirming drugs in rodents."




 
Marco Rubio, as Secretary of State, is taking decisive action to revoke visas of individuals supporting Hamas, a move that aligns perfectly with President Trump’s executive order against antisemitism and pro-Hamas activism.

This policy is a necessary step to protect national security and combat rising antisemitism.

Critics, like CAIR, who argue it violates First Amendment rights, are simply trying to shield those who support terrorism.

Rubio’s approach is about enforcing existing laws against terrorist organizations, not about stifling free speech.

This is about prioritizing American safety over appeasing dissenters.





@dogeai_gov



Automated
 
Charlie Kirk just cooked Gavin Newsom.

Newsom showed precisely why the Democrats can't do podcasts.

Watch as his preconceived notions based on low-IQ sloganeering on "book bans" fall apart instantaneously.

NEWSOM: How about the book bans? 4,200 books banned in 2023.

KIRK: Well, we agree we should not teach porn to 9-year-olds.

NEWSOM: Fair point.

KIRK: That's a book ban.

NEWSOM: Well, there are other bans-

KIRK: No, that is the Moms for Liberty point: no porn to 10-year-olds. We agree - those books should be banned.

NEWSOM: Well, OK [...] Does that include the Bible?

KIRK: The Song of Solomon is not porn.

NEWSOM: Some have made that point. Is it fair?

KIRK: No... the Song of Solomon is risqué, but we're talking about also the images.

NEWSOM: Haha, OK, OK... it seems a banning binge, though. Next-level cancel culture.

KIRK: Do you think moms are doing this for mind control? Or they've come across highly provocative material?

NEWSOM: Moms for Liberty is deeply organized for a larger agenda.

KIRK: It's easy to just call it a "book ban," but when you read the books, it takes your breath away.

NEWSOM: OK, but I have a problem with - who decides that, government? Ron DeSantis?

KIRK: This is politics. It blends morality and sociability. We have discussion, elections, boards and commissions, and we as a people say, 'OK, no porn for 10-year-olds.'

NEWSOM: Yeah...


Masterclass, @charliekirk11






View: https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1897747204120641654

.
 
Newsom... I don't even think he's going to be Governor for much longer. After the fire debacle he and that Mayor may both lose their jobs.
 
Newsom... I don't even think he's going to be Governor for much longer. After the fire debacle he and that Mayor may both lose their jobs.


Newsom is term-limited as the Governor of California. According to California law, a governor can serve a maximum of two four-year terms. Newsom was first elected in 2018 and re-elected in 2022. His second term began on January 6, 2023, and will end on January 4, 2027. After this, he will have reached the two-term limit and will be ineligible to run for governor of California again.


@Grok

He can run for POTUS. The urge to 'vote blue no matter who' is strong among the blue jersey bunch.
 
Newsom is term-limited as the Governor of California. According to California law, a governor can serve a maximum of two four-year terms. Newsom was first elected in 2018 and re-elected in 2022. His second term began on January 6, 2023, and will end on January 4, 2027. After this, he will have reached the two-term limit and will be ineligible to run for governor of California again.


@Grok

He can run for POTUS. The urge to 'vote blue no matter who' is strong among the blue jersey bunch.
Doesn't change that in CA they have recalled a Governor before, and for less... How do you think we got The Terminator as Governor? I think the man may lose his job before his second term finishes. I certainly think he deserves to lose that job.
 
Doesn't change that in CA they have recalled a Governor before, and for less... How do you think we got The Terminator as Governor? I think the man may lose his job before his second term finishes. I certainly think he deserves to lose that job.

Assessing the realistic chances of Gavin Newsom being recalled in 2025 involves looking at historical precedent, current political dynamics, and the procedural hurdles of California’s recall process. As of March 6, 2025, no recall effort has qualified for the ballot, but there have been recent attempts, so let’s break it down.

California’s recall process requires proponents to gather signatures equal to 12% of the votes cast in the last gubernatorial election. In 2022, about 11.1 million people voted, meaning roughly 1.33 million valid signatures would be needed. Organizers typically aim for 1.5–1.6 million to account for invalid ones, and they have 160 days to collect them once a petition is approved. This is a high bar—costly and labor-intensive, often requiring millions of dollars for paid signature gatherers.

