Read the title in the address... it says "most dangerous cities IN CALIFORNIA"

I'm tipping my hat to Road Snacks for explaining their methodology, I actually found the table in the FBI data that they used.. It's 2019 data and the only way to get city-by-city comparisons is to look at one dataset at a time, or write a program to combine them.

These datasets BTW are available as CSV downloads. I loaded up the California data set in Excel and ran the same calculations... but I show Emeryville in 10th place and Oakland in 15th. Stockton is in 9th and San Bernardino is in 11th. But this was for violent crimes only, not property crimes. If you look at the Road Snacks website for Emeryville, you will notice the wide margin between violent crime and property crime. It's the property crime that puts Emeryville high on the list and I think I know why... I've been to Emeryville... Nice place... Wealthy people... LOTS of valuable things to steal.

I don't consider that "dangerous". If anything, it's a burden to insurance companies.

When you actually focus on violent crime, which you KNOW is what people are implying when they talk about dangerous cities... AND when you look at ALL the states, not just California the list looks much more like what I posted.

So this answers the charge that California has the most dangerous cities in the US with a resounding no, it does not.

As for the implication that the most violent cities are run by Democrats, that also has a simple answer...

Most violent cities have large and diverse populations. The size of the population INCREASES the likelihood of crime and diversity DECREASES the likelihood of a Republican being elected.

That means the Democrats are the only ones that are even dealing with the levels of crime found in major cities as the Republican mayors way out in the cornfields are busy planning this year's hoedown at the big barn, where you KNOW all those white folks will be yabbering about how THEY would be take control of the crime issue if only THEY were in charge.

1) homeless takeover in all Ca major cities - no action
2) forestry management essentially non existent
3) power grid failures, rolling black/brown outs - no action
4) crime out of control in all Ca major cities - action: defund the police
5) moronic District Attorney operating without regard for the law in la - action: no cash bail
6) unnecessary lockdowns, business restrictions except for the Gov and his people doing laundry
7) Kids out of school in the name of safety but covering up teacher union extortion

just a few

Liberty is exactly what Newsome and the California liberals are fighting for and conservatives h**e it. When Trump tried to tell California what it can and can't do, Newsome told him to F-off. When conservatives wanted to amend the California Constitution so that gay people can't get married, the California majority told them to F-off too.

Conservatives like to say that liberals in California are giving up their freedoms, but that perspective is based on rhetoric and cultural prejudice. If you actually look at the b****ts, it's the conservatives that keep trying to prohibit our freedoms.

LOL - LOVE that first video... it's such a good example of how Fox works... First make sure you cut off the first part of what Clinton is saying so the context doesn't interfere with your own interpretation. Then get some bimbo to roll the tape and react to the fragment you leave in... Oh, and don't forget to rotate as many gotcha shots of Clinton to emphasize her "crazy" character. The Fox audience just LOVES that stuff... Always a big seller.

I actually understand what she was saying. She was being figurative not literal. Saying the e******n was s****n from her was a reference to a faulty system that caused her to lose the e******n LEGALLY. The concern therefore is to fix the faulty system... In this context, 2016 is NOT the point of contention but simply a lesson to learn from. Trump on the other hand, after loosing the popular v**e buy a whopping 8 million went on a baseless rampage about v***r f***d that he claims LITERALLY s***e the e******n ILLEGALLY!

Not even close to the same thing.