this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2025
514 points (98.9% liked)

politics

25350 readers
2339 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Politico reports that at a Hamptons fundraiser last Saturday, Cuomo told his well-heeled supporters that, contrary to all available evidence, he could win the New York mayoral race as an independent—because he was likely to have the implicit support of President Donald Trump.

The imperative of defeating Mamdani justified the new coalition Cuomo is trying to create of his die-hard loyalists (who are Democrats) with Trump Republicans.

Some of that latter group might be tempted to back Curtis Sliwa, the actual GOP nominee in the race. Cuomo told these donors, “We can minimize [the Sliwa] vote, because he’ll never be a serious candidate. And Trump himself, as well as top Republicans, will say the goal is to stop Mamdani. And you’ll be wasting your vote on Sliwa.” Cuomo went on to emphasize that he’d be a mayor who could find common ground with Trump:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yesman@lemmy.world 52 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

This is why the Democratic party stinks. Just cynical assholes only loyal to power.

You think Gavan Newsom is different?

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Newsom is only different in the sense his constituents won't stand for this sort of thing.

I hope New York proves they won't, either.

[–] icystar@lemmy.cif.su 1 points 35 minutes ago

New Yorkers love robber barons and maximizing profit at every turn.

Why would we expect them to get angry at businesspeople enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else if that's what they all want to do?

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 41 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Nope, Newsom vetoes progressive voter referendums all the time in deference to established power and corporations. Just look at what happens in Cali when power companies are at fault for massive wildfires due to negligent equipment/line upkeep…

The state has the 4th largest economy in the world, and yet simultaneously has incredible wealth disparity, a crisis of unhoused people and untreated mental health issues with no affordable/free housing in sight, and crumbling roads/infrastructure everywhere. It is not well run.

So yeah, Newsom wouldn’t be my first pick based on substance. But on style, yes, he’s fighting fire with fire. Hell, he’s simply just doing something to fight, and myself and many others love to see it. More of this from all Dems please, especially those who aren’t full on corporate shills. AOC - now is your time to step up, let’s go!

[–] icystar@lemmy.cif.su 1 points 33 minutes ago

Our representatives don't represent us.

Those people that you get up in arms in online arguments defending? They're put there by the ruling class to take advantage of your ignorance.

The people who actually want to solve these problems are people we've never heard of because the ruling class makes sure they get no recognition.

I'd say about 1-2% of votes go towards politicians that fight for the working class.

[–] Gustephan@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago (4 children)

Im glad somebody is fighting trump, but good lord i do not want California to become the blueprint for America. Driving along the PCH from avocado farms in Oxnard to Malibu and seeing the sick fucking filth that is the California wealthy right next to the migrant workers they exploit is in my top 5 "most disturbing things ive ever experienced." That is taking into account that I used to work on strategic bombers and I know in gruesome detail what a 2000 lb bomb does to a human body. Newsom is a bitter poison pill whose voting record shows that he basically agrees with Trump across the board, and his imitation of trump is barely even ironic. He's always imitated trump in terms of policy.

[–] octopus_ink@slrpnk.net 3 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

seeing the sick fucking filth that is the California wealthy right next to the migrant workers they exploit is in my top 5 “most disturbing things ive ever experienced.”

I traveled to Thailand once for a work related meeting in the oughts.

I stayed in a pretty nice hotel that they booked for me. Nicer than anything I'd have paid for with my own money, or probably ever have.

From the window of my room I could see that at the edge of the parking lot for the hotel was the tallish wall I'd seen, and then (if memory serves) there wasn't even a single row of transition. It was straight to shanties with roofs that looked put together with scrap, etc etc etc.

Maybe it wasn't quite District 9 / Elysium over there, but the contrast was like that.

I came away from that moment looking out the window with some very similar feelings. (Then of course shrugged it off and went about doing what I had to do in fear of having to live like that myself...)

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 5 points 18 hours ago

Well said.

Just adding my 2c - in my top 3 most disturbing was a work trip to San Francisco, and witnessing the mega wealthy tech moguls juxtaposed with the poor destitute souls begging on the street. It’s just wrong, and something about how it works in Cali is just so in your face. Made me sick and never wanted to visit there again.

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago

You need to visit South Africa to see the wealthy and poor.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

It being further away from the source doesn't make other states less exploitative.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 0 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

TBF if I were homeless I could live in cali, I would be left to die in most other states.

[–] Goferking0@ttrpg.network 5 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

would be left to die in most other states.

