Palisades Fire - Los Angeles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

+1 Same. I'm also carefully reading articles and listening to CA's Democrat leaders as they explain decisions prior to the fires and afterwards. Responsible, trustworthy leaders who prepare for emergency events in ways that emphasize people's safety and protection of their homes and businesses are needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

Fortunately, some of the Rs are being helpful - Abbott. The rest are being typical Republican dickheads.

[Anonymous]

Governor Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he has directed the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) and the Texas A&M Forest Service to deploy firefighters, emergency management and medical personnel, and equipment to assist with wildfire response efforts in California.
“Our hearts grieve with the entire Los Angeles community as they continue to respond to these destructive wildfires,” Governor Abbott said. “Texans know all too well the devastation wildfires can cause to our communities, and our country is stronger when we come together in times of crisis."

I disagree with his politics, but he is doing the right thing for CA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

Fortunately, some of the Rs are being helpful - Abbott. The rest are being typical Republican dickheads.

Florida has offered help as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Friend of mine told me a family friend stayed behind at their house to protect the house. IDK where this is but it was an evac area. I mentioned that's a dangerous thing to do. Then I learned the friend also has a broken wrist, and someone else who is there is physically disabled (I forget what the disability is). Reading about victims, most of them seem to be people who were doing basically the same thing.

I am hoping that your friend's friend was not the mom I just read about, who had a broken arm (report said arm...could have been wrist) and tried to get her disabled adult son out but couldn't carry or drag him and he apparently couldn't walk enough to leave.

This situation has already shown how disabled people are incredibly disadvantaged whenever there is a natural disaster. Two of the deaths were a father and son--both disabled. A third, adult son who lived with them was in the hospital when the fires began or he might have saved them. The disabled father and son died waiting for an ambulance that was supposed to evacuate them but never arrived.

Disabled activists are trying to spotlight how incredibly hard it can be to evacuate quickly if one uses any kind of mobility aid, or needs to haul things like essential medical devices or oxygen tanks (not everyone can afford the small, easily portable oxygen devices), etc.

I fully expect that, tragically, as they find more and more remains in the burned-out parts of LA, many of those will be remains of people who could not evacuate in time because of disabilities.

Not that person, whom I read about before hearing this from my friend, but it did make me worry about the woman she knows. I also remember reading about several disabled or elderly people (some elderly who just did not want to leave), so sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

+1 Same. I'm also carefully reading articles and listening to CA's Democrat leaders as they explain decisions prior to the fires and afterwards. Responsible, trustworthy leaders who prepare for emergency events in ways that emphasize people's safety and protection of their homes and businesses are needed.

This is so true. Emergency preparedness is key and states need to show that they are responsibly pursuing it, and also regulating their insurance carriers! And their builders! and on and on. And a lot of money to do that prep work is federally matched so it should be even more obvious who is a responsible steward state and who is just floating by.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Governor Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he has directed the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) and the Texas A&M Forest Service to deploy firefighters, emergency management and medical personnel, and equipment to assist with wildfire response efforts in California.
“Our hearts grieve with the entire Los Angeles community as they continue to respond to these destructive wildfires,” Governor Abbott said. “Texans know all too well the devastation wildfires can cause to our communities, and our country is stronger when we come together in times of crisis."

I disagree with his politics, but he is doing the right thing for CA.

Those people will just loot and beat up the residents of California. Texas hates California.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Governor Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he has directed the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) and the Texas A&M Forest Service to deploy firefighters, emergency management and medical personnel, and equipment to assist with wildfire response efforts in California.
“Our hearts grieve with the entire Los Angeles community as they continue to respond to these destructive wildfires,” Governor Abbott said. “Texans know all too well the devastation wildfires can cause to our communities, and our country is stronger when we come together in times of crisis."

I disagree with his politics, but he is doing the right thing for CA.

This is normal. Large wildfires and disaster responses come from local, state, interstate, federal, international, and private entities. If you want to continue to have an operational response to natural disasters, contact your elected representatives and tell them

-you do not want FEMA dismantled, or under incompetent and unqualified administration

-you do not want our vital weather and warning agencies like NOAA privatized, dismantled or under incompetent and unqualified administration

-you don’t want disaster response denied politically. Ever. If you’re a Dem, make clear you want Floridians to get help. If you’re a GOP make clear you want California to get help

-you don’t want our relationship with Canada endangered

-Include your state representatives and tell them that you never want interstate cooperation politically weaponized

All places have vulnerabilities to natural disaster or human attack. No state or municipality should be denied the help they need.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

Fortunately, some of the Rs are being helpful - Abbott. The rest are being typical Republican dickheads.

Florida has offered help as well.

But still finds a way to trash CA. DeSantis is being helpful AND a dick.

[Anonymous]

CA will go RED going forward. It's just time and necessary. Either that, or just let it go...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

+1 Same. I'm also carefully reading articles and listening to CA's Democrat leaders as they explain decisions prior to the fires and afterwards. Responsible, trustworthy leaders who prepare for emergency events in ways that emphasize people's safety and protection of their homes and businesses are needed.

This is so true. Emergency preparedness is key and states need to show that they are responsibly pursuing it, and also regulating their insurance carriers! And their builders! and on and on. And a lot of money to do that prep work is federally matched so it should be even more obvious who is a responsible steward state and who is just floating by.

Oof - Texas power has some work to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

+1 Same. I'm also carefully reading articles and listening to CA's Democrat leaders as they explain decisions prior to the fires and afterwards. Responsible, trustworthy leaders who prepare for emergency events in ways that emphasize people's safety and protection of their homes and businesses are needed.

This is so true. Emergency preparedness is key and states need to show that they are responsibly pursuing it, and also regulating their insurance carriers! And their builders! and on and on. And a lot of money to do that prep work is federally matched so it should be even more obvious who is a responsible steward state and who is just floating by.

I would like to see your list of who, precisely, is being a responsible steward state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pp here. I’m also in deep fear of what happens under dry CA conditions over the next 4 years if federal aid is withheld, as Trump promised on the campaign trail.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/10/03/helene-trump-politics-natural-disaster-00182419

In 2020 Trump signed a bill that would have diverted excess water from Northern California to LA specifically to boost the reservoirs for fire fighting purposes. The state and advocacy groups, including Newsom, battled him using the pretext that it'd hurt the salmon among others. That is the origin of the disagreement of Trump and Newsom. Unfortunately, it is true, so for all of his childish petulant screeds in a manner that only Trump can muster, Trump actually does have a point here. Right now California is not really governed to serve the safety and wellbeing of its people. Its programs and policies are bled by a thousand cuts through demands by so many advocacy groups wanting to protect/preserve/champion equity for this and that.

Wildfires are a fact of life in California and the dangers of a massive wildfire promising this level and even greater destructions has always been there, yet what we saw was a strange lack of advance preparation despite plenty of warnings that the conditions were ripe. Serious questions have to be asked about it. And I would not be upset if the Trump administration demanded LA and the California state governments to explain why they weren't better prepared or to outline new policies and laws that guaranteed a basic level of preparedness for worst case situations before releasing any new federal aid to the state. Americans cannot be called to pour more money (billions and billions) after bad if no basic changes are being made at the ground level. To use as one small but critical example, so many wildfires (fortunately mostly doused in time) are started by homeless people yet California has seemingly done little to address the homeless problem or is, at least, very slow to do anything meaningful.

Legitimate questions need to be asked about the competence of California governing class.

I’m OP worried about Trump. I agree questions need to be asked re the response to the current fire. That said, the videos of Santa Ana winds and the idea that entire neighborhoods in Southern California should all be able to hose their houses while fire fighters are using hydrants and having enough water for it all seems very hard - if not impossible - to be prepared for. Also, I don’t know that water should be diverted from Northern CA to southern CA and / or farmlands. This is not a problem unique to CA - red states have plenty of wildfires (Alaska, Idaho etc) and also have cities that are likely to face severe water problems regardless of whether a fire ever whips through neighborhoods (eg Phoenix, Las Vegas).

