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..."

Show thread

BK Wooramel 1d ago

@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.

Show thread

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.

Show thread

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.

Show thread

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.

Show thread

BK Wooramel

@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.