this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2026
133 points (96.5% liked)

politics

30309 readers
2414 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The California governor described White House reporters as ‘sycophants’

California Governor Gavin Newsom criticized the media for what he described as overly deferential coverage of Donald Trump, characterizing reporters in Oval Office press briefings as “sycophants.”

The Democratic governor — widely seen as a potential contender for the 2028 presidential race — made the remarks during a Sunday interview with progressive commentator Jack Cocchiarella.

Cocchiarella pressed Newsom on what he framed as “hesitancy” within the White House press corps to scrutinize certain subjects: namely, the 80-year-old president’s health.

“You see these press conferences in the Oval Office,” the governor replied. “You maybe have one or two reasonable reporters. They ask a question; there's no chance for a follow-up. And then it’s seven sycophants from news outlets.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 34 points 20 hours ago (9 children)

Lefties you gotta get your person up and ready. Presuming elections still exist and should this guy emerge as the frontrunner you have about 814 days before you have to vote for this guy or continue flushing ourselves down the republican hole.

Every article about him brings the boo-birds. That’s fine, but there’s still no champion for our leftier-than-thou politicos. You just gonna let it ride on Bernie again?

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Mamdani cannot run as he was born in Uganda to two non-Americans

[–] amgine@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

But Obama did it! /s

[–] ShredderFeeder@shredderfood.net 7 points 19 hours ago (30 children)

Bernie is officially too old (honestly, he was in 2015)

If Newsome is on the ballot in november I'll vote for him. Of course if Lassie was on the ballot as a democrat in 2028, I'll vote for her.

Don't give a shit. Anything is better than a republican.

load more comments (30 replies)
[–] TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 7 points 19 hours ago

Every article about him brings the boo-birds. That’s fine, but there’s still no champion for our leftier-than-thou politicos.

Crazy, It's almost like the DNC is complicit in keeping any viable economically left winged candidates away from any seat of power where they could one day become a decent candidate for president.

I really can't understand why anyone would think Gavin Newsome is a good candidate. Imo the only thing different between the mainstream Democrats and the Republicans is an affectation of wokeness, and Gavin Newsome doesn't even clear that hurdle.

His only talent in life is cheating on his wife and befriending the Gettys. Literally has not had to work for a thing in his life. Daddy bought him a degree at a private school, got a baseball scholarship..... never played a single game. His best friend bought him a winery, and then had Mayor Brown take him under his wing in SF, and then had governor brown do the same exact thing.

Can we not go a little bit farther to the left than the best friend of an oil Barron?

[–] sportsjorts@lemmy.zip 1 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

I’ll do what I always do watch the Dem establishment shit all over everything while I hold my nose and vote for a shit stain like newsowm. There’s plenty of time for a “lefty” candidate to rise as long as the DNC fucks off to hell.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 5 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

I'll be shocked if AOC runs for president and not against Schumer.

If she doesn't then just vote Michelle Obama in, as there's really nobody else I can think of in a position to run by then. Not a leftist at least in the surface but she'd win in a landslide. Easily. And I'd prefer her over someone like Newsom or Shapiro..

[–] MartianRecon@lemmus.org 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

She'll go for Schumers seat. The Democrats need a dude to run against the republican. Shooting yourself in the foot by having a woman run is not worth the risk to the fate of the country. The handicap from the sexist assholes is just too great to overcome.

That's the frank games theory we've proven this decade.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (6 children)

I think it has been debunked that a woman or person of color is why we lost. Key to note: Anyone who was a true sexist racist piece of shit was already core maga and never, ever going to vote for any Democrat.

People must remember that nobody has polled higher against Trump -- ever -- than Michelle Obama. IF she wants to run (and a big if), she would win. Just need a tad bit more charisma.

(If anyone has any evidence whatsoever beyond speculation or shoddy N=2 statistics, I'm all ears, but I have not found evidence).

[–] edible_funk@lemmy.world 1 points 8 minutes ago

When was that debunked? How? If you genuinely think misogyny and misogynoir weren't part of why Hillary and Kamala lost then I've got a bridge to sell you.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I hear ya. But 814 days is 814 days.

[–] TheMadCodger@piefed.social 9 points 19 hours ago

That's one of the many problems with this system. The DNC is a private organisation and they can put forth or hold back any candidate they want regardless of the will of the people (see: Harris or Sanders the first time).

So unless the DNC finally gets out of its own way (it won't) and lets an actual progressive candidate run, they'll do the same thing they always do and pick some Milquetoast "centrist" who will keep the status quo, and an actual progressive will have to run independent or form a new party and then get enough people to vote for them without splitting the vote and causing the Nazis to win by default.

The entrenched powers have no interest in change and don't care what the people actually want.

load more comments (5 replies)