My understanding is that Trump didn’t sign a water diversion bill (ie no such bill existed) but that there have been other water fights. By all means there should be investigations into what happened - Newsom has said as much - but we also need federal aid to continue in January. Calling for an investigation to occur and be concluded as a condition of aid is a dangerous president. For instance, I suspect many more people would have died had a completed investigation into the Texas powergrid failure been a condition for federal aid then, as is true of other emergency responses (hurricanes, forest fires etc). The precedent is that Trump has wanted to withhold disaster funding to CA - and he repeated this on the campaign trail - as a stick, but other states (to my Knowledge) haven’t had similar sticks as conditional requirements in their emergencies.

The whole debate reminds me of the gun reform arguments - after a mass shouting there are a lot of statements that it’s not the right time for policy and help is needed now, but then it never is the right time for policy because help is always needed by that standard given the number of shootings in this country. Balancing emergency response and care with policy reform is needed, but there does have to be some triage.

Agreed. The partisan targeting of California when red states have been equally or even more unprepared is really vile and frankly immoral.

This a thousand times. It’s vile and evil

+1 Yes, and there are many DCUM threads in which posters bash red states. Vile and evil no matter who does it.

The difference is that this time it is red state politicians targeting Californians who have lost their homes. That is not something blue politicians have done.

Think what you want, but blue politicians are not above reproach either.

I have not seen a specific example of blue state politicians holding (or pushing publicly to hold) aid hostage like red state politicians are currently doing.

Example:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

And I am no partisan Democrat. I’m a moderate independent. But honesty is important here. I have never seen that behavior from Democrat politicians towards the victims of disasters.

This is one moron and not a movement.

The point remains that this not something I have ever seen Democratic politicians, even the most unhinged and crazy of them, ever do. They simply do not target the victims of natural disasters. I have only ever seen that behavior from Republican politicians, and it is appalling.

Really? Some people in North Carolina would like a word with you.

Please post a news article showing a Democratic politician doing this:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/11/warren-davidson-republican-disaster-relief-california-wildfires

To victims of the NC floods.

I genuinely want to know, because I am an independent and view this as a significant gap between the parties at this point.

Thank you for the link and to PP as well about Biden asking for NC funds. I'm sick of the disinformation, the whataboutism, and the CRUELTY. If congress is going to play games with FEMA (the F is for Federal), then let's simply have 50 SEMAs (plus PR, Guam, etc). Everyone pays their own way. If a state can't afford it, their residents don't like it, they move to another state.

I'm also an independent and I'm playing close attention to how we treat fellow citizens in our one country.

Same. As someone who has been a crossover voter and donor, I am watching the Republican response to this extremely carefully.

+1 Same. I'm also carefully reading articles and listening to CA's Democrat leaders as they explain decisions prior to the fires and afterwards. Responsible, trustworthy leaders who prepare for emergency events in ways that emphasize people's safety and protection of their homes and businesses are needed.

This is so true. Emergency preparedness is key and states need to show that they are responsibly pursuing it, and also regulating their insurance carriers! And their builders! and on and on. And a lot of money to do that prep work is federally matched so it should be even more obvious who is a responsible steward state and who is just floating by.

A challenge here is that insurers were doing the right thing. They were appropriately raising rates based on increasing fire risk, but California regulations put caps on their ability to do so. This is a popular policy for obvious reasons, but when disaster strikes it doesn't help if the insurer goes insolvent which is a significant risk since so many homes are impacted at once.

I'm a very liberal Californian with a house in an area whose fire risk has grown rapidly in the past few years. Our HOA has extremely strict policies around defensible space etc, which is the only reason we are insurable at all...but eventually we might get dropped. But this is not the wrong thing, honestly. There are places that will cease being livable. We have to accept that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CA will go RED going forward. It's just time and necessary. Either that, or just let it go...

F that. The response to a natural disaster isn't a political disaster.

Republicans want to burn it all down. They aren't the solution to anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Governor Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he has directed the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) and the Texas A&M Forest Service to deploy firefighters, emergency management and medical personnel, and equipment to assist with wildfire response efforts in California.
“Our hearts grieve with the entire Los Angeles community as they continue to respond to these destructive wildfires,” Governor Abbott said. “Texans know all too well the devastation wildfires can cause to our communities, and our country is stronger when we come together in times of crisis."

I disagree with his politics, but he is doing the right thing for CA.

Well it took him way too long. After Wednesday the winds stop and the fires will be easily contained. He must have some sort of alternative reasoning.