10
I wish they'd wake up and stop pushing this guy. They need to be pushing a Bernie style left of center. Otherwise it's going to swing so far left there's going to be carpenters working to build mideval structures outside their homes.
Pushing this guy is how they stay in power. They don't give a fuck if they win or lose. Democratic consultants had their best year in 2024 pushing two right wing slop candidates.
We have a right wing party and an ultra far right wing party, neither of them will ever allow a left wing progressive into power.
We got close to having Bernie twice.
If just a few scumbags had less influence, he would've won.
You realize if Bernie had won he'd have been impeached before he took office, right? Maybe day 1 if they were feeling generous. He probably should've sold his soundbites better but isn't that always the folly of the Dems?
How much ~~sawdust~~ transphobia can you put in ~~rice crispies~~ a politician before people ~~notice~~ care enough to complain?
Also did he just do the "I have a black friend" thing with his godson? Because it kind of seems like he just did almost exactly that.
If I did not vote for him it would not be because of this statement. Heck im one who thinks maybe we just need to stop having sports seperated by sex and just have the league levels and you participate in the highes league you can get into.
The idea of Gavin Newsom running as a spoiler legitimately terrifies me.
He is the chosen representative of the part of the party that would rather have Trump than someone like Bernie.
Here's something important for everyone: It's actually a GOOD thing to be able to change your views when confronted with new evidence. Many of the Nordic countries, Canada and the rest of Europe are putting the brakes on certain gender affirming care up to a certain age and I'm going to guess it's not just childish discrimination as to the reason they're doing it.
What do you think is the reason several countries are putting the brakes on certain gender affirming care under a certain age?
I've read a few things but the primary concern is irreversible treatments.
I'm not the expert and think it should be up to doctors and their patients based on whatever consensus the medical community reaches.
I agree with with it being between doctors and patients based on the medical consensus.
Tho that's kinda the opposite of your original comment, which seemed to suggest it should be determined by politicians. Or at least implied that politicians are basing their laws on the medical consensus, which isn't always true especially with topics like trans rights that have been overly politicized and then demonized as a moral failing.
Wrong .1% issue to care about. Literally there are pedos running the whitehouse committing so many crimes
Newsom isn't a democratic nominee running against Trump. He's a Democrat who wants to be chosen over other Democrats to be the 2028 nominee.
Calling out any apparent backsliding or bigotry is relevant, be it transphobia, homophobia, Islamophobia, anti-semitism, sexism, or racism.
It’s not backsliding if he’s always been a bigot.
And frankly, the way he deals with homelessness is bad enough for me to vociferously oppose him.
We need solutions that fix people’s problems, not feeds the prison slave labor industry.
If he can't be trusted to help .1% amount of the population, how can he be trusted to help .6%, or 26%?
I don’t care about the culture war puppet show. I’ll vote for whoever can get the nazi pedos out of office.
So the blue fascist pedos get elected?
That isn't going to be done by a person that isn't willing to come out against the Republicans favorite wedge issues.
Except his backsliding on liberal issues should be a sign he's another Manchin, Sinema, or Fetterman and he'll royally fuck us over when it hurts the most.
Throwing trans people under the bus isn’t going to get the Republicans out of office. The Democrats in NC who caved on trans rights just got walloped in the primaries. Even if you don’t care about trans rights (and I think we should all care), trying to chase the mythical moderate like this is not an effective strategy to getting elected.
OK, well that ain't Newsom. He may win the primary if we're unlucky but there's no way he's winning the general without turning out the whole Democratic party, and this transphobic nonsense he chose to engage in has made sure that won't happen.
Fortunately, there's still plenty of time to rally around a different nominee
Same, but it's telling how the neo-liberal candidate is ignoring both the culture war and the class war.
From what I see he doesnt appear to be running from the issue. Hes passed a ton of pro trans legislation and it seems he will continue. But the reality is its an 80/20 issue and there is little point in rhetorically fighting on it when you can fight on something better like cost of living or Republican corruption.
It's not an 80/20 issue, it's a human rights issue. Just because he's done some good doesn't discount his bigoted rhetoric. Fun fact, multiple issues can be addressed at once.
Something can be a human rights issue and an 80/20 issue. He does not have bigoted rhetoric. If you think that then youve been lied to. His rhetoric hasnt shifted from ally to bigoted Its shifted to less focus on putting these issues at the forefront of the campaign because they are not popular issues compared to what he could be talking about.
this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
10 points (100.0% liked)
politics
29548 readers
286 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS