177
submitted 15 hours ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

The California governor described White House reporters as ‘sycophants’

California Governor Gavin Newsom criticized the media for what he described as overly deferential coverage of Donald Trump, characterizing reporters in Oval Office press briefings as “sycophants.”

The Democratic governor — widely seen as a potential contender for the 2028 presidential race — made the remarks during a Sunday interview with progressive commentator Jack Cocchiarella.

Cocchiarella pressed Newsom on what he framed as “hesitancy” within the White House press corps to scrutinize certain subjects: namely, the 80-year-old president’s health.

“You see these press conferences in the Oval Office,” the governor replied. “You maybe have one or two reasonable reporters. They ask a question; there's no chance for a follow-up. And then it’s seven sycophants from news outlets.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ProfThadBach@lemmy.world 22 points 12 hours ago

I can already see it. The DNC is going to shove this chucklefuck down our throats. I am tired of eating shit sandwiches. I don't know the answer but her is not it.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 47 points 15 hours ago

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?

[-] ShredderFeeder@shredderfood.net 18 points 13 hours ago

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.

[-] shirasho@feddit.online 12 points 12 hours ago

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.

[-] ShredderFeeder@shredderfood.net 9 points 7 hours ago

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.

[-] shirasho@feddit.online 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

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.

[-] Triumph@fedia.io 18 points 11 hours ago

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.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 hours ago

Neither is a 3rd party candidate.

[-] jumjummy@lemmy.world 4 points 6 hours ago

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.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

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.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

And they have next to no chance of winning.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 hours ago

Let's follow that thought. Why do you think that?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

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.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

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.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

Under normal circumstances I'd be inclined to agree but these are not normal circumstances.

[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 3 points 11 hours ago

so they say every 2-4 years.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

You think Trump term 2 is just as bad as Bush? Even trump term 1 was not this bad.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 14 points 14 hours ago

Every article about him brings the boo-birds. That’s fine, but there’s still no champion for our leftier-than-thou politicos.

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?

[-] sportsjorts@lemmy.zip 7 points 14 hours ago

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.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 6 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

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..

[-] MartianRecon@lemmus.org 5 points 14 hours ago

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.

[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 8 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

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).

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Catoblepas 38 points 15 hours ago

Reminder that Newsom is a snake and can go fuck himself

[-] toast@retrolemmy.com 13 points 15 hours ago

That's the dirty ouroboros

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago

Future President Gavin Newsom is a snake and can go fuck himself

Fixed it for you

[-] Catoblepas 11 points 14 hours ago

He doesn’t have to be president when the primary hasn’t even happened.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 5 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

But he's the Next One Up, he's already got the nomination. The primary is a formality.

The last time the DNC let a grassroots candidate take over and ruin the plans for the Next One Up, we got 8 years of a young, transformative President. They're not gonna let that happen again under their watch!

[-] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 8 points 13 hours ago

Uh you really didn't. Obama was pretty much business as usual save for the affordable care act and some good foreign policy decisions.

[-] Ghyste@sh.itjust.works 6 points 11 hours ago

Of course every WH press member is asking softball questions. Any reporter that isn't licking Donnie's asshole has been booted from press conferences.

[-] some_designer_dude@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

He knows this. We all know this. It’s posturing but he’s so shite it reads like a gerbil trying to convince everyone it’s a grizzly bear.

[-] nanometer1625@thelemmy.club 5 points 10 hours ago

namely, the 80-year-old president’s health

Isn't that a softball? His poor health is a good thing for everyone, not a bad thing.

[-] DevDave@piefed.social 14 points 14 hours ago

Please for the love of god don't let this fuckhead be the Democrat Party presidential candidate.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/13/california-law-online-age-checks-00606115 - Google, Meta, and OpenAI "supported" this. Does anyone really think their motive is to "protect the children"?

Age checks is a/the path to a national login system.

[-] homes@piefed.world 10 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

We all knew this is coming. Gavin Newsom isn’t the lefty we thought he was, or the lefty he was pretending to be. He’s a corporate shitLib, and we can’t let him be president. Not now, not ever!

Maybe AOC isn’t all we hoped she would be (and she got me drunk at some Union Square adjacent Mexican bar when I was an undergrad, so I actually trust her), but for fucks sake, if she runs for president, I’m gonna vote for her, and I hope all of you do too!

I’d much rather she be the first woman president than that Hillary bitch. Yes, fuck Trump, but that’s already happened. AOC for the win. She made me the best margaritas I’ve ever had

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

If he get's the nomination, I'll be glad to vote 3rd party again. It's not like I'm a Democrat anyways.

[-] Artemis_Mystique@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

The California governor described White House reporters as ‘sycophants’

we call em 'Lapdog media' where i'm from, i guess y'all should call them 'Rump media'.

[-] Corvidae@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Murdoch's presses are why Trump got elected the first time. Trump has threatened broadcasting licenses, which strikes at one ventricle of the First Amendment. If Newsom is on the ballot for president, I'll happily vote for him.

[-] billwashere@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

It’s because Donpedo doesn’t allow anyone in the press core who will actually ask real questions and press him on anything.

I’d love for that to happen in the air on Qatar Force One where he just can’t walk away. He’d cower in the bathroom the whole time. Although I’m pretty sure he does that anyway.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
177 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30313 readers
2194 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS