I'd actually say that that counts against her opponent - things got worse as her opponent was in power. (And the effects of policies often only start being felt years later).
Yeah... no. He had already been in power for years when she got here, and there were decades between then and the campaign in question. The evidence under discussion doesn't rule out that interpretation, but it doesn't actually make it particularly likely.
Ah ok, fair, I'm not familiar with the particulars of CA politics. I was mostly commenting on the how people arguing in politics frequently try to blame things on people whose fault it couldn't possibly be and take credit for things they couldn't have caused.
