this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2026
185 points (89.7% liked)

politics

28312 readers
2496 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
 

Newsom and his team have successfully tapped into the need that many rank-and-file Democrats have for adopting a confrontational approach to Trump and his policies. But few people outside of California know much about the governor’s actual record — and many Democratic voters will be turned off to learn that his fervent opposition to a billionaire tax is part of an overall political approach that has trended more and more corporate-friendly.

A year ago, Newsom sent about 100 leaders of California-based companies a prepaid cell phone “programmed with Newsom’s digits and accompanied by notes from the governor himself,” POLITICO reported. One note to the CEO of a big tech corporation said, “If you ever need anything, I’m a phone call away.” While pandering to business elites, Newsom has slashed budgets to assist the poor and near-poor with healthcare, housing and food – in a state where seven million live under the official poverty line and child poverty rates are the highest in the nation.

...

“Governor Newsom’s reluctance to propose meaningful revenue solutions to help blunt the harm of federal cuts undermines his posture to counter the Trump administration.” The statement said that the proposed budget “will leave many Californians without food assistance and healthcare coverage.”

So far, key facts about Newsom’s policy priorities have scarcely gone beyond California’s borders. “National media have focused on Newsom as a personality and potential White House candidate and have almost completely ignored what he has and has not done as a governor,” said columnist Dan Walters, whose five decades covering California politics included 33 years at the Sacramento Bee. “It’s a perpetual failing of national political media to be more interested in image and gamesmanship rather than actual actions, the sizzle rather than the steak, and Newsom is very adept at exploiting that tendency.”

Also see https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/feb/10/gavin-newsom-presidential-candidate-democrats

Like Trump, Newsom breaks promises, serves billionaire interests and mistakes social media theatrics for leadership. Is that really what American voters will want in 2028? After Richard Nixon, Americans chose Jimmy Carter. After George W Bush, they chose Barack Obama. After Trump, they’ll likely want change – authentic, strong, moral leadership, a leader with competence and vision.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

libs in this thread, having already settled for mediocrity 2 years before there’s an election lol

like yea guys, keep putting shitass unappealing candidates and blaming their loss on scary internet communists who, as we all know, actually account for most of the non-voting population in the US. it worked so well the last checks notes 2 times.

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca 6 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Here come the protest voters to ensure Trump’s legacy continues.

[–] nednobbins@lemmy.zip 2 points 40 minutes ago (1 children)

Every time these "less than perfect" candidates get elected they end up screwing us over and giving the Republicans fertile ground to expand their power networks. We've given such fake saviors countless opportunities and look where it's landed us.

It's going to take more than a good show of being anti-Nazi.

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca 2 points 35 minutes ago* (last edited 34 minutes ago)

Oh look! Here’s one now to tell us that… [checks notes] apparently, the democrats elected Trump.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 8 points 2 hours ago (3 children)

I am trying to get us to win by having a candidate that actually has a chance, which Gavin doesn't because the more everybody learns about him nationally the less people like him, what the hell are you trying to do?

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Your just here to slam dems. Happens every election cycle. Flick off and eat trash you Russian bot.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 1 points 46 minutes ago* (last edited 34 minutes ago)

I make a good chunk of the posts on the Ukraine sopuli community to pro-Ukrainian news coverage, you could not have picked a worse lazy accusation to throw clumsily in my direction. Check my post history, and next time think before you type :)

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

I’m trying to ensure that people have learned from past mistakes that perfect isn’t obtainable right now and in these desperate times we need to just fucking vote AGAINST fascism regardless of who it is that is standing in it’s way.

But if you really feel the need to rally people into falsely assuming that a perfect candidate is worth holding out for- I guess it’s that’s all the proof needed that we collectively haven’t learned shit, and probably just deserve the shit we’re forced to endure.

[–] A7thStone@lemmy.world 2 points 55 minutes ago (1 children)

If Newsome is your choice then apparently you don't even think good is obtainable right now.

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca -3 points 53 minutes ago (1 children)

At this point- I don’t give a shit because ANYTHING is better than a fascist Nazi.

That you don’t agree says a lot more about you I’d say.

[–] A7thStone@lemmy.world 2 points 45 minutes ago (1 children)

I don't disagree that Gavin is better than actual fascists, but we have two years to actually come up with someone better and protecting him now when it's obvious how garbage he is isn't helping us.

