149
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago
[-] TonyOstrich@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

Jeff Jackson of North Carolina would be my personal pick. He's just too new. If he were 4-8 years further into his career I think it would be a slam dunk.

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Unfortunately agreed but wish he'd run anyway

[-] curiousaur@reddthat.com 2 points 9 months ago

Yeah, I think Biden should draw all the hate over Israel, take it with him and pave the way for Newsom to step up strongly against genocide.

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

You know... The first half has catapulted me into a constant state of chagrin. But I think you've got a plan that can turn it around. He's so good at the game, he could probably pull it off without even throwing Biden under the bus lol

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 0 points 9 months ago

This is good, let's get all the bad ideas out of our system

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago
[-] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago

Tim Walz, Shawn Fain, AOC....

In Newsom's defense, his state is overrun with the largest, most politically-active companies on the planet - but I can't say he's actually done much to fundamentally improve working-class conditions or addressed housing affordability or COL. He's applied a lot of band-aids, though.

He's a loud voice in a liberal state, but he's essentially just a younger Biden. He does the most optically-left thing he can without ruffling any feathers of the biggest DNC donors.

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Fuck yeah. Great selection! I wish we were still on trajectory for AOC, but 2016 set us back decades overnight. That's how we got Biden. Walz is a great milk toast caring Dem, definitely great in Midwest, not sure about angry rust belt, don't know his policy stances as well. Fain.. oh man. That MF cares about us. He can get the Bernie vote, the wannabe libertarian vote, etc

I might feel slightly less critical about what Gavin done here than I'm imagining your sentiment, but I can't say you're wrong, especially on housing. You're absolutely right he hasn't done the real work to make systemic changes. I do think we have tons of QoL improvements.

To be fair, that's my exact point. Biden's most unelectable quality is his age. Newsom's perfectly polished and architected candidate for this age. And he's hot and charming. Very electable. Could probably even spin his ex for some kind of GOP brownie points?

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago

On the contrary, Walz has been anything but milquetoast, he's just not as publicity-oriented as Newsom. He's passed a number of extremely popular progressive policies, including a campaign finance reform banning corporate contributions from companies who have 5% or more foreign ownership (that's poised to be struck down, but still an unambiguous signal against monied interests). Minnesota also has one of the lowest inflation rates in the country.

He's done his wildly progressive legislating while lowering taxes and running a surplus.

But Newsom is the Democratic darling because he's.... Hot? Idk what makes him a good candidate other than his optics, and even then, he'd have almost as bad a time as AOC would agaist a reactionary GOP, but with none of the desirable progressive policies we actually need. I'm honestly a little frustrated by this sentiment... He's a neoliberal candidate that has no other actual qualifications other than his media literacy and age, but he's also basically the GOP's definition of 'Elite-westcost-liberal'. I think he's the worst of the losing choices.

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I don't think you're hearing my point. Electability, not policy. I agree with you on what makes for good policy. It unfortunately doesn't stop a Trump election win

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago

And I'm saying I don't think he is, unless you think charisma is the only necessary quality for electability.

Personally I think Newsom comes off as a douche

[-] blazeknave@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

For president? Yes. Policy will not change hearts and minds anymore. (Unless you're a union organizer..I really do wish he would run!) Purported independent swing voters are spineless and vote for character stories and who they like, if they aren't full of shit Republican voters to begin with.

You feel that way about him because you're intelligent, critical, and seeking substance. Do you think you're the voter we're talking about persuading?

[-] archomrade@midwest.social 1 points 9 months ago

I'm not trying to get into an argument over electoralism right now, but I think you underestimate people's sensitivity to their material conditions.

Candidates like Newsom are the reason why people disengage from politics entirely. It's why I like Walz, he's been extremely effective at passing popular policies while heading off the most common GOB objections.

Someone with that kind of record would be way more electable than a Newsom or a Biden. Even the most reactionary people in my life have nothing to complain about with Walz. We haven't had an effective Democratic president since FDR, and it's the reason our economy continues to get worse for the working class.

this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
149 points (88.2% liked)

politics

18874 readers
3713 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS