However, Babale did not do that. Both he and i did say-with cites, that anyone claiming Newsoms record on LBGT+ issues is poor is wrong. His record is the very best among all governors. If someone just claims Newsom is “:smarmy” due to their “gut feeling” then that is their opinion, and not falsifiable. Sure IMHO Newsom is not , but that’s just my opinion.
- Newsom shocks LGBTQ allies with stance on transgender athletes (link posted above)
- https://lalgbtcenter.org/vanguard/press-releases/statement-governor-newsom-betrays-queer-and-transgender-californians-with-health-budget-cuts-says-los-angeles-lgbt-center/
- Gavin Newsom again pulls back from Dems' LGBTQ+ support | Advocate.com
- Newsom condemned for ‘throwing trans people under bus’ after sports comment | Gavin Newsom | The Guardian
- https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/31/us/politics/newsom-social-media-grindr-homophobia.html
It sounds like you’re aware of the many positive things he’s done for the community, but that’s just a handful of the negative ones. I stand by my statement: his record is mixed.
For me it is vibe first and foremost anyway. And the stridency of his supporters, like Babale’s and Dr Deth’s posts, add to it?
It isn’t any specific policy item mainly because I don’t believe him in anything he’d state as policy.
Nice definition of the situation so that everyone who disagrees with you gets put into a pre-selected slot. Points for consistency of technique.
Yes he did. He claimed that everyone that doesn’t like Newsome is either an extremist accelerationist or misinformed by the former.
- That was in his podcast with Kirk, and he was trolling Kirk. Newsom later on clarified his stance.
- Newsom had to propose to cut a lot of thing in the grossly inflated budget proposal sent to him. After the Legislature sent him a better leaner budget, with 40 Million for that program, Newsom signed it. No cuts were made. A Nothingburger.
During the interview, Newsom called for his party to be “culturally normal,” and specifically to stop “spending a disproportionate amount of time on pronouns [and] identity politics.”
- That same Kirk podcast. repeating.
- paywalled. Kirk podcast again?
Cite?
No, I claimed that a person who passionately hates Newsom is either an extremist accelerationist or misinformed by such people. I totally get the people who dislike him because they think he’s smarmy or whatever. I think it’s a little silly to base your politics on aesthetics like that, but I understand the sentiment. Those aren’t the people who passionately hate him, though.
Same for me.
My gut says he is in it for himself and beholden to whoever writes the biggest checks. I just do not trust him…at all.
Not just wrong but easily manipulated by someone. If you don’t like him you have no critical thinking skills.
Hmm, apparently, I didn’t do a good enough job of explaining my goal. I was not trying to call out those posters for having invalid opinions. I was trying to reach the posters who had a very different reaction to Newsom than I do and trying to understand how they reached that conclusion.
The reason I quoted all of those posters is they seemed to most closely fit the strongly dislike Newsom’s vibe and then asking them if it was almost entirely a vibe thing or if it is a vibe + something else.
By no means do I claim their opinions are wrong. Just that such opinions, not based upon solid facts are= “Yeah, well, you know, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.”.
And to be fair- the same applies to my opinions.
But facts are rather sparse here.
- He vetoed a bill that would have asked courts to consider a child’s gender identity in custody decisions.
- He vetoed a bill requiring human drivers in self-driving trucks after his top business official argued it would stifle innovation, and California Labor Federation leader Lorena Gonzalez called the veto shocking.
- His veto of a widely supported university reparations bill drew criticism from racial justice advocates.
- Facing a deficit, he proposed freezing new applications for the immigrant healthcare expansion to save $5 billion.
- He gave cities a blueprint for clearing homeless encampments and publicly criticized local governments for not clearing them.
- He campaigned in 2018 on single-payer health care but has not pursued it.
- Hosted conservatives like Steve Bannon and Charlie Kirk on his podcast.
Probably more but that’s a start.
It amazes me that you’re getting this from this thread. Going through the thread up to the point where you posted, there were at most 3 posters whose posts could be interpreted as hate. The rest were either positive, indifferent, or distrustful of him. I think it’s a long stretch from distrust to hate, but maybe that’s just me.
In a veto message, Newsom urged caution that the bill’s approach could be used “to diminish the civil rights of vulnerable communities.”
“Moreover, a court, under existing law, is required to consider a child’s health, safety, and welfare when determining the best interests of a child in these proceedings, including the parent’s affirmation of the child’s gender identity,” Newsom’s message read. “For these reasons, I cannot sign this bill.”
He did pursue it, opting for Incrementalism, as California’s health plans were attacked by trumps administration. He focused on expanding Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid program) to cover more groups, including low-income adults regardless of immigration status. In October trumps administration cut $1.2 billion in federal Medicaid funds to California, in July $867.5 million, in May $1.3 billion, And then came HR1.
Already covered- several times.
You know our last candidate was from California, right? She was not a spectacular candidate, and she almost won. And her being from California wasn’t a particular issue during the campaign.
Eh, maybe I was a little strong, but it seemed like extremely strong dislike to me. Really nasty.
The thing I object to isn’t that he had Charlie Kirk on his podcast, or what he actually said about trans athletes. (He acknowledged legitimate concern about fair competition, and then pivoted to “on the other hand, maybe we should be more worried about suicide and homelessness among trans youth”). It’s that he referred to Kirk as a person of “innate decency”, which is just demonstrably untrue. I’m tired of Democrats not being willing to call racist scumbags what they are.
Right. Democrats can take a page from Jon Ossoff who has been very willing to call out the Nazis in his opponent’s campaign.
They married in 2001 and divorced in 2005. It lasted 4 years, a bit shy of the average length of a marriage that ends in divorce in the USA (7 years). Doesn’t look to me like they were of like mind for very long, if ever they were.
But if you insist on being troubled by the relationship, lemme ask you: have your values & opinions changed much in the past 20 years? Would you say it is unreasonable for someone to look at their 38 year old self and think maybe it was time for some reflection and correction? Did YOU have yourself 100% put together at that age? Where I’m going with this is, would you be less suspicious of Gavin if he’d not changed at all over ANY 20 year period? At some point holding someone’s past against them has less and less to do with that person than it does the one with the opinion.
It didn’t help anyway. It isn’t a big mark against but it is an extra bit to step over to prove you connect to those in fly over country, it comes with a presumptive stereotype of a superiority complex and elitism, able to be overcome, but easier to reinforce.
Given a cloned person as a candidate and one clone from a Midwest state and one from California, the former would have an easier row to hoe.