Mastodawn

I am going to say this now for all the liberals in the back:

If you insist on Gavin Newsom in 2028, you will lose the election. If you screw progressive candidates, Democrats will never win another election in the United States, because there will never be another free or fair election. That will squarely be put on your shoulders.

I will not vote for Newsom in the general election if he is on the ballot. I am not voting for my own destruction. I am aware of what is at stake: the continued existence of millions of trans people, and the existence of millions more who live in poverty but whom he will not help.

Gavin Newsom will do nothing for the cost of living. He does not care. California remains one of the most expensive states in the nation and it is shrinking for a reason. San Francisco has an apocalyptic level housing crisis and his solution has mostly been to make it illegal to be homeless.

He is not likeable to your average person. People do not want "Kamala Harris but this time he's a white guy."
Millenials will not come out and vote for him. Gen Z absolutely will not vote for him. Your average independent will not vote for him. He is likeable to your average milquetoast Californian, the same kind of people who voted against (yes, against) affirmative action, twice. The same kind of people who voted for California prop 8 because they believed gay panic bullshit.

You will show that you do not support trans people. A vote for Newsom is telling every trans person you know: "I will toss you in a woodchipper because I like mediocrity. Your life does not matter to me at all." I already knew that, but everyone will know that. It will be as much of a black mark on you as supporting redlining back in the 60's was, even for people who said shit like "but I don't support segregation..."

@Elizafox The US electoral system is 'First Past the Post' or Winner takes all.
Those systems inevitably end up with two parties: Awful, and Slightly Less Awful.
If you do not vote for 'Slightly Less Awful' you get 'Awful'.
Those are your choices. If you think 'Any Republican' is worse than 'Gavin Newson', vote for Gavin Newsom or you get 'Any Republican'.
This purity bullshit about 'OMG my candidate does some awful things!' will get you the worst possible outcome.

Here's your solution: Vote for 'Slightly Less Awful' party every time. In local elections support candidates who want to reform US elections into a Proportional Representation system. (There are several systems to choose from).
With proportional representational systems of government you tend toward less extreme polarization of parties because *every vote counts* even those for third parties.

But for now, vote 'Less Awful', or get Awful. Those are your *only* choices.

@wooramel I am not voting for a candidate who supports my destruction. That is not “lesser of two evils.” That is two evils. If he supported taking the rights of white cis people, maybe you’d feel differently.

@wooramel at that point I don’t care what happens to the country because either way *I* am fucked and so are my friends.

BK Wooramel 1d ago

@Elizafox And of the people who aren't your friends? Do only your issues count?
Which party is better on environment? Health? Immigration? Rights in general? War? Foreign policy?

Single-issue-voting gets you the Most Worst option.

Your choices: Vote least worst, or Most Worst gets in. There aren't third choices in the US electoral system. That is all there is. Scream, rail at the injustice, cry, and then suffer the consequences of your action/inaction.

Least worst, or worst.

@wooramel @Elizafox wow there really is no difference between a liberal and a fascist, is there.

"my human rights will be stripped."
"it's for the greater good."

why are you asking someone who is literally talking about being stripped of her human rights to have solidarity with you and others like you? you say 'oh i would vote to strip white people of their rights' but that's easy to say when it will literally never happen.

@wooramel @Elizafox supporting forced detransition, segregation, and discrimination, makes you As Bad as Trump. "oh but the environment," well how about trans people offer YOU the ultimatum. how about instead of this;

"vote to reduce your own rights to save the environment"

they offer this:

"vote for trans rights or kill the planet."

you and your scummy cohorts don't get to offload the burden onto the marginalised any more.

@wooramel @Elizafox if trans people are numerous enough to sway the vote to the democrats then how about actually showing them a little fucking respect. how about not paternalistic condescension as to why their rights are the sacrificial ones. no, this time, buddy, it's "trans rights or your rights go to." time to get a crash course in solidarity.

wanker.

BK Wooramel 19h ago

@PsyChuan @Elizafox
I'm an old gay man. So old I was around when being gay was an imprisonable offence.
Our voting choices:
a) Gays for Gulags!
b) Gays for execution, immigrants for gulags, burn the planet for everyone
c) Ponies and unicorns!

Party 'c' was promoted by party 'b' to take votes away from party 'a' in the First Past the Post system meaning party 'b' would be more likely to win when people voted for 'c'

We voted for 'a', got gay rights, and proportional representation.

I'm still young enough to understand that the world is heading back toward rule by 'Gays for execution!' parties. I mean, I hope I'm dead before that happens, but that's where we're heading.

Purity voting gets you the worst possible outcome.

