If that’s meant to be the DNC, okay.
If that’s meant to be people who made an argument for coalition politics and not straight up forfeiting an election to the worst presidential candidate anyone could find lying around to stuff into a diaper and a suit and put behind a podium… that’s not really the same thing.
Gavin Newsom is not, at the moment, running for president. He’s not sitting opposite some extreme right-winger serving as a disappointing but necessary defensive line between us and things getting much worse. He’s an asshole who happens to be a Democrat and is the current governor of a state where he’s actively making things worse. He, like Harris, would clearly be leaning toward the right to try to win center votes.
The reasonable strategic move to make for anyone who wants the government in the US to shift to the left is to make it clear that while his humiliating Trump is useful, he is not a viable candidate. Supporting him now would be backing a lame horse that’s literally still in the stable during a time where we should be finding the healthiest, fastest horse we possibly can. That is not the same as if he were in an election right now and were the only way to prevent a Trump from getting into office.
I’m trans. I hope Newsom falls off a cliff. But if he had been running against Trump instead of Harris I would have held my nose and checked the box, because strategy isn’t about throwing a fit until you get the scenario you want, it’s about doing what you can with the hand you’ve got.
Right now what we can do is toss his ass away and draw another card from the deck before we end up being forced to play him.
I’m trans. I hope Newsom falls off a cliff. But if he had been running against Trump instead of Harris I would have held my nose and checked the box, because strategy isn’t about throwing a fit until you get the scenario you want, it’s about doing what you can with the hand you’ve got.
I’m trans too, fwiw. I’ve reached a slightly different conclusion, though I respect yours:
I am going to pre-commit not to vote for Newsom. I’m going to encourage as many people as I can to pre-commit. If Progressives pledge not to vote for him, and the DNC knows they’re serious, Newsom will lose the primary. He’ll lose because it will be apparent to DNC superdelegates that Progressives won’t show up for him, and that without the Progressive vote Newsom will not win the election.
Basically, it’s like nuclear war: if you’re nuked, you shouldn’t retaliate, because nuking back would wipe out all of humanity, instead of half. But your enemy must know that you’ve pre-committed to retaliate, otherwise they will nuke you.
It’s a stupid game equilibrium but inevitable, IMO.
because strategy isn’t about throwing a fit until you get the scenario you want, it’s about doing what you can with the hand you’ve got.
This is an important thing to point out. I am some what reminded of the meme where the democrats are represented as a stopper that keeps the a wheel from moving back left. I get their complaint and it is valid, but abstaining from elections is doing a similar function. It is also rather privileged as they are not feeling the pressure for why harm minimization is important.
On a somewhat historical approach revolutionaries are oppressed and kept down, and that does mean that those in power have implicitly give up all bargaining power by refusing dialog. I feel that in a sense we have done similar to ourselves electorally. We won’t participate and organize there, so no one will ever take us seriously and our issues are never heard. Voting lesser evil is not a long term solution, but it is lower effort than organizing a new third party. Even still it is less effort than picking up a rifle and holding down a trench. I get that in the discourse it feels like the fastest way (unfounded assumption that war is ever fast)and that sentiments for a total revolution is always around the corner. Given that we won’t have any third party organization now I don’t see how it will form and put our ideas out in more chaos. Presumably the most informed on the subject matters and theory are also the most bought in and going to be leaders, who cannot be bothered to commit an evening to the lowest effort civic engagement.
I think we have some good leaders in AOC and Mamdami to start some foundations, but I fear apathy might mean no shows and they genuinely lose their seats or have to make even more compromises than they otherwise have to. I hope we can all go to primaries and vote for progressive candidates (even encourage them to go third party if they have to). Also remember that we have more than just presidential elections happening on the same ballot.
There we go, that’s the most complete and correct answer. High five internet friend.
We haven’t even entered midterm season yet and we’re arguing about Newsom’s viability. The focus should be on midterms. We still have 2 years for a new star to shine, for a progressive to break through, for the DNC to maybe get a clue.
I’d rather hear discussions about who is best to face off against Collins, how can we take back some of the house seats where the margins are thinnest, where could we break in.
