Friendly reminder, we're talking about a hypothetical here, where Newsom wins the presidential primary in '28. In that scenario, one of the two psychopaths is a clear and obvious better choice. Dems being the lesser of two evils has always been a problem and letting Republicans win won't fix it.
And in this scenario Newsome won't actually be a lesser of two evils if you're trans or unhoused. So if you don't agree with the Anglosphere's current fascist hysteria about trans folks, then the thing to do is to not let it get to the point where Newsome is in the ticket, because he'll lose.
I would much rather see MN gov. Tim Walz win the Democratic primary. But if Gavin Newsom does instead: the whole fucking planet is dying from fossil fuel emissions and at least he's not a climate denier, and encouraging a symbolic abstention / third party vote is morally questionable at best.
So, you should probably try to stop Newsome from getting the nomination, since we won't vote for him if he's the nominee
Newsome's handling of PG&E doesn't I soiree a lot of hope in his ability to do what is necessary to minimize the climate chaos. That's something we can probably say about any democrat who might win though. Walz would be better. Pritzker would be better. Both are more electable too.
Great news then! He's also willing to streamline oil drilling and exploration if it means he might get to sit in the Oval Office. Guess the planet dying from fossil fuel emissions doesn't seem so bad if your chair is comfy enough. sjvsun.com/business/ene... calmatters.org/politics/202...
Bummer. Welp, I guess we got our work cut out for us to promote a different dem governor like Walz or Pritzker. If the guy leading the perpetually on-fire and drought-ridden state is so devoid of empathy as to be conflicted on curbing fossil fuel usage then he's lost my vote full stop.