this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
68 points (92.5% liked)

politics

19002 readers
3826 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
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] return2ozma@lemmy.world 33 points 11 months ago (4 children)

They really want him to replace Biden, don't they?

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)

According to the DNC's own lawyers, there's nothing we can do because they're a private organization.

Even if Newsome loses the primary, there's nothing legally stopping the DNC from making him the candidate in the general.

It's insane people aren't demanding that be changed before it happens. On a long enough timeline, one of the private parties will do it. Just a matter of when.

[–] Witchfire@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

🪟🤓🫴🦋 Is this democracy?

[–] Pasta4u@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

I'm surprised woth the DNC storied past people are calling for it to be dismantled

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

They really really do.

[–] BarrierWithAshes@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago

Him or Whitmer are the prime candidates should Biden fall. Though if either could win is a whole other discussion.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Then guess they want Trump to win. Fucking Democrats can't seem to not keep moving right and catering to Republicans.

[–] themadcodger@kbin.social 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I once heard it described that if Democrats found a magic lamp and got three wishes, they'd negotiate it down to one, and wish for something they think the Republicans would want.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

That's a good one and they also have the ratchet effect.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 4 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


“I’m here in expectation, as you suggest, of turning the page, of renewing our friendship and reengaging (on) foundational and fundamental issues that will determine our collective faith in the future,” Newsom said in brief opening remarks ahead of his meeting with Wang Yi, China’s top diplomat, earlier in the day.

Though Newsom was in China to promote cooperation in curbing climate change, Chinese officials took the opportunity in welcome speeches ahead of the closed-door meetings to talk about U.S.-China relations.

They also talked about fentanyl, a synthetic drug and leading killer of young people in the U.S., and China’s role in combating the transnational shipping of precursor chemicals, Newsom said.

At a speech at Hong Kong University on Monday, he promised to continue to cooperate on climate change regardless of the outcome of the next U.S. presidential election.

The governor met as well with the head of China’s National Development and Reform Commission, a Cabinet-level agency responsible for economic policies.

Democrat Jerry Brown and Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger also traveled to China to swap knowledge on reducing air pollution and emissions.


The original article contains 672 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 73%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] CrimsonMishaps@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I’m glad Arnold was there to share his knowledge on reducing air pollution.