this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2026
835 points (98.7% liked)

politics

31379 readers
2526 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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

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
 

Not only has Gov. Gavin Newsom vocally opposed the proposed California billionaire tax, but he also wants to prevent the state from ever passing a wealth tax in the future.

On Friday he endorsed Proposition 42, a ballot measure that would cancel out Proposition 40, the proposed billionaire tax. Prop. 42 would prohibit retroactive taxes like the one-time 5% tax on assets that would apply to any billionaire who lived in California on Jan. 1, 2026 if Prop. 40 passes.

But Prop. 42, funded and placed on the ballot by billionaire and Google co-founder Sergey Brin to defeat the billionaire tax, also would go further, by banning any new taxes on personal property.

That includes pensions and 401K accounts before retirees start drawing retirement income from them. It also includes other investments, financial assets, business holdings, art collections and all other forms of personal wealth that would be affected by the billionaire tax or any future wealth tax.

Newsom’s decision to support Prop. 42 runs counter to his own Democratic Party and some labor unions. It also aligns him with some of the wealthy tech donors with whom he’s maintained longstanding relationships dating back to his days as mayor of San Francisco.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jaykrown@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

It's comical at this point. No way anyone votes for him if he tries to run for president.

[–] bold_atlas@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

As if anyone can remember anything for longer than a week.

[–] nieminen@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

You'd be surprised. I thought the same thing about trump 2024. A lot of people only see newsom as a charismatic anti-trump, And don't actually see or care about his individual decisions or policies. Which, come to think of it, is very similar to how trump made it in.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The truly fucked part of government is the people who you'd want in the position absolutely want no part of the position. Almost everyone in government is in there for the money and the power. If you did manage to get someone in who is altruistic, they would simply be fighting against swarm upon swarm of horrible people, while at the same time refusing to take bribes and make personal deals to be able to advance any form of wealth.

For the most part, we've designed our government to only attract self-serving pieces of shit, and the few that aren't in that camp never make it to the top because of all the other self-serving pieces of shit.

We're looking at a sack of turds that occasionally does something anti-trump while licking the balls of some other oligarch, vs someone who walks out there talking centrist and campaigns for the right claiming they're very nice people.

It is entirely possible that the DNC puts him out front instead of AOC, then we're left with whoever trumps successor is (asuming we ever have actual real elections again), or some democrat right sycophant, or trying to convince everyone in the fucking US to write in a name.

We're cooked any way the cards fall

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

Not really cooked any way the cards fall, you as an individual understand that alongside myself. Our knowledge and ability to discuss freely is what will save us. The senate has a good chance soon, we'll know:

The Democratic candidates for those potential flips:

North Carolina: Roy Cooper

Ohio: Sherrod Brown

Alaska: Mary Peltola

Maine: Troy Jackson

Texas: James Talarico

Iowa: Josh Turek

Kansas: Adam Hamilton

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

If they let midterms happen without militarizing it and accept the results without fucking with them, we have a chance.

I wish those weren't ifs

[–] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The primaries showed how much pull cable news pundits still have. They just have to tell voters "don't vote for the policy that helps you and everyone else, the only way to beat republicans is if you imagine a voter who loves republicans dogshit policy and strategically vote for a dem candidate with those policies"