You are mixing way too many issues. For example, LGBT laws and drug offenses have nothing whatsoever to do with having sound fiscal and regulatory policies. Don't throw everything onto one pile. Things don't work that way. Yes, those are important policies and I am glad we have them. That does not mean EVERYTHING else is done well.

As for the economic balance sheet, you are not well informed. For starters, check this out:

https://www.usdebtclock.org/state-debt-clocks/state-of-calif...

That said, this isn't the entire story. California liabilities are in a range between 1.5 and 3 TRILLION dollars. It's massive and not something that leads to good outcomes. The nature of a Ponzi scheme is that it feels great until the music stops.

https://californiapolicycenter.org/californias-state-and-loc...

Not sure what "Trumpian politics" might be (Is that actually a thing?).

> California population is actually going up (up 2 million over the decade)

You are falling for using very shallow analysis. Did you stop to ask how much of what you claim might be due to birth? And how much might be due to net international migration?

The fact is exactly opposite what you think it is. Here, check this out. Nice charts too:

https://qz.com/1599150/californias-population-could-start-sh...

From the article (emphasis mine):

"Besides births, the main reason California’s population hasn’t already started falling has been international migration into the state. Every year since 2011, net domestic migration has been negative—i.e., MORE PEOPLE LEAVE CALIFORNIA THAN MOVE IN FROM OTHER STATES. But from 2011 to 2016, the number of international migrants moving into California was larger than the number of locals who were moving out.

Since then, however, domestic departures have outstripped international arrivals. In 2018, 156,000 locals left the state, compared to 118,000 international who came."

Yet, that doesn't tell the entire story. Businesses are leaving California, and with them job creation and more:

https://chiefexecutive.net/business-exodus-california-troubl...

From the article:

"What is more serious is the number of California-based companies that have left or signaled their intention to leave the state. Last year marks the first anniversary of the announcement that Carl’s Jr., a California burger icon for more than six decades, was relocating its headquarters to Nashville. It’s a symbol for what’s become a stream of businesses that have quit California. What was once an almost quiet exodus of companies now looks more like a stampede."

There's also a bit of bigotry in a comment like "conservatives are getting replaced by wealthy residents". I won't even go into the assumptions this makes. One thing is clear: Democrats have become a party that is for the poor, so long as they vote Democrat and don't bitch about the fact that the people they vote for somehow magically never seem to do anything for them. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. People who earn $55,000 and less are leaving CA if they can because things have become unsustainable. So, yeah, if the assumption is that all of those are conservatives and are being replaced by "wealthy residents" --the implication being that they are good people because they are not conservatives-- sure, yeah, Democrats want to help the poor so much they multiply them.

https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/04/17/the-changes-that-made...

The irony here is that CA has been under leftist control for decades now and it is still a mess and getting worse. This is a case just like that of Chicago, where nobody wants to talk about the thousands of black kids getting shot there every year, dozens per week, because the inconvenient truth is they've been under Democrat control for somewhere close to a century and the place is a mess.

This is a website that should inspire deep introspection about how this ideology has derailed, to the detriment of all:

https://heyjackass.com