California Gov. Gavin Newsom's office said the governor was denied entry into a venue at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 21, after being invited to speak at the event due to "pressure" from the Trump administration.

Newsom had been scheduled to speak with Fortune at the USA House, Davos, a privately organized event, at the World Economic Forum, which has been recognized by the U.S. government as the nation's headquarters in Davos.

top 65 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 123 points 9 months ago

Time for my least favorite game!

"Imagine a Democrat did that to a Republican!"

... Fox News would be running that story for a week, screaming at the public about how they're being discriminated against and how the Democrats hate freedom and free speech. How they hate "you" and your "values" etc etc etc...

  • source
  • [–] 91 points 9 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    That's pretty good, but it has two extra red stripes in the tent.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 9 months ago

    Under Newsom, California is the 4th largest GDP on the planet and the Davos losers listened to racist, pedophile, rapist, felon fucknut!?!?

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

    Yeah and then he ripped them a new one at the event that he did end up speaking at in Davos.

  • source
  • [–] 96 points 9 months ago (29 children)

    This is really funny considering Trump and Newsome seem to agree on quite a few things

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 102 points 9 months ago* (24 children)

    I would one thousand percent prefer Newsom over Trump and I almost guarantee Newsom wouldn’t send his brownshirts into red states to shoot mothers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    If they are homeless or trans, Newsome is happy to arrest or shoot them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    He broke the marriage equality impasse. Without him I might not be married.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 9 months ago*

    He protects LG rights and maybe BQ, but he has consistently vetoed T rights. I'm straight AF so this doesn't affect me directly, but it affects my friends, so I care that he doesn't.

    To be clear, I voted for Newsome, because the Democratic party didn't give me a choice. I'd primary him if I could.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    What if the mothers were homeless?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago

    Yet without popular reform, which he is constitutionally opposed to, they can't win. Your lesser of two assholes arguments has no answer to the fact that these status quo democrats cannot reliably win. Now with republicans cheating in so many ways, that's especially true.

    He had his chance in 2024 and he declined to stand up and take the election.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 9 months ago (5 children)

    I mean a lot of us have been voting blue no matter who for our entire adult lives and things keep ratcheting right into Nazi land

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    I've been voting that way too. I question it often but haven't changed my mind yet.

    I might have an issue with "vote blue no matter who" were it not for the fact that the morons around us are voting by the tens of millions FOR Nazi land!

    They had the opportunity to vote for the center-right corporate-friendly administration that will probably not get much progressive stuff done because they have the same billionaire donors.

    But no, they voted for the idiotic criminal self-labeled dictator THREE TIMES! They cared more about who could get hurt (LGBT, minority, female, "other") than whether we could actually improve society.

    The DNC shares a ton of blame too. I don't mean to leave them out of it. I hope that some young progressive voices can drag the party to the left. It would be great to not be forced into a two party system in the first place of course, but I worry that the only way such a change will happen any time soon is that a lot of people die and then the survivors write new rules.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    The democrats just voted to give ICE more money. They always do this and then we ratchet right into Nazi land… I’m getting pretty old and this always happens. I’ve watched it my entire life the democrats don’t ever do anything to stop the evil. They enable it every time

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    Exactly. Americans need to do something else because there isn’t any voting their way out of this. Keep voting democrat, but know that it wont actually fix anything. It’s not meant to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    The point isn't to keep voting for democrats because they will save us.

    The point, given we are forced into a two party system, is more about trying to take over the party most of the time while also voting against the outright nazis in general elections.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago

    Understand that you will not be able to take over that party by voting alone. At least acknowledge that. Because the way you talk about it makes me think that the US is absolutely a lost cause when this is how their “leftists” speak.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 9 months ago (4 children)

    Newsome is going to enable the tech billionaires and Israel so basically we will keep marching in lockstep with project 2025 with funny tweets. He has been fighting the one time 5% billionaire tax proposal in California and he vetoes everything that upsets shareholder profit in California.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    with funny tweets

    Those are from a team of social media savvy folks. He's demonstrated that he doesn't always understand his own tweets.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago*

    Do you think newsom would steal children from parents, shoot mothers, molest children and call for war and tariffs?