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca 0 points 27 minutes ago* (last edited 26 minutes ago) (1 children)

So again, the nuance of the topic is lost-

IF- Gavin is the one to remain standing, I am suggesting we vote for him.

Big IF.

This isn’t to suggest that I support everything he is about- but I’d vote for anyone over suffering a single extra day with an addled gelatinous child molesterer.

And to be honest- if who ever is out there that is better, and they don’t stand and be counted soon, I will have zero faith that they’re the right person.

So this eliminates any 11th hour arrivals of spoiler 3rd party idiots that disappear and reappear like cicadas every four years. Say what you will about Gavin, but he’s getting his hands dirty at least. And that means more than the silence from [candidate].

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 1 points 23 minutes ago

Trump is the result of "lesser of two evils" voting. Maybe try doing something different this time?

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz -2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

Im not holding out for a perfect candidate, I am holding out for a candidate that isn't worse than useless as far as the objective of winning is concerned.

Are you not reading my words? How many times do I have to say this?

Gavin will lose, that is that reality, I am trying to be proactive and raise awareness so we can put our energy into candidates and movements that actually have a fighting chance.

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Okay… word it in whatever way paints the prettiest picture of hopeful rhetoric as you’d like, however, at the end of the day, you’re basically saying you refuse to vote against a fascist unless the person running against them meets some weird purity test that defies gradation.

It’s pretty fucking simple bud…. If we have no other options you FUCKING VOTE AGAINST the FASCIST. There is no debating this.

I honestly cannot believe we’re still having to teach this shit to people.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 59 minutes ago) (1 children)

Never said I refused to vote, never said the candidate had to be perfect.

What you seem to refuse to understand is that we have far better options than Gavin Newsom both from a policy standpoint and an electability standpoint.

Get out of here with your accusations I have some weird purity test, I am applying basic political competency standards here and Gavin desperately fails them.

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca -1 points 54 minutes ago (1 children)

LMAO…

Two years prior to an election, you’re already salivating over anyone that isn’t him. You done even know who that is- but NOT Gavin is clearly your angle here

This is as bad faith as it gets and whatever you’re up to, I have doubts that it has anything to do with what you’re on about.

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 0 points 48 minutes ago (1 children)

Two years prior to an election, you’re already salivating over anyone that isn’t him. You done even know who that is- but NOT Gavin is clearly your angle here

Right, now is too early and later will be too late I know how this one goes...

[–] Pratai@piefed.ca -1 points 25 minutes ago

Okay buddy. You keep saying that. I’m sure someone will be dumb enough to believe it.

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

This shit. This shit right here is how trump won.

Go to hell Russian bot. I swear this happens every election now

[–] supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 hour ago

Yes me the poster who vomits up article links to pro-Ukrainian news almost every day is a Russian bot.

Lol facepalm

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

The bots are at it again

[–] wuffah@lemmy.world 17 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

At this point, I would vote for an upturned mop painted with lipstick for president.

[–] Rhoeri@piefed.social 2 points 58 minutes ago

Any sane person would, but these kids would have you believe the perfection is out there waiting to be voted for.

[–] PumpkinEscobar@lemmy.world 36 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

progressive credentials

He's only progressive if you squint a little, really want very badly to see him as progressive, and then pretend his actions line up with his progressive speech. And even the left-most of his speech is really milquetoast progressive, like elevator muzak rock and roll.

[–] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 hours ago

That caught my eye too. I didn't think anyone thought he was progressive.

[–] MajinBlayze@lemmy.world 75 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (14 children)

Anywhere else in the country, Newsom would have run as a Republican.

Genuinely, if Newsom is selected by the Democratic party in 2028, nothing will change and we'll be staring down the barrel of trump 2.0 in 2032.

There are only two ways for the Democratic party to be relevant at this point:

  1. Support politicians who bring actual change to improve people's lives
  2. Actually punish Republican politicians for all of the crimes that they are doing in broad daylight right now.

But the Dems showed in NY how they feel about #1, and are refusing to do anything with #2 in Minnesota (and completely fumbled the opportunity they had over the last few ~~years~~ decades nationwide)

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›