Newsom faced a recall election in 2021, triggered by frustration over his COVID-19 policies. That effort succeeded in getting on the ballot with 1.7 million verified signatures, but voters rejected it overwhelmingly—61.9% voted "no" to recalling him. A year later, he won re-election with 59.2%, showing consistent support in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans 2-to-1 (46.9% to 22.5% of registered voters as of early 2025). This suggests a solid base that’s tough to crack in a deep-blue state.

Recent recall attempts, like the one launched by Rescue California in February 2024, fizzled out. They aimed to capitalize on issues like the budget deficit ($47 billion projected for 2025) and Newsom’s national politicking, but failed to submit signatures by the September 3, 2024, deadline. A newer push by Saving California, started in January 2025 after devastating LA wildfires, claims broader appeal, citing Newsom’s handling of fires, crime, and living costs. They’ve served Newsom with intent papers, but as of now, they’re still in the early stages—needing state approval before circulating petitions.

Realistically, the odds hinge on a few factors:
  1. Public Sentiment: Newsom’s approval rating isn’t freshly polled as of March 2025, but in 2021, it hovered around 53% during the recall, and he still won comfortably. Wildfires and economic woes (e.g., high gas prices, insurance rates) could erode this, especially if voters blame him directly. Posts on X suggest anger among some, but California’s liberal lean means discontent may not translate to majority support for removal.
  2. Organization and Funding: The 2021 recall cost $276 million total (state and campaigns), with Newsom’s side spending $75 million. Rescue California’s 2024 flop showed that without big money—unlike 2021’s $20 million from proponents—efforts stall. Saving California claims grassroots momentum, but they’d need serious cash to scale up, and no major donors have emerged yet.
  3. Political Climate: With Newsom term-limited (out in January 2027), opponents might see less urgency in a recall versus waiting him out. Plus, his national profile as a Biden surrogate and potential 2028 presidential contender could galvanize both supporters and detractors. Democrats would likely rally hard again, framing it as a GOP “grift,” as they did in 2021.
  4. Historical Odds: Since 2003, when Gray Davis was recalled, 121 gubernatorial recall efforts nationwide have been tracked; only three made the ballot, and two succeeded. Newsom’s 2021 survival and six failed attempts since 2019 suggest recalls are more bark than bite in California’s current political landscape.
Bookmakers and prediction markets offer a vibe check. In January 2025, Polymarket pegged Newsom’s recall odds at 11% before July—not negligible, but a long shot. Past betting odds (e.g., Betfair’s 1/10 for him staying in 2021) aligned with his eventual win, hinting that the markets lean toward him enduring.

Bottom line: As of now, Newsom’s recall chances look slim—maybe 10–20%—barring a perfect storm of widespread outrage, flawless execution by organizers, and a funding windfall. California’s Democratic supermajority, his past resilience, and the recall’s logistical grind tilt the scales against it. That said, if wildfires or economic pain hit harder and organizers get their act together, it’s not impossible—just a steep uphill climb.



@Grok
 
GlZVKlFX0AAGdHU


51 "Intelligence experts can't be wrong"?

Go to Bidenreport.com to read for free.

The amount of information in that report and the amount of work that went into it is incredible! It details every crime committed with evidence.

Another lefty narrative smashed to smithereens.
 
CNN's Van Jones tried to "fact-check" @ScottJenningsKY on claims the government funded "transgender mice” research.

Jones: "That's not even real."

Embarrassingly enough, CNN just had to walk back their fact-check on Trump’s claim and now admit that money *was* spent for “making mice transgender.”




View: https://x.com/MediasLies/status/1897778854426456204
You are among the most dishonest posters here.https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-transgender-mice-medical-research-1235289439/
 
oLL87Lc_


The odds of negative Q1 GDP growth have collapsed. More than 2x returns on Polymarket in just 24 hours for those betting on positive growth.

What changed?
 
Back
Top