113

Barack Obama accuses Republicans of wanting to ‘rig the next election’ in ad supporting Governor Newsom (www.latintimes.com)

submitted 1 month ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

99 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Obama's comments appear in a new video supporting Gavin Newsom's Proposition 50 which would allow the California legislature to draw new congressional boundaries ahead of the midterms

Barack Obama has entered the political fray ahead of November's special election in California, accusing Republicans of attempting to "rig the next election" in a new ad backing Governor Gavin Newsom's Proposition 50, a ballot measure that could reshape the state's congressional map.

"Republicans want to steal enough seats in Congress to rig the next election and wield unchecked power for two more years," Obama says in the 30-second ad, urging voters to approve the proposal. "You can stop Republicans in their tracks."

(page 2) 49 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] antifa_ceo@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Fuck Obama. What a slimy grifter he is. Hope and change my ass.

Edit: Liberals man. Obama was objectively a liar who campaigned as a progessive and governed like a centrist liberal. He spent his whole admin engaging in endless war crimes abroad while tirelessly working to destroy the left in our country paving the way for the fascist surge we are seeing today.

He could have done stuff to move us away from this path but instead doubled down on it. Go read a fucking a book y'all are remembering history with rose colored glasses.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems -2 points 1 month ago

MMW: Prop 50 is going to make somethings worse. I live on a blue island in a red sea in the blue state of California. Disenfranchising voters is going to lead to violence. If they were serious they would give us rank choice voting.

[-] JuBe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

The proposition is time-limited, and will revert back to independent redistricting organization after 2030.

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 month ago

Ranked choice makes no sense until the majority of states implement it.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] webdox@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

This disenfranchises no one.

[-] zbyte64@awful.systems 0 points 1 month ago

GOP when they gerrymandered Texas

[-] themaninblack@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I feel alone in my opposition to this proposition. Especially on this platform where most believe the ends justify the means.

You can’t answer voter disenfranchisement with more voter disenfranchisement. District lines should always be determined in a nonpartisan way, full stop.

That having been said we should implement more federal control of voting, at least for federal contests.

I also have much more radically left views in some ways. For example that we should use jury nullification against the emerging American gestapo, have zero tolerance for sieging the fucking capitol building (including shooting those who try), remove corrupt Democratic leadership by prosecution if necessary, etc.

But democracy is democracy. I still have loyalty to enlightenment ideals ffs.

[-] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 1 month ago

yall need more laws that are based on dynamic countering of negative forces

ie minimum wage should adjust yearly with inflation…

in this case, states that are against gerrymandering should form a pact to nullify its effects: if another state gerrymanders, between them they must gerrymander opposite to at least the same magnitude. if enough states get on board, gerrymandering is done

it’s possible to measure gerrymandering, and states know that it’s in their best interest to stop another state from doing it. the only thing that’s needed is inter-state cooperation

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2025

113 points (99.1% liked)

politics

26640 readers

1023 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

• 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