this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2025
201 points (95.5% liked)

politics

26628 readers
1487 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
[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The only reason Newsom has had any interest from the broader electorate is that he was outspoken in opposing Trump. The minute he enters the primary and starts spouting the same valueless, donor-approved, corporate drivel as Kamala, Jefferies, Schumer, etc., he's going to flame out fast.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I feel like people have completely forgotten that Kamala was at like 3% when she bowed out of the primaries.

[–] kreskin@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

The hatred of trump might propel a dem who otherwise has no chance. like when Biden won. Against any competent republican he would have been clobbered.

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world -3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

She was the vice president, the person we choose to take over when a president is incapacitated. I would love to hear about all the ways she's worse than Trump.

Nothing more infuriating to see people thoroughly scrutinize one candidate while absolutely refusing to do so for the other.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They didn't say anything about Trump, they said she had no shot of winning the primary, which is true. She was on track to lose every single state, including California, where she was a sitting senator. If you think describing polling data from a 5 year old primary is somehow saying Kamala is, "worse than Trump," you should log off for a while, maybe take a walk or something.

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world -1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

they said she had no shot of winning the primary

The neither did Sanders.

She was NOT GOING TO LOSE CALIFORNIA. For fuck's sake, who could possibly be this fucking stupid. You know the election happened right? SHE WON CALIFORNIA, YOU IMPOSSIBLE DUMBASS.

She was essentially a younger Biden so you might want to look into whatever unconscious issues you have with voting for a non-white man.

You're saying Harris shouldn't have been elected.... that means you support Trump. You certainly worked extra hard for him spreading your bullshit lies and blatant propaganda. You're the same as MAGA, no thought, no reasoning, no HONESTY. Fucking shameful.

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

She was NOT GOING TO LOSE CALIFORNIA. For fuck's sake, who could possibly be this fucking stupid.

OK, but yes, she absolutely was..

You know the election happened right? SHE WON CALIFORNIA, YOU IMPOSSIBLE DUMBASS.

Again, no. She dropped out before the California ballot deadline, most likely to spare herself the embarrassment of losing her home state.

The neither did Sanders.

Sanders won several states. Kamala was polling so badly she dropped out before Iowa.

I'm sorry that accurately remembering the 2020 primary is so upsetting to you, but Kamala did not win a single state, even as a VP choice. She dropped out in December of 2019. Voting started in February of 2020. Biden eventually secured the nomination, and on August 11th, the day that the final state voted, he named Kamala as his running mate.. Anyway, maybe before you jump into a thread and start calling people dumbasses, you should make sure that literally everything you're saying isn't wrong.

[–] hatorade@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Notice how @MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world didn't have any reply to you giving citations, almost like they can't face facts. Weird!

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

I'm sure they're just planning to quietly delete their comments once they're sure everyone's stopped paying attention.

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world -5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You mean idiots will refuse to vote for him while refusing to scrutinize his opposition.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

His, "opposition," is going to be other Democratic primary challengers. Can you at least wait until there's a nominee before you start in with the, "Oh, you want the Republicans to win!?!?" bullshit?

[–] MiddleAgesModem@lemmy.world -2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

If Newsome gets the nod, which is the assumption we were all OBVIOUSLY operating one for the purpose of this conversation, people are already all over this thread saying they wouldn't vote him and would hand the presidency to Republicans.

Just like they did last November. They're right to scrutinize Harries, every politician should be. But they're WRONG to stop at Harris. They give Trump a pass. Then they act like they have the moral high ground and gloat about bringing Trump back to power.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

If Newsome gets the nod, which is the assumption we were all OBVIOUSLY operating one for the purpose of this conversation

That's a weird assumption to make considering I started this conversation by saying, "The minute [Newsom] enters the primary...he's going to flame out fast."

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They love to simp for the DNC, check their history. They are currently defending Newsom doing this and other things he's done.

[–] pjwestin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It's just fascinating to watch someone argue that we can't criticize the Democratic nominee without helping Republicans even though we're three years away from getting a Democratic nominee.

[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago

No criticism, only votes!

No platform, only votes!

No primaries, only votes!

No speech, only votes!

You voted in a way they didn't like? HOW DARE YOU!