this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
112 points (96.7% liked)

politics

19094 readers
3262 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

An alternative title is "Newsom declares candidacy for US President in 2028 election". He is certainly casting himself as the heel in the kayfabe that will be US politics in the next four years.

Edited to add: He is term limited, and his term runs out in 2026. So he will have nothing better to do.

[–] [email protected] 44 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Please no, he's just another limousine liberal, up there with Hillary and the gang. I think people are done with that. Let's get some real revolutionaries in there.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I'll vote for the actual limousine if it has a chance of beating the next MAGA candidate, whether it's Vance, Trump Jr, or Donald Trump with a fake mustache that fools no one but his voters. (And as long as that limousine wins a contested primary.)

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's the issue with the hard right candidates, people keep settling for Republican-lite Dems that don't address core economic problems because they're left in comparison, then predictably they lose to far right politicians when their moderate reforms don't do anything other than provide temporary relief. We need actual left politicians to institute radical structural changes if we ever want to break this cycle. Or a revolution, but given the way this country is going I have no faith that the victors in that would be on the left

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

What would the world have looked like if Bernie was the candidate against Donald…? 😕

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Let’s get some real revolutionaries in there.

Do you want republicans to win the next election too?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago

next election?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

If there's another legitimate election, you want to double down on neoliberalism and trying to meet fascist in the middle yet again?

If we can't elect a revolutionary, then it's all over anyway until collapse, Trump is a symptom of the crony capitalist greed disease that's infected both parties. It's a shame we can't even agree that our economy's structure and incentives are the problem and requires drastic change, because without addressing that, nothing can begin to improve. It is the bloodsucking vampire elephant in the room.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

What election?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

No, please no. Newsom is a textbook greasy CA neoliberal, a Newsom presidency would do next to nothing for the working class and bring a load of benefits to the wealthy.

I generally support his policies on education, environmental protection and long term economic stability but his positions on housing, single payer healthcare, corruption and democratic representation are awful.

So far he's: vetoed a statewide upzoning bill that would get dense housing built statewide near public transit corridors, vetoed ranked preference voting across CA, opposed single payer healthcare and let the CPUC ride roughshod over utility customers and saddle them with PG&E's felonious wildfire liability. The dude is Grey Davis's protege and was basically raised by the Getty family, he's absolutely not the candidate to run in a tight economy where populism is surging.

Edit: fun fact, we called him Teflon Gavin when he ran San Francisco. Nothing sticks to this guy's PR. Fox news consumers have had 10+y of "commie California's Gavin Newsom" poured into their heads in preparation for his eventual Whitehouse run and that will matter when he presents his slick well-fed wealthy self to middle America.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You left out that he was married to Kimberly Guilfoyle

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Oh yeah, and after that he had the church of scientology throwing a parade of women at him to see if one would stick.

He's the textbook old money nepobaby and while I have no qualms about his competence (they prepared him for big money politics extremely well) I don't think he's the change the working class wants to see in America. He certainly hasn't brought much change to CA outside of funding primary education. We haven't even begun to tackle living conditions for the bottom 80% here, he's just a less bad option than whatever unpopular Republican ends up running against him. All of the social reform that actually works (boosting minimum wage, providing single payer healthcare, running cooperative local utilities or tackling corruption) is happening at the city and county level or as a ballot proposition. There's resistance from Sacramento when anyone brings these up as statewide policies.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I dont want him to run. I'm tired of seeing neoliberal-lite candidates running and being forces to hold my nose "bcz the other candidate is worse."

We can and should do better than this guy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

Newsom isn't neoliberal light, he's about as neoliberal as it's possible to be

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Newsome can do whatever he wants, but aside from seceding, there isn't anything to stop P2025 now.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Except California has the 5th largest economy in the world. Good luck running the U.S. without their tax dollars.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That is secession. You're trying to push a different agenda here.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not pushing anything. They've threatened to stop paying taxes before. Look it up.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago

A threat is way different.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's crazy how often Lucy can yank that football away from you chumps.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Wow, your comment history is wild dude...just had to have a look.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The problem with the incoming fascist reality is that people like you think acknowledging that reality is "wild"

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'd support a threat of secession.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

Great.

See the Wikipedia of every other state who has tried under an non-authoritarian regime over the past 100 years.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The Tenth Amendment states

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

So there are a fair amount of domestic affairs that California can take care of on its own. So Newsom cannot stop Project 2025, but he can make plans so that California citizens are not quite so adversely affected when certain administrative departments go poof.

Expect liberal states to make a point of scrutinizing this clause and suing the Federal Government when they think it has overstepped its bounds.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

The GOP has the White House. And the Senate. And the House of Representatives. And the Supreme Court. The constitution says whatever they want it to say.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago

And the MAGA administration and supreme court will just laugh in our faces. We're toast, man.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago

This is true and good. But with the Supreme Court in Trump's pocket the results may not be great.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

The Tenth Amendment states

~~The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.~~ Whatever the fuck Trump's handpicked SCOTUS says it states.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago