This perception that Trump wouldn't be a viable candidate if we knew his tax record would have been true before he won. I don't think the FBI and Russian meddling during election had anything to do with it. People who knew Trump is an asshole and how he treats contractors, employees, and women (even on record) still voted for him.

I want to believe his tax record could have changed the outcome, but probably not and it's scary thinking about it.

I mostly agree with you. A lot of the Dems still don't get that Lesser Evils work both ways and that there's a significant chunk of our population that is completely revolted by Hillary Clinton for one reason or another. But, if he had been up against anyone else, I think his tax returns would've been a significant blow to his image as a successful, wealthy upper class person. That's if what we suspect is true and his wealth is nowhere near what he claims. That, under different circumstances, might've been enough to stop his opponent from losing to him. Because that's ultimately what happened; Trump didn't win of his own merit, his opponent handed him the election.

Saw this the other day, and as a Californian, I'm... encouraged? Enthused? Bemused? Something. It may not mean a whole lot unless other states follow suit, though.

They're also trying to move up the primary to March (2020) from June to give partisan Californians more punch (I'm not registered to a party, so no primary for me).

'It may not mean a whole lot' Maybe not electoral, but add on double the popular vote margin in 2016 and I dunno...at some point if the popular vote significantly differs than electoral I'd expect some recoil. Assuming it holds up as constitutional.

Would be interesting. There's not much reason for a Republican to care about being on the California ballot, aside from demonstrating how much the system is weighted towards Cletus McJebus and against ordinary folks on the coasts.