Newsom Echoes Progressives: Mamdani, AOC, and Sanders Shape the Future Democrats Need

[egbertowillies]

Newsom unexpectedly validates Mamdani, AOC, and Sanders as the voices defining America’s future—and exposes the failures of neoliberal politics in the process.

Blog Post: https://egberto.substack.com/p/newsom-echoes-progressives-mamdani

Podcast: https://creators.spotify.com/pod/profile/politicsdoneright/episodes/Newsom-Echoes-Progressives-Mamdani--AOC--and-Sanders-Shape-the-Future-Democrats-Need-e3bthnh/a-acbi6q7

[Blue Full Moon]

1. Damage control or saying whatever to which group he's taking to

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220848181

[BannonsLiver]

10. Saying things most Democrats agree with doesn't require damage control.

Not sure that thread went the way the OP intended and beyond that, the hard data says things he’s said in the past reflect the views of most Dem voters. That was all covered in the podcast uproar in March.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

14. It's the same thing!

It's the same "more culturally normal" group from the other thread. Jeez.

[leftstreet]

2. In the same interview he says he's against taxing the wealthy

The Tennessee Holler
@TheTNHoller
Dec 4
Gov. @GavinNewsom
says he disagrees with Mayor @ZohranKMamdani
about the need for a wealth tax on billionaires, which he is “adamantly against” - says Dems are a “big tent party” with both views.

Link to tweet

?s=20

[FascismIsDeath]

3. Being against the "wealth tax" is not the same thing as being against "taxing the wealthy".

I'm not opposed to the "wealth tax" idea myself. But you worded that very deceptively.

[leftstreet]

4. LOL okay n/t

[ancianita]

8. Not so lol when you consider that Newsom's taxing the wealthy led to CA having a budget surplus. Very smart.

[leftstreet]

9. Maybe he's forgotten that

[ancianita]

11. Or you have. You think the governor of the 4th largest economy on the planet has to have the exact politics you

think he should? Maybe he knows more about what he's doing than you. Definitely he's a step ahead of our political opponents ...you gotta give him that much. He's completely surprised the party recently with his quick legal solution to the felons' demand for more disenfranchising gerrymanders; so maybe consider that he can make political moves with the future in mind.

[leftstreet]

12. Not at all

Sounds like he's been a great Governor for CA. I think he also has excellent future prospects as a Senator, Cabinet Appointee, etc

[FascismIsDeath]

20. No, its like I said, he doesn't favor the actual "Wealth Tax" policy. He is fine with progressive income taxes...

...where higher earnings are taxed at higher rates. That is our most common form of "taxing the wealthy". Newsom is not against that.

The "Wealth Tax" policy idea is different. That is saying "we are going to annually tax people based on their net worth, over and over and over". So if I have a billion and a half dollars in savings, they would tax that a certain percentage, then that might bring that savings down it 1.3 billion or something but then next year, those same left over dollars get taxed again. He seems to be opposed to retaxing something that was already taxed.

I'm not saying I am personally against the Wealth Tax policy either. I'm actually fine with it (though its likely never getting passed anytime soon).

But in this big tent party, people are allowed to have nuance and not support every single progressive idea, as long as they agree with the overall concepts, I can tolerate that. We have to tolerate it if we are ever going to hold a coalition together that is large enough to outvote the roughly half of the country that generally opposes everything the left, center-left and even so called moderates, stand for.

[leftstreet]

23. It doesn't matter

The optics here are ridiculous

People are paying half their incomes for rent, facing skyrocketing insurance premiums, holding $200 utility bills in their hands, wondering if they'll be part of escalating layoffs....and Newsom is balking about taxing rich people, and leaving it for others to parse his meaning.

It's the most tone deaf thing imaginable. And proof that while Newsom may be great at many things, he's past the expiration date for 90s centrists politicians. Way past

[Jack Valentino]

29. I don't know if Newsom is 'past his expiration date' or not, but EVERY Democrat should be saying

"TAX THE FUCKING RICH NOW!" their fare share.

As Jesse Jackson once said about taxes on the rich in 1988, paraphrased,

'they have been having a party. now they have to pay for the party'

[John Coktosten]

5. Doesn't this entire post violate the DU TOS?

Now I'm not saying we should hit alert because I completely agree with the post. But seriously doesn't it violate our rules in multiple ways? Am I hallucinating?

Is there anyway to change the current DU rules so that it doesn't violate them because I think more like this post is needed?

Are our rules set in stone as if passed down by some deity?

Looking for answers.

[LT Barclay]

6. It surely wouldn't have survived the great purge of 2015

[John Coktosten]

7. I was only a DU lurker back then.

What happened back then?

[LT Barclay]

15. Anyone who questioned the wisdom and ultimate coronation of Hillary was attacked and often removed.

Some folks with brilliant minds. I miss Octafish. Don't know who he was, but he could lay out some referenced material as fast as McDonalds could spread fries.
You can still detect it if you mention public figures that were not onboard or who noted the downsides of the campaign. Michael Moore mentions will often be met with derision. Bernie Sanders mentions used to be dangerous.

[John Coktosten]

16. I remember seeing exactly what you're mentioning.

Any sentence not in absolute favor of HRC was getting people banned.
One can still support Dems and the party in general while still not being happy with every single thing done by the party or by every single dem personality. Why we're not allowed to say anything negative about a dem is horrible to me. For instance the 8 dem senators who caved recently. Are we not allowed to say negative things about them?

What's wrong with that? I've had posts removed for that recently and have been threatened with being banned.

It's nuts and frankly in and of itself the opposite of what the dem party stands for.

