view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:

- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I like the clap backing Newsom does but he's a shit politician who is only slightly less right than Fetterman.
I know little about him, as I expect most of the country does other than he seems ready willing and able to take the piss out of the demented rapist, and that’s such a rare commodity, somehow, that it’s worth political capital.
His state has a lot of electoral votes, he’s a white male, and would likely attract big money to run. Strictly speaking, it seems likely he’ll be a frontrunner, but I expect we’ll be right back to arguing the Dems need to lose again and go through all this *gestures* again.
He is particularly harsh on telling law enforcement to break up homeless camps regularly, shows no concern to the growing amount in his state, he holds conservative beliefs on trans rights. https://abcnews.com/Politics/california-gov-gavin-newsom-breaks-party-transgender-athletes/story?id=119559011
https://www.pacificresearch.org/newsom-has-failed-on-homelessness-and-it-shouldnt-be-hard-so-hard-to-spot/
Don't forget that he vetoed unemployment pay for striking workers, vetoed decriminalization of psychedelics (in other words, the aspiring future leader of "my body my choice" party wants to put people in prison for what they do with their bodies), and frequently flaunted COVID restrictions which he put in place.
He also did nothing about corporations stealing (and now ruining) the legal cannabis industry. Voters who voted to pass cannabis legalization did so under the context of an acreage cap: no corporation could own more than... 2 acres? I don't know the exact number off the top of my head, but the idea was, it's small enough to keep corporations from dominating but big enough to allow them decent operating room.
Lawmakers went behind the electorate's back and removed the acreage cap. Newsom did nothing, and was buddy-buddy with corporate cannabis people like Big Mike, so why would he? This resulted in corporate cannabis, including professional boof cultivators like Glass House Farms (owned by a MAGA-supporting cop), dominating the legal industry. Their weed is garbage, which is why ~75% of cannabis sales in California occur in the legacy market ("illegal" under bullshit laws that everyone should ignore).
He also hosts conservative shitstains on his podcast, though if he was actually ideologically righteous, I could potentially excuse that as genuine outreach. But he's not, so I don't.
He was doing homeless sweeps and talking about his undying support for Pissrael when Republicans were on the up-trend. Now everyone hates Republicans, so suddenly Newsom is refusing money from AIPAC and doesn't talk so much about the problem of having to witness poors in the street. He stands for nothing but his own gain.
Here's a photo op he did of him throwing away, potentially, the only worldly possessions of homeless people. He presumably retreated to his Napa Valley winery after this. Fucking parasite.