There will never be a perfect candidate for any office. You will always have issues you don’t align on. If you think you align on everything, you’re probably not looking closely enough. Vote for freedom, join the conversation and advocate for change. I have seen many politicians change their beliefs over the years, often their positions are uninformed and giving them the right information can help and assuming they know the facts helps no one.
We are all flawed. We have all made mistakes. We are all capable of change. Politicians are no less suited to making mistakes than we are.
I’d say this is far more accurate:
“Wow, Trump really is a patriarchally traitorous transphobic, cowardly piece of shit that either locks innocent people up in concentration camps or illegally deports them because of his unrestrained racism that has done evening he promised he would do in Project 2025.”
“We hate Trump! Why is he so evil? Why is this happening!”
“Does the mean you’ll vote blue if that who stands against a return of the same in 2028?”
“Hahahahahahahaha! No.”
But we don’t have to go with Newsom yet. AOC is more electable, by a lot, and just better.
https://goatmatrix.net/c/FutureAnalysis/6e7EQfHEZC
If we are smart we convince her to announce as early as possible before we have too deal with excessive amounts of Newsom momentum. Get her to announce and kick Patrick Bateman out of the race ASAP.
I’ll take AOC any day of the week over pretty much anyone. But I’ll also vote for ANYONE over fascism, so there’s that.
I honestly don’t understand how people haven’t learned their lesson that wishful thinking doesn’t move the needle. In their protest of chemo, they let cancer take the body.
Removed by mod
Keep trying the same losing strategy, I’m sure it will work next time. But just barely, like when we elected a sundowning neocon disguised as a liberal without dementia.
Prop up someone better that stands a chance instead of untested generic nobodies that no one has ever heard of and maybe you’ll be taken seriously.
Until then, keep doing jack shit and hope that change comes as a result. It’s working so well so far.
The people have on multiple occasions propped up great candidates who were then ratfucked by the Democratic establishment. When the Democratic party sees a candidate who inspires a groundswell of grassroots support - like Zohran Mamdani, Graham Platner, and Omar Fateh - they do everything in their power to keep them from winning.
The reason the DNC is propping up Gavin Newsom right now is to get out ahead of any potential populist candidate. They’re cultivating an image of Newsom as a fighter because they finally understood that’s what people want (took them long enough), but it’s all just WWE style kayfabe. The redistricting is the only kind of real fighting they’re willing to do. Hell, they’re happy to do it. Establishment types love a rigged game; makes it so they can focus on the process without having to worry about bad poll numbers. For the DNC, fighting means competing over how effectively they can rig the system in their favor, a race to the bottom. Once we reach it, no material difference will remain between the two parties.
The problem with people like Zohran Mamdani, Graham Platner, and Omar Fateh is that they’re unknown and untested. Few will ever vote for someone with no experience. Well, no one that isn’t a republican or thinks like one anyway.
AOC would be an amazing option and I’d be happy to support her any way I can if she runs, but as for the others… I’d be wary of voting for people that have little experience in dealing with veteran politicians- because that is what they would be up against. I mean, sure… they promise a lot, but a promise is easy, free, and without need of validation or proof. This sure looks good on paper and sounds fantastic on the campaign circuit. But… just because they look good on paper, have great soundbites, and promise a lot of appealing things, it doesn’t mean they will have what it takes to actually see any of it to fruition.
Politics is incredibly nuanced. And I feel that the mistake being made is that people think that these unknowns will actually accomplish the things they say where it’s just wishful thinking. They have never been tested against opposition.
As much as I’d love to have a progressive that the average far-leftist would approve of, I also subscribe to a more realistic version of reality and don’t punish the good for its inability to be perfect.
The problem with people like Zohran Mamdani, Graham Platner, and Omar Fateh is that they’re unknown and untested. Few will ever vote for someone with no experience. Well, no one that isn’t a republican or thinks like one anyway.
You’re projecting. You would not vote for someone with no experience because you have a conservative-style risk aversion. When the choice is between a known and unknown quantity - and the known quantity is proven to be corrupt and/or impotent - the unknown quantity is preferable. Zohran Mamdani’s primary victory is exemplary of this.
Whatever you say man. I’m not here to change minds. I’m simply making a statement of observation based on being alive for over 50 years.
This type of thing happens every election. Some flavor of the week outrage upsets the locals and we have another “grassroots movement” to not vote for [insert politically charged derogatory].