@wooramel @Elizafox buddy, pal, mate, *the parties did not give you those rights.* queer people MAKING those rights a NON-NEGOTIABLE part of their support, and kicking up a fucking shitstorm, is how you got those rights.

queer people didn't get rights by rolling the fuck over. they threw bricks at cops and held fucking die-ins. they showed solidarity with labour movements and in turn the labour movements showed solidarity with them.

frankly, if you're "old" and forgetting this, that's shameful

BK Wooramel 18h ago

@PsyChuan @Elizafox You're not wrong there!

The activism happened in parallel with having to eat and go to work and buy groceries. Throwing bricks at cops was for after brunch.

So... which party is most labour-friendly?

It's a different world now too - the consolidation of wealth into the hands of few who also control media make 'activism' more challenging - I get that too. The 'no kings' largest protests in history barely made a blip in the news.

I regret there is no simple solution. The 'trans panic' stuff is a useful weapon for horrible people to do horrible things. I firmly believe we will again see the 'gays for gulags!' parties winning again in my (ever shortening) lifetime.

BK Wooramel 1d ago

@Elizafox Funny you should say that, because I *would* vote to take away the rights of Cis White people if that meant better climate policy, better healthcare, better global security, longer-term species survival.
I'm not the only one standing on this rock in space. I will (and have) voted against my own self-interest in the vain hope of helping keep society fair.

@wooramel @Elizafox then let it burn.

BK Wooramel 1d ago

@PsyChuan @Elizafox It is. That's what not voting for the least worst option gets you.

@wooramel @Elizafox then let the country burn. if short-sighted mooks like you can only offer 'bad' and 'worse' and not actually 'good' then you've fucked something up spectacularly and let the entire thing burn to the ground. frankly, perhaps it's about time libs were affected by the policies they're so eager to put others through in the name of "the lesser evil," see how "lesser" it really is.

liberals are scum.

BK Wooramel 20h ago

@PsyChuan @Elizafox
Until the US electoral system gets Proportional Representation it will always be 'Bad' or 'Worse'.
Scream all you want. If you dont vote for one party the other party is more likely to get in.
There are no other choices.
Your shouting at me doesn't change that.
If you think another republican administration is the best option for humanity, by all means give them your vote!

Locally, support candidates that want to change the US electoral system to Proportional Representation so you *can* vote for other options in a meaningful way. Getting rid of the duopoly of two parties in a Winner Takes All system solves many many of the extremist policies you're currently suffering through.

Inga stands with 🇺🇦 🇵🇸1d ago

@wooramel @Elizafox last time I checked, Gavin Newsom was not a nominee yet.

Perhaps it's better to nominate someone people would want to vote for, instead of nominating someone who is Slightly Less Awful than Trump and then harass people into voting for him by saying that otherwise they bring Trump to power. Perhaps the first way decreases the chance of Trump winning again.

BK Wooramel 1d ago

@IngaLovinde @Elizafox
I'm in 100% agreement with you there!
Regrettably life rarely gives out ponies. So swallowing bile and doing what is necessary is often required.

And, hey, Trump cant run for a third term... right? RIGHT?
There was a time when the rule of law applied in America. Not so much now.

Inga stands with 🇺🇦 🇵🇸1d ago

@wooramel @Elizafox the original post is literally saying: "If you insist on Gavin Newsom in 2028".

Yet some people keep explaining to others how they should vote for literally the worst possible democratic nominee, 2.5 years before the elections, way before the primaries even start, seemingly trying to manufacturing consent for Newsom to become nominee.
Not only swallowing bile (while throwing so many others under the bus and asking them to throw themselves under the bus) is not required, but it is not even on the table right now! And it won't be, if some people won't obey in advance and if there won't be that "we all should unite and vote for Newsom" everywhere so that DNC can just say "yeah we'll make Newsom the nominee since everybody on the internet is ready to swallow bile and vote for him".

Ironically, from what I hear about uspol, Newsom is to the right of republican presidents and candidates from 1990-2000s. That's what voting for Slightly Less Awful (and obeying in advance) gives you: that Slightly Less Awful of today is worse than Awful of two decades ago, and that Slightly Less Awful two decades later is going to be worse than Awful of today.

BK Wooramel 1d ago

@IngaLovinde @Elizafox
I'm agreeing with you, 100%
I don't think he should be the democratic presidential nominee.
I'm with you there.

Come 2028 examine what the best likely outcome for the planet is, and vote for the party most likely to bring it about. (Or... least likely to screw us all entirely is probably more accurate).

Be it Mouldy Sock vs JDVance - whatever. We have exactly one rock to stand on. Vote for Longest Viability of Rock to Stand On. Everything else is just wankery.