[LT Barclay]

19. It is not what it stands for but it is what is has become. Just look at what happened when a bunch of senators were

upset that a Bernie backed candidate might win a nomination, so they dug up some acceptable (to them) puppet to run against. And then in public wail and cry that they don't understand why younger folks are sold hook, line, and sinker on committing to voting D for life. Chris Hedges says this is what fuels fascism and autocracy, when the liberals abandon the working class.

[Kid Berwyn]

22. Octafish is still here -- channeled by Kid Berwyn

C'est moi.

I left DU after the primary battle, but was not forced to leave. I posted at Jackpine Radicals (named after a late, great liberal, progressive and brave DUer), but never in a disrespectful or condescending way toward Hillary Clinton, the team at DU, or anyone else -- with the exception of certain, censoring types who didn't care for criticism of Herr Trump, friend of Putin and the Mob. Once they took over JR, I quit posting alltogether for a couple of years. When Putin's puppy started climbing in the polls, I came back to DU to give him the what's for, but was unable to reincarnate my old account. So I chose this handle -- named after a time-wasting camera store shopper-never-buyer from a Chicago suburb.

Thank you, LT Barclay! You made my day.

[LT Barclay]

25. I'm glad! And it is good to know you are back. For some reason I could never get registered with that website.

There are only a few here that I actually what to know when they post and you are one!

[Kid Berwyn]

36. Thank you, my Friend.

Reading you care means the world to me. Dr. Samuel Johnson said, “Only a fool writes for anything but money.” And he’s correct — except when it comes to defending the Constitution of the United States of America.

[H2O Man]

35. I have heard

That Kid Berwyn is Octafish's Bruce Wayne.

[Kid Berwyn]

37. Working for Alfred's dogsbody, as bathrooms don't clean themselves.

Ad astra per aspera.

[Jack Valentino]

26. and still might be!

also, any positive mention of Bernie Sanders is likely to start
some kind of gangland war....

I vocally supported Hillary Clinton in the 2016 General Election,
and was heartbroken when she lost---

but any mention that I did not support her in the primary,
and much less stating any reasons WHY not,
is "triggering" to some people....

[usonian]

32. I voted for Bernie in the CA primary over Joe because I thought he had the better chance of winning.

It worked out fine. Bernie and AOC were staunch supporters of President Biden and campaigned hard for Harris and Walz.

Eyes on the prize.

[Jack Valentino]

33. I voted for Joe Biden in 2020, because I thought he had the best chance of winning---

even though I might have agreed more with Bernie Sanders
on a lot of specific issues----

but after he was elected, Joe Biden paid a good deal of attention
to Bernie Sanders on many issues--- I was not disappointed in Joe....

The most important thing in 2020 was to kick Trump's smelly ass OUT
of the White House--- and we certainly did THAT !


(And President 'Fighting Joe' Biden then became
the most progressive Democratic President
in modern history!)

[usonian]

34. I'm glad I was wrong in 2020, that's for sure.

2024, not so happy, but I was all in for Harris and Walz.

Agree about Joe. Bidenomics was revolutionary and a spectacular success.

But people had to have their racism and lies. "Cuz they felt so good"

No further comment.

[ancianita]

13. How so? Have you ever read the rules?

Last edited Fri Dec 5, 2025, 08:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Are our rules set in stone as if passed down by some deity?

Looking for answers.

Here ya go. hth

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

[pat_k]

17. I don't see it either.

There is a hell of a difference between criticizing a Democratic elected for something I personally consider a failing or advocating that others lobby their Democratic electeds to take some action they have resisted, and declaring oneself against, and intending to vote against, a Democratic nominee.

[ancianita]

18. I hear you.

But why should the poster be interpreted as endorsing egbertowillies' content (which is covered by free speech) which has been popular on this site, and in days past, often posted. Sure, he's mistaken in his interpreting what Newsom is actually saying; he misheard Newsom, who himself is inclusive of the AOC, Mamdani, Sanders wing in preference to older neolibaral wing. Doesn't mean they can't coexist, but one wing will have to continue to learn how much party voters have changed.

[usonian]

27. Oh flame wars.

The rules are (sometimes) flexible.

Senator Schumer used to be protected by DU guards until he caved.

Israel and Palestine are banned to this day ftom GD. Right ...

I step semi-cautiously. Had only a few posts pulled. But I speak my peace.

Not making any general statements because things change a lot.

I favor progressives. I want fighters, and when a troll gives me crap, I hit the well-worn ignore button.

I was royally pissed at the treatment of Joe, because the chat was behind his back, and not, AFAICT, an earnest face to face discussion. I do believe in honor in dealing with honorable people. Say it face to face or STFU. BTB stuff is garbage, IMO.

Most here are honorable and sincere, but there be trolls, too.

[Jack Valentino]

30. Sounds a little like a backward attack on the OP, amigo....

but I agree about problems with the site rules now---

because there are rules you can alert on here
which will fit almost any situation
when you disagree with something
which someone has said.....

[Kid Berwyn]

24. Absolutely.

And he's not afraid of getting bullied by Putin's puppet and bullshitter in chief. In fact, Newsom dishes it right back.

PS: Whoever is the nominee, he or she better have a plan in place to raise taxes on the wealthy. Otherwise, the problem will remain: the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, as the middle class evaporates into the latter.

[Jack Valentino]

31. I admire his quick responses---- the last Democrat who was so quick with

the fight-back was Barack Obama!


(and the worst was Michael Dukakis, but he was a good man....!)

[usonian]

28. Egberto is a DU member.

I try to read all his blog posts, but I am inundated with unfinished chores.