327
Gavin Newsom’s quest to ‘Trump-proof’ California enrages incoming president
(www.politico.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
327 points (97.1% liked)
politics
19246 readers
2798 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
I think you’re right. Everyone is bowing down and kissing the ring.
If Democrats want any respect they need to act bravely in unison now and erect every possible barrier possible.
One of the problem with liberals is they believe we live in a somewhat fair and just world where laws work, justice takes time, and if you play by the rules everything will work out fine.
Fascists will nod along with liberals while thinking they’re a bunch of idiots and will use their naivety against them until they gain power, then turn to violence.
Trump has a lot of plans to put into place effect so there will be a lot of balls in the air and actors on the field.
Everyone needs to block them, disrupt them, distract them in any way possible.
I think part of the problem is that liberals don’t actually think we live in an inherently just and fair world. But that they think that capitalism, corporatism, and “stability” at any cost (even if that stability is a downward slope to fascism/oligopoly and ecocide) can still be “just” and “fair.”
Look at—and I hate to use Bernie as the example, but it’s relevant—how Bernie’s kinda progressive policies were treated by the party. They refused to let him win. And then pseudo-“adopted” the outward appearance of those policies to win voters. If his policies aren’t harmful enough to refuse to endorse them…why would you not just let him be president? Why stop him and take facsimiles of his policies? Is it because they knew they would win them votes but they’d never in a million years enact those policies? What was scaring them about him winning with his (again, very moderate) policies?
This is just the most recent and telling example. And then…I mean, the genocide thing. Not supporting a genocide is a pretty goddamn easy ask. But they were probably bleeding voters because they just wouldn’t.
These are not big, crazy things to ask for. But stopping them and enacting helpful policies was unthinkable to them. Why is that. Because more than anything, they would protect the rotting corpse of capitalism and the global hegemony over anything that might help people. And that comes back to their fucking billionaire backers, I assume? They are the ones who stand to lose scraps of their money and power.
I mean, I have to assume that is the answer. But it can’t be denied, I don’t think.
Oh Bernie…. Bernie would have given us a chance with real solutions and hope for the working class and would have been able to push back on Israel without being smeared as an antisemite.
But no, the DNC would never let him.