50 years of trained helplessness. You’ve seen every attempt at bucking the Democratic establishment fail and at some point must have come to the conclusion that trying can only ever cause harm. It’s an understandable cynicism given the circumstances you’ve been living through, but you’ve forgotten that circumstances change.
Just so people know Gavin newsom made a comment about trans children in sports.
And political influential dems have had issues with mamdani for issues ranging from tax policies (tax rich as too ambitious) to lack of stance regarding Israel
https://www.newsweek.com/full-list-new-york-democrats-not-endorsing-zohran-mamdani-2092616
This is the info that’s missing.
Just tired of people dropping headline bombs with no story and just expecting others to follow suit on a dime . All this talk about echo chambers but we can’t possibly take the time to educate people.
Yeah… this TOTALY makes him the same as Trump. Definitely worth not regaining our freedoms and democracy over.
(obligatory /s)
Yeah… this TOTALY makes him the same as Trump. Definitely worth not regaining our freedoms and democracy over.
(obligatory /s)
Removed by mod
The GOP spent 40 years building a Big Tent Coalition. Their message was simple - if you share some of our values, you’re one of us.
The Dems have spent the past 10 years building a Shrinking Tent. Their message is now simple - unless you share every single value, down to a specific level of support for each community, you’re not one of us.
And look who’s winning.
The democrats have mostly spent that time trying to become conservative lite and chasing billionaire donations. You want that big tent back? The DNC needs to remember that they’re supposed to be on the left.
Edit: BTW, the gop didn’t get where they are by building a big tent. The tea party came in and kicked out anyone who wasn’t 100% in lockstep with their agenda.
I feel that calling them ‘big tent’ is both correct and incorrect, depending on definitions. My parents were tea partiers, so I got a real up-close look at it.
You are correct about needing lockstep with the agenda, but missing the part where they didn’t care so much about your past actions. They Big Tent in the “well, you might have voted Dem before, but now you’re with us now, so you’re cool” sort of way.
(hint: there’s no such thing, **********)
Yeah… this is a bannable offense by the standards of most Lemmy instances.
It’s simple.
Vote for the Democratic nominee against the GOP in the general election.
If you live somewhere the Dems tend to win elections, vote in the Democratic primaries to change the party little by little.
If you live somewhere the GOP tends to win, vote in the GOP primaries to try and at least get rid of the MAGA Republicans and THEN vote for the Democratic candidate in the general election.
Gradual incrementalism is precisely what got us into this mess, so it isn’t that simple. So long as the Dems are controlled by their donors, they will never willingly let an actual leftist in. See Mamdani. Ratchet effect then ensures both parties grow ever rightward.
We need meaningful leftist opposition in power if the US is going to survive. I think transforming the DNC into that is a much more difficult task than anyone cares to admit, and the delusion that we can do it without forming a new party entirely is just bringing us closer to inevitable collapse once the capital owners have stolen everything from us.
The single most successful third party presidential candidate since 1900 was Teddy Roosevelt, who had already been president twice, when he ran under the Bull Moose Party ticket. He got 29% of the popular vote, spilt the Republican vote, and handed the presidency to Democrat Woodrow Wilson.
The second most successful third party presidential candidate since 1900 was Ross Perot in 1992. He got 18.6% of the popular vote, drew conservative voters away from George H. W. Bush, and handed the presidency to Bill Clinton.
Third party candidates by all means should run for local and down-ballot offices, but above a certain level, if you haven’t got a realistic plan for how to win beyond wishful thinking, then the responsible move is to run as hard as you can in the primary, try to drag the primary electorate in the direction you want it to move, and endorse the major party candidate that most closely aligns with your views. If you aren’t even hitting twenty percent in the polls leading up to the general, then you’re acting as a spoiler and helping your most-hated opponent win.
You explained this well. You should copy and paste it into every post about Dems vs lefts vs liberals.
No what got us here is no one voting. Literally go look at participation between elections.
Why is no one voting? Could it be that making people choose between 2 shit candidates doesn’t work?
The voting system needs to change.
As soon as elections stop being just one vote per individual we can actually vote our conscience. New York City has Ranked Choice voting, so does Alaska and Maine. Ideally having STAR, Ranked Robin, or Score voting would be best as the first two are better versions of Ranked Choice voting.
This is called letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. We can push for better electoral systems while also refusing to vote for Democrats who support genocide or support throwing minority groups onto the pyre.
It’s actually the only way it will change.
Those in power do not want the electoral system to change, because they know of it changes they will lose their power which was only given to them because of how fucked up the system is. They rely on the system being fucked up.
Change will not come from within the system while those in power over the system benefit from its structure.
People are gonna need to find alternative means to take power back in order to affect change.
I agree that we should be doing multiple things at the same time here.
I’m in favor of championing leftists and progressives and pushing back against Dems that are acting in their own self interest. For sure the corporate owned Dems and Republicans that are propping up arms for Israel need to go and for those wanting to throw minorities under the bus.
Libs/Blue MAGA are gonna hate you for speaking the truth.
Incrementalism is what sorta helps to get us out as well. By that I mean changing the voting systems like New York City did which helps make it easier to get more leftist candidates in office.
Changing the DNC requires the majority of new voters to continue being left/progressive on issues and could take another decade.
Changing the voting system in our cities and states is the best chance to pull politics left and to actually allow third parties to take root. The last thing we want really is for the spoiler effect to happen, where our preferred candidate(s) and safe candidate lose to the least preferred candidate.
Please, inform us plebs on how not voting for the Democratic nominee will help improve things.
How has voting for the centrist Democratic nominee been going so far?
Maybe people aren’t voting because all they see are two Republicans. I’ve been voting since 1996 and every time I feel I’ve been voting for the lesser of two evils.
Maybe people want candidates that are worth voting for.
What we were doing certainly isn’t working, it’s how we got in this mess in the first place. We need to change or we’ll lose again.
Gradual incrementalism is precisely what got us into this mess
What got us into this mess was the resounding success of gradual incrementalism in the hands of the right. We didn’t get where we are spontaneously, it’s the result of decades of preparation by the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation.
It works, you just have to commit to it.
Aren’t you locked in to the party you’re registered with, specifically to avoid this scenario?
in most states, you have to register with one party or the other for primaries, so you can only vote in one primary. But in the general election, you aren’t required to cast a ballot for the party for which you’re registered.
Interesting, thank you!
They can’t actually stop you from registering with the other party. It’s not a crime to vote in their primaries and then vote for the other party in the general.
Depends on where you live. Here in Missouri, you just tell them which primary ballot you want when you go to vote. I’ve voted for both sides (Democrat primary in 2016 and Conservative primary in 2020 since Missouri will never go blue so might as well attempt to get the least dogshit option for the Dems to weakly fight against).
Right, but that’s two different election cycles, I meant in the same election cycle.
I’ve seen what feels like a hundred posts complaining about people saying we need to support Gavin Newsome no matter what but I have yet to see someone saying we need to support Gavin Newsome no matter what.
It’s literally in this thread.
I don’t see it much on here, but they’re everywhere on Bluesky. You can search Newsom’s name and the first result will probably be someone talking shit about him with tons of comments and quote posts telling them they’re just trying to get Trump to win a third term.
Then these memes should be posted on Bluesky not here where “centrists” are unwanted.
I have absolutely seen it.
There’s a big difference between:
“We need to support Gavin Newsom no matter what.”
And
“You don’t need to comment on every post about Newsom trolling Trump by talking shit about him. You can support a thing he’s doing without supporting him.”
As have I, and they are sanctimonous, condescending, and tiresome in the extreme.
Support him for what?
For an eventual presidential run. This is what the DNC does. Spend three years finding the worse technically electable person they can, then pressure the left into voting for them because otherwise the republicans will destroy everything.
I personally had many people pile on me when I criticized him during the peak of his meming on Trump. But it does feel like the tide has turned against him a bit now.
They love the pointless, performative shit.
Look at what Newsom is actually doing: presiding over a state where, for the vast majority of his constituents, it’s becoming unaffordable to live in while at the same time he is actively criminalizing homelessness.
Absolutely. And he vetoed a lot of great bills seeking to address many of the state’s crises.
He also vetoed ranked choice voting
All the more reason to pass STAR or Ranked Robin voting, improved versions of RCV, once he’s out of the governor’s office.
