181
Gavin Newsom turns on the press for asking Trump softball questions
(www.independent.co.uk)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
181 points (100.0% liked)
politics
30313 readers
2197 users here now
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
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Lefties you gotta get your person up and ready. Presuming elections still exist and should this guy emerge as the frontrunner you have about 814 days before you have to vote for this guy or continue flushing ourselves down the republican hole.
Every article about him brings the boo-birds. That’s fine, but there’s still no champion for our leftier-than-thou politicos. You just gonna let it ride on Bernie again?
Mamdani.
Bernie is officially too old (honestly, he was in 2015)
If Newsome is on the ballot in november I'll vote for him. Of course if Lassie was on the ballot as a democrat in 2028, I'll vote for her.
Don't give a shit. Anything is better than a republican.
That is NOT true. Voting for a Democrat that does nothing is just as bad. Not only would they do nothing to reverse the damage, they have actively taken votes that would have been better used on a politician that actually cares.
A lot of people will blindly vote for the person with a D next to their name. The Democratic party is purposely not putting the best candidates forward. There needs to be more awareness of who the duds are and either vote them out or not vote them in.
And that's how people like Trump become president. Pure and simple.
Sometimes the lesser of two evils is quite a lot less fucking evil.
The problem as I see it is that you and the other posters here have fallen for the moving goalposts. "Shit is ok - at least it isn't vomit." That is such a poor and defeatist mentality to have. It isn't a bad thing to want more. Don't be OK with "the lesser of two evils". Fight for at least one good candidate. Hold your party accountable for choosing awful candidates that don't have the people's best interests at heart.
I have voted for the lesser of two evils, and I will continue to do so. That won't stop me from asking for better, and it will not change my mind that inaction in a bad situation is no better than doing bad things.
Primaries are where you decide. After that, you choose the least worst. And sorry, a "Democrat that does nothing" is not just as bad as open fascism.
Neither is a 3rd party candidate.
No 3rd party candidate will win a General Election unless something changes in the way the Is voting system works. Voting for a 3rd party is literally throwing your vote away at best, or helping the Republicans at worst.
It’s either naivety or intentional disinformation to spout otherwise.
so in your worldview does voting Libertarian hurt the Republicans and/or Does it help the Democrats?
Additionally, voting 3rd-party is not "Figuratively throwing your vote away." Not voting when you're registered is "Figuratively Throwing your vote away." Voting 3rd party at the very least puts the other parties on notice that you're willing to vote -just not for them.
And they have next to no chance of winning.
Let's follow that thought. Why do you think that?
For one thing, there is no serious third party. For another: history.
If we had ranked choice voting, it might be different. If Democratic Socialists want to run in and win primaries and run as Democrats, hey, great.
I am not throwing away my vote in the general for some unserious party like the Green Party (which is probably just a cutout anyway) who runs a candidate at the national level every 4 years and does next to nothing at the local level.
it's not "throwing away your vote" it puts on record that your willing to vote just not for the major party candidates. Not voting is "throwing your vote away." Voting for someone you don't like and winning --That's throwing your vote away.
Under normal circumstances I'd be inclined to agree but these are not normal circumstances.
so they say every 2-4 years.
You think Trump term 2 is just as bad as Bush? Even trump term 1 was not this bad.
That's dumb
Care to elaborate?
Crazy, It's almost like the DNC is complicit in keeping any viable economically left winged candidates away from any seat of power where they could one day become a decent candidate for president.
I really can't understand why anyone would think Gavin Newsome is a good candidate. Imo the only thing different between the mainstream Democrats and the Republicans is an affectation of wokeness, and Gavin Newsome doesn't even clear that hurdle.
His only talent in life is cheating on his wife and befriending the Gettys. Literally has not had to work for a thing in his life. Daddy bought him a degree at a private school, got a baseball scholarship..... never played a single game. His best friend bought him a winery, and then had Mayor Brown take him under his wing in SF, and then had governor brown do the same exact thing.
Can we not go a little bit farther to the left than the best friend of an oil Barron?
I’ll do what I always do watch the Dem establishment shit all over everything while I hold my nose and vote for a shit stain like newsowm. There’s plenty of time for a “lefty” candidate to rise as long as the DNC fucks off to hell.
I'll be shocked if AOC runs for president and not against Schumer.
If she doesn't then just vote Michelle Obama in, as there's really nobody else I can think of in a position to run by then. Not a leftist at least in the surface but she'd win in a landslide. Easily. And I'd prefer her over someone like Newsom or Shapiro..
She'll go for Schumers seat. The Democrats need a dude to run against the republican. Shooting yourself in the foot by having a woman run is not worth the risk to the fate of the country. The handicap from the sexist assholes is just too great to overcome.
That's the frank games theory we've proven this decade.
I think it has been debunked that a woman or person of color is why we lost. Key to note: Anyone who was a true sexist racist piece of shit was already core maga and never, ever going to vote for any Democrat.
People must remember that nobody has polled higher against Trump -- ever -- than Michelle Obama. IF she wants to run (and a big if), she would win. Just need a tad bit more charisma.
(If anyone has any evidence whatsoever beyond speculation or shoddy N=2 statistics, I'm all ears, but I have not found evidence).
Uh dude like more than 5% of the party didn't show up, and a bunch of male Democrats that identify as Latin or African American didn't vote for her because she was a woman.
Both Kamala and Clinton were two of the most qualified people to have run for president, and they were fucking beaten by the worst candidate in the history of politics.
I don't want to risk it.
Uh, dude show me your evidence this was the reason lol.
I'm going to give you a hint: You won't find it. This is straight up bull fucking shit and 100% speculative.
I highly advise you not to make such blatant non-sequitur fallacies devoid of any supportive data. I can think of at least a half a dozen other reasons for why people voted or didn't vote the way they did that actually has data with infinitely less distance to connect the dots than what you're doing right now.
We don't know the why, but it was a big swing among men of color:
https://navigatorresearch.org/2024-post-election-survey-racial-analysis-of-2024-election-results/
Without some very careful probing via polls, getting to the why is going to be harder, most likely. Not too many people are just going to be absolutely candid about being sexist.
I hear ya. But 814 days is 814 days.
That's one of the many problems with this system. The DNC is a private organisation and they can put forth or hold back any candidate they want regardless of the will of the people (see: Harris or Sanders the first time).
So unless the DNC finally gets out of its own way (it won't) and lets an actual progressive candidate run, they'll do the same thing they always do and pick some Milquetoast "centrist" who will keep the status quo, and an actual progressive will have to run independent or form a new party and then get enough people to vote for them without splitting the vote and causing the Nazis to win by default.
The entrenched powers have no interest in change and don't care what the people actually want.
You know most of them won't because he doesn't support their personally cut together version of Das Kapital.
Like it or not, Gavin is one of the few Dems who actually has signed progressive laws in this country. But because he looks the way he do the 'identity politics' people can't help but judge him because of that.
He also made homelessness illegal and held back plenty of other progressive laws, but yeah sure it's identity politics.
Sure discount the numerous pieces of progressive legislation the guy has passed. I swear you people can never, ever, find a positive to say about people.
Yes I am in fact going to do that because of, you know, everything else he did.
Sure dude. Gavin's passed more progressive legislation than anyone else in the country. Listen to the Active Measures people and attack someone who's on your side, and probably would give you guys a solid chunk of legislation that you would support. But you know, he's not giving you 100% so sit on the fucking sidelines like always o7.