Yeah you sure about that? Gavin been on a crusade to do exactly that in California.

https://www.aclusocal.org/en/press-releases/aclu-report-californias-war-unhoused-people

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -4 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

That article says like 28 times that these actions are by communities and innercity municipalities yet somehow your reaction is "tHe GuVneR DeeD THIs"

[–] Goferking0@ttrpg.network 7 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Because he's continuously attacking them...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/californias-homeless-crisis-newsoms-political-albatross-rcna206849

And directing the communities to do exactly that.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/07/23/governor-newsom-announces-local-progress-in-reducing-homelessness/

And he fucking ran on getting rid of the homeless

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/newsom-urges-california-cities-and-counties-to-ban-homeless-encampments

Newsom, a former mayor of San Francisco, made tackling homelessness a priority of his administration when he took office in 2019 and since then, Democratic leaders in the state have also moved toward cracking down on encampments.

And surprise surprise, he escalated after courts said it was okay to do.

His declaration comes a year after the U.S. Supreme Court made it easier for officials to ban homeless people from camping outside. It was a ruling welcomed by many Democratic leaders, including Newsom, despite pushback from advocates for homeless people who objected to the decision by the conservative court as cruel.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 12 hours ago

Amazing how he can just selectively read and then just be wrong even about the stuff he "read".

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The only Legislation Newsom has signed involving homelessness is expanding the number of shelter beds available.

[–] Goferking0@ttrpg.network 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

He ran on getting rid of them and does the trump thing of just suggesting they do the dirty work for him.

Gov. Gavin Newsom told California cities this week that there “were no more excuses” for homeless encampments, a message he has repeated often over the years with little success.

who will rid me of these terrible homeless people, I will surely do more if no one rids me of them

But since he's a dem you're perfectly fine with anything awful he does or campaigns on

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -2 points 12 hours ago

TBF if the cities had built enough beds like he's been doing, there would be few to none encampments.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 3 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Well yeah, you ever had to sleep outside in a Midwestern winter? I was lucky I had a car to sleep in, but if it was going to be a regular thing I mightve up and went to cali myself.

[–] Goferking0@ttrpg.network 2 points 14 hours ago

Depends on the part of California we're talking about. Not all of it is LA weather

[–] But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago (5 children)

No wonder you Americans are fucked, you demand that democrats step up and hit back at trump and the moment one does, you guys shit on him and tear him down. Enjoy more trump i guess, since you clearly think he’s better than Newson

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 7 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

You should really research Newsom some more. One example is that he hangs out with, and a gives a platform to, Charlie Kirk on his podcast but there are far worse things, too.

Newsom is not the guy.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Why research when you can just vote blue no matter who, as they platform fascists and treat the poor like dirt?

[–] WoodScientist@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The critical failure of "vote blue no matter who" is that many of those who run under the blue banner are actually just opportunistic Republicans who happen to live in blue states or districts. They're Republicans who can't get elected running as their true selves, so they lie and pretend to be Democrats. And then you do vote for them, because "blue no matter who." And then they corrupt the party from the inside, and deliberately make it harder for Democrats to win in the future. Remember, these people aren't actually Democrats. They don't want the Democratic Party or Democratic values or goals to succeed. They're just a bunch of cynical Republicans pulling one over on the Democratic base.

The problem with "blue no matter who" is that it has no way to address outright fraudsters. You're electing 'Democrats' who literally want the Democratic party to fail.

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

Always glad to see Eugene Debbs still haunting the fascists and its enablers.

[–] gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world 12 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

You're missing the point I think. People want better politicians, Democrats are better than Republicans meaningfully but not so meaningfully that they could fix the issues we're seeing in society. People like Cuomo and Newson are just power hungry people, who may be better than Trump but the people won't be satisfied with replacing their turd sandwich with ultra processed fast food, they want a healthy nutritious meal. Newson is fast food, it's a meaningful step up from turd sandwich but it won't fix the American diet.

It's Germany being upset at the traffic light coalition and then electing Merz. They went from one back stabbing party to unhealthy and destructive fast food. This will only upset people enough to eventually elect their version of a turd sandwich - the AFD.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -5 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

You're missing the point. If we don't back the imperfection in this FPTP system and then pass meaningful reforms the which we haven't had enough senators to do in over 10 years, we're going to end up in a racist theocratic dictatorship which will make even something as horrible as China or Russia blush. The world will devolve into war which will leave hundreds of millions in perpetual suffering. The rich elite are the only people benefiting from this downfall.

People want something better than Democrats? Then we're all going to fucking die.

[–] octopus_ink@slrpnk.net 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

You’re missing the point. If we don’t back the imperfection in this FPTP system and then pass meaningful reforms the which we haven’t had enough senators to do in over 10 years, we’re going to end up in a racist theocratic dictatorship which will make even something as horrible as China or Russia blush.

