Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Sogo

(7,364 posts)
33. He thinks and operates from a broad perspective.
Wed Jul 8, 2026, 11:05 PM
15 hrs ago

That's why I think he would be a great President.....

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Breaking from Gavin Newsom [View all] senseandsensibility 20 hrs ago OP
We all love our Governor! skylucy 20 hrs ago #1
Oh yes we do senseandsensibility 20 hrs ago #3
K & R.................. Lovie777 20 hrs ago #2
here as well, Marc Elias DoBW 19 hrs ago #4
He'd make a good president. calimary 19 hrs ago #6
He's my favorite so far. llmart 19 hrs ago #10
thats why i reelected him before. AllaN01Bear 17 hrs ago #24
I will definitely give Newsom close consideration. ShazzieB 12 hrs ago #35
His best qualification azureblue 5 hrs ago #39
I'm surprised it wasn't all along! some_of_us_are_sane 19 hrs ago #9
He's been at the vanguard of MAGA 2.0 resistance from Day 1. BannonsLiver 19 hrs ago #5
Every state needs to do this IMMEDIATELY FakeNoose 19 hrs ago #7
You're right. It should not be necessary. hamsterjill 18 hrs ago #19
Kick Exp 19 hrs ago #8
Purple states must take the same steps. oasis 19 hrs ago #11
This would actually probably survive the supremacy clause too SSJVegeta 18 hrs ago #12
Yes, because states are in charge of elections, not the feds. wnylib 17 hrs ago #26
And it is explicitly stated in the constitution. A fact that matters to 5 whole justices so far. SSJVegeta 16 hrs ago #31
LOL popsdenver 11 hrs ago #36
I'm skeptical. TomSlick 18 hrs ago #13
Nope. Article I, Section 4. paleotn 18 hrs ago #15
I don't read Article I, Section 4 that expansively. TomSlick 18 hrs ago #17
Tenth Amendment. paleotn 18 hrs ago #18
That's a better argument TomSlick 18 hrs ago #20
You're retired JAG, in Arkansas, and you're Texas two step dancing MerryBlooms 17 hrs ago #29
The legislation can be written so that a proper judicial warrant would be needed with reason to believe muriel_volestrangler 5 hrs ago #38
Post removed Post removed 18 hrs ago #16
Federal agents are also armed and authorized to shoot someone threatening with a weapon. TomSlick 18 hrs ago #21
depends who gets the drop on who dave99 17 hrs ago #25
Ridiculous and illegal senseandsensibility 18 hrs ago #22
No, that's not how any of this works. MerryBlooms 17 hrs ago #30
Democrats have to be proactive in these treacherous times dlk 18 hrs ago #14
ding. this . AllaN01Bear 17 hrs ago #23
Post removed Post removed 17 hrs ago #27
I don't know who you're talking about senseandsensibility 17 hrs ago #28
This is exactly what we need!! Proactive vs reactive!!! Pisces 16 hrs ago #32
He thinks and operates from a broad perspective. Sogo 15 hrs ago #33
THis is good, but completely misss the point Bluetus 13 hrs ago #34
i totally misunderstood the headline orleans 11 hrs ago #37
Leading the way. Martin68 1 hr ago #40
I believe there are now meds for ballot seizures. C Moon 40 min ago #41
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Breaking from Gavin Newso...»Reply #33