    Do you think newsom would let a prick like Steve miller pull his Hitler act?

    These two people are not the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

    Do you purposefully misspell his name?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 9 months ago* (22 children)

    "Gavin Newsom-" aaand the comments are flooded lmao. I mean, I despise Newsom as much as I can, but, also, this is World News.

    In the spirit of a non-USA news subreddit, I'll point out that California governor Newsom feels like a weird speaker for a world economic event. Yes, I know Newsom had to deal with the Republican administration when ICE and the military were deployed to Los Angeles, CA; but if you're looking for a leader to advise you on opposing Trump from an economic standpoint, wouldn't an economic department head from Canada be a better choice?

    Canada's been dealing with Republican isolationist tariff policy fairly well from what I know. Facing the most direct pressure over the "51st state" invasion threats, the Canadian population is pushing away from USA brands and investing in domestic products. With alllll the nations facing tariffs from the USA, surely a dialogue about encouraging such shifts in a population would be valuable.

  • source
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 9 months ago (9 children)

    California has the fourth largest economy in the world.

    it out-performs Canada.

    1000002870

    so yeah, it makes sense to have him there as a speaker.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago (8 children)

    if you’re talking about policy choices, canada has a lot more relevance to a world economic forum though. ata bare minimum, california is a lot more constrained in how it can behave, making its solutions largely only relevant to the context of other US states - unless you’re talking purely social/soft solutions

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago

    If they push for something like emission standards in the US, other states get drawn in since OEMs need to adhere to California and it's often easier just to make the 1 product everywhere, but that also ripples outside the country to some extent.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (6 children)

    I don't know where you got that idea from. doesn't make sense when you think about it.

    do you really believe there are economic constraints on a state in the largest economic country that holds capitalism in the highest regard?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 9 months ago* (5 children)

    … yes…

    canada can do basically whatever it wants theoretically

    california can’t use its national guard without risk of federalisation, its can’t issue tariffs or any kind of trade controls, it can’t even stop giving money to the aggressor via taxes to finance its own aggression

    hell california apparently can’t even stop the federal government from doing blatantly illegal shit

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago* (4 children)

    and what does that have anything to do with a world economic forum?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (1 child)

    Almost everything. California doesn't make trade rules, it doesn't regulate interstate commerce, and those that do are outwardly hostile to them. There's a good chance he gets indicted next year in the run up to the election, even though he's a lousy candidate and choosing him or any of the establishment picks is akin to throwing the election, again.

    Unless he finds his backbone and constructs a popular reform ticket, but he was chosen not to do that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 23 points 9 months ago* (3 children)

    Given that snivelling Nigel Fucking Farage spoke at one of the Davos events the bar can't be that high.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    Good point. Newsome manages the fourth-largest economy in the world and Farage . . . well, I seem to remember something about a bus and the NHS, but I don't think anything ever came of it, lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 9 months ago

    I think the bus was Boris's, which made it even more egregious for the fact that he subsequently became Prime Minister and acted like the whole thing was just a jolly jape that wasn't meant to be taken literally.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 9 months ago

    I’m sorry, but the people at Davos have no material interest in opposing Trump. The global oligarchy and the politicians they employ are preparing the world for neo-feudalism, and Trump is their Messiah.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    Newsome is there because if California were to leave the US, we would be the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world, and if Trump keeps doing what he's doing the rest of the US would dip to number 2

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago* (1 child)

    I really don't think that California will secede and it would be stupid of any USA governor to suggest that. Sedition would warrant a military response, and I'm certain the Republican administration would obliterate the state given how they're reacting to anyone opposing their fascist paramilitary "ICE".

    Edit: Upon re-reading I think I understand what you're saying. Newsom is the head of California and he leads California's economy, which includes Silicon Valley and the major Fin-Tech companies. I see; I see.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (4 children)

    Bad link, ads for days

    Edit: I can only assume the downvoters are ad providers fuck you

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago* (3 children)

    Probably the same company that owns the USA network. Watching shows on that network will make you want throw your tv out the window. 6 minute ads per 4.5 minutes of show time. Their ads just keep gooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooing. And yes. That's how absurd they are.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›