Well, we can pre-blame the voters for not liking what Democrats continue to sell, just like we blame the left for Kamala's decision to court Republican voters instead of Democrat voters, or we could recognize that I guess Newsom's got a very generous four years ahead to make himself an attractive choice on the basis of being something more than just not Trump and yet more warnings about the end of the world as we know it. (Which, by the way, I completely agree is happening-edit:the end of the world, not Newsom making himself attractive in more ways than that)

Maybe modified maga AI memes will be all it takes for enough people. I'm not that enthused by just aping what maga does, but it seems like a lot of people are. The gerrymandering thing is good, but it's also a slam dunk because he's fucking with Abbot and Trump, so let's see if he abandons less safe positions or shows he'll fight for any of them.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 50 minutes ago* (last edited 50 minutes ago) (1 children)

I do blame people who chose not to vote for Kamala. I really do. Blood on their hands.

This should have been the easiest fucking choice and they blew it.

[–] octopus_ink@slrpnk.net 0 points 35 minutes ago* (last edited 30 minutes ago) (1 children)

This should have been the easiest fucking choice and they blew it.

Totally agreed. But do I blame them? No, I fucking get it. They need to own that they contributed in some way to what's going on, but that doesn't mean I don't get it.

So do you want to blame them again next time, or would you rather kick D in the ass so they stop running the 2016 and earlier playbook?

I'm not voting for R-lite again, and for whatever small degree of difference there is between the two, I'm not voting 2016-era-D again either.

It's their job to show me they support my values, not my job to convince myself they do, then hope I'm right. I've been voting that way for decades and I'm done with it.

Conservatives and centrists already elected modern Hitler. There's no bigger bogeyman to hang in front of us next time. It's time for D to be actual opposition. Time to stop ignoring progressives except to blame them for their own failure to evolve. Time to admit they've got a lot of people still in power who haven't been able to relate to most of the electorate for thirty years, and many of them are in those positions because of nothing but internal power brokerage and politicking. Otherwise D better hope there's enough non-crazy R and conservative D left to keep them in power on their own, if they still plan on winning elections fair and square. The pool of people who are about done with the old ways and the oligarchs isn't shrinking, it's getting bigger.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 17 minutes ago (1 children)

I blame them. Blood on their hands. I don't pretend to understand any reasoning behind it besides pure ignorance.

[–] octopus_ink@slrpnk.net 0 points 12 minutes ago (1 children)

Choosing blame over change is a time honored establishment-Democrat tradition so I get it. You do you man, some people find that more comforting anyhow.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 minute ago

Identifying the problems is how we come up with solutions. I can't control who the winning candidate campaigns alongside, but I can convince people that the enemies of the DNC are all of our enemies. Being confronted isn't likely to change the person on the receiving end but it certainly makes onlookers think about their own stance.

We need to reform the electoral process and there is only one way to do that: remove as many GOP from office as possible. Volunteer for the DNC. If your candidate loses the primary? Doesn't matter, Republicans are worse.

[–] eskimofry@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

you're fucked too to suggest people should vote non-republican, and then bitch when people vote for a true progressive.

[–] But_my_mom_says_im_cool@lemmy.world -1 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I think you’re confused and lost

[–] eskimofry@lemmy.world 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

you're the one who is confused and lost here. I don't have a skin in the game. It's quite clear to me what liberals are doing and it's neither honest or decent.

Loyalty to the "lesser of two-evils" is worthless if one of the evils defers to the other.

You’re hysterical

[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 8 points 18 hours ago

They're raised on a steady diet of propaganda that says that they're the Greatest Country in the World, with a perfect democracy created by visionary prophets who understood the whole of human history back in the late 18th century. Therefore, whenever they're forced to confront the fact that that isn't the case, they rationalize things by assuming that the present state of affairs is just an anomaly and that the perfect candidate is just around the corner who'll win universal support and usher in a new golden age.

They're incapable of understanding the idea that, when things are fucked, you're going to have to go through a long path consisting of several stages of not-quite-as-fucked before things become good.

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 2 points 15 hours ago

Thank you! These people are about as entitled as it gets. And with no good reason! Their campaign to protest against good because it’s not perfect got us where we are. And I’m blown away by the fact that they just don’t fucking get it.

Thank you for pointing this out. This should be shouted from the mountaintops.

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip -1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

You think Gavan Newsom is different?

Yes, but you go ahead and be sure to vote for “More of the Same” on the ballot if we’re lucky enough to have an election in 2028.

See how much changes from doing nothing.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

How.much has changed from doing something?

[–] MourningDove@lemmy.zip 0 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

You people have had since this time last year to understand how all of this works. If I have to explain how the concept of voting works to you, our problem is FAR greater than I ever thought possible.

[–] icystar@lemmy.cif.su 1 points 30 minutes ago

You're part of the problem.

It's a two-pronged strategy.