this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
240 points (92.0% liked)

politics

28245 readers
2218 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 61 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That's a ridiculously low bar, but it's also an important distinction.

Do I want Gavin Newsom to be the Democrat nominee for 2028? Hell no! He's revealed himself to be a shallow political opportunist and an ideological chameleon. And I think that party can do better.

But regardless, would he be an improvement over Trump? Hell yes!

Another question is: is he - a supposedly populist liberal from California - even electable on a national stage? I don't think so. But then, we live in very 'interesting' times. So who knows.

The third question is: will we have a fair enough election in 2028 (or an election at all)? That remains to be seen.

[–] stylusmobilus@aussie.zone 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Put it this way, us overseas would rather see Newsom in charge of it than Trump.

That’s way better for us.

[–] mcv@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Anyone would be an improvement over Trump. Even Vance, probably. I'd gladly see Newsom win. But even more than that, I'd like to see Bernie, Warren or AOC win.

[–] Scirocco@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

Bernie + (anyone else, but preferably AOC) would have won against Trump three (3) times.

[–] stylusmobilus@aussie.zone 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Me too, but anyone who doesn’t threaten the sovereignty of other countries and respects some form of order is good for us.

Edit: Vance would last a month and no, if he could get full influence he might be as bad or worse than Trump.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

See this I feel. These articles annoy me because it feels like the dem bad thing but yeah if your talking canidate heck I would love waltz. him being put on as vice president was the main thing that jazzed me a bit with harris. Honestly I did not want my own govenor to run because our state has been such a trump show in the past and its nice being on track for awhile but man we need something decent in the role. I really don't know enough about newsom to say for sure but he certiainly does not have much going for him outside of using social media to combat trump which is good idea overall. Still unlike republicans I am going to be voting based on someone who I think can actually do a good job in the role rather than score some points.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

These do annoy me. Of course Newsom is not the best candidate but they are distracting everyone from how much better that would be than the current shitshow

And I have to ask y’all, are we really going to an insists on an ideal candidate regardless whether they are electable?

I have no idea whether Newsom is but he has name recognition, presidential presence, and a successful “populist” strategy. He has successfully positioned himself as a leading foil of Trump. All that stuff that seem necessary for getting elected even if they have no part in whether they would do well for their constituents. …. And they’re building a train!

I do always wonder if this is just republicans trying to astroturf “both sides the same”.

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

I think there's this assumption that the more centrist a dem is, the more electable they are and that may have been true decades ago. Now though? With how polarized the electorate is, people either vote for their party's candidate or the couch. Trump got roughly the same number of votes in 2024 (77M) as 2020( 74M) maybe he changed some minds; but Harris got 7M fewer votes than biden (81->74). People stayed home. "Not trump" wasn't enough to get excited about for enough folks, and that's about all Newsom has to offer

I genuinely believe Bernie is more electable than Newsom. We should give voters some credit

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 1 day ago

I mean when it comes to primaries I do not vote on electability. I think that is how we get the democrats we have now. Come general though im not going to be supporting the republican by voting for them or not voting. Bernie was the supposed unelectable canidate and I voted for him but come the general I voted for clinton.