Newsom specifically would never would have won reelection for the governor’s race under ranked choice voting.
Yeah, those posts were in response to people being completely shitty about it.
Do you need me to link to some previous discussions where there are accusations of someone being an accelerationist who prefers Trump because they criticized Newsom? Because that was just yesterday. That’s not even touching the people who flat out say ‘I am absolutely willing to sacrifice trans rights because everyone else is more important’.
Don’t trans people already have the same rights as other people? The things happening to them are prejudice.
No.
It is illegal for trans people to use the bathroom corresponding with their gender in 13 states. (Drop down menu to change maps)
It’s illegal to update your gender markers on ID in 3 states.
Over half of states prevent trans youth from even playing in school sports.
In 10 states it’s not considered a hate crime to attack a trans person for being trans.
Conversion “therapy,” proven to be psychologically damaging, is legal in almost half of states, including against youth who can’t say no to it.
It’s legal to discriminate against trans people in housing in almost half of states.
18 states allow employers to fire someone for being transgender.
TIL
The funny thing about trans people is that they also care about having an administration full of insane clowns enabling climate catastrophe, the next pandemic, and the Gaza genocide.
You would think this incredibly basic understanding of the political leanings of the average trans person would get us a little solidarity from Democratic leadership, but we can all go fuck ourselves the second a blue dog dem starts crying about being scared of pronouns apparently.
You don’t have to fuck yourself. But you might be asked to hold your nose and vote even if you can’t compete on the sports team you want. I’m actually unclear when that became a human right. I am far more concerned for your physical safety under another Trump administration.
even if you can’t compete on the sports team you want
It never, ever stops there. And if you view the participation of trans people in public life as a nice thing that we get as a treat when times are good, then yeah, you are kind of telling us to go fuck ourselves.
It should make you stop and think when LGBT leaders and organizations within California are condemning his statements.
I am far more concerned for your physical safety under another Trump administration.
The fact you don’t connect pushing trans people out of public life with the exact transphobia that endangers us is why you need to listen to us instead of deciding you know best and lecturing us about it.
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/why-transgender-people-are-not-feeling
This is the time for someone else to step up and be noticed by the crowd.
Exactly. I support Newsom because he fights and would even support even Republicans. We need everyone.
Most Democrats don’t do anything beyond nice speeches and many don’t even bother with that.
Does he fight? What’s he actually done beyond steal Trump’s vibes?
It’s funny how that works on here.
Feels kind of manufactured, honestly. I’m also trying to find evidence that he’s a transphobic piece of shit, but it seems like he’s pretty good on trans rights.
I think this post is that “sowing division” thing we’ve heard so much about.
The damage he can inflict is in some ways greater: Republicans attacking us keeps allies on alert, ready to resist. But when Democrats begin to adopt the same rhetoric, that resistance dissolves. Transphobia inside the party is not a treatable wound inflicted by the far right—it is a malignancy, slow-moving but devastating, one that threatens to hollow out decades of progress from within. If it spreads unchecked, it could mark the end of so much our community has fought to preserve.
The entire article is excellent (as usual from Erin), but that especially gets to the heart of why so many trans people are immediately pumping the brakes on this shit. And why so many Democratic voters are unwilling to even consider that this is a problem that urgently needs to be fixed, before it gets worse.
He went on
Joe Rogan’sCharlie Kirk’s show and said he doesn’t think trans women should be in sports. Solidarity only goes one way for him.Edit: the deleted comment under this by Madzielle is the work of a coward. Post for real and stand by your (shitty) opinion. Don’t delete it immediately just so it hits my inbox and you suffer no community consequences from it.
He basically capitulated to the claims that “Democrats supporting trans rights have caused them to lose support”.
That’s not even me excusing him. It’s pointing out that he’s spineless and caves under pressure, which might be even more important than whether he supports trans rights.
Rogan would be one thing since he’s a bit independently minded it was even worse it was Charlie Kirk. No reason to give him that audience.
Thanks, corrected.
deleted by creator
Apparently the climate, the constitution, and every child in Gaza need to die on the hill of trans people in sports.
Democrats already sacrificed the climate and Gaza. Now they’re moving on to sacrificing trans people.
Which of your rights have you given up for any of those?
How the fuck is keeping trans people out of sports going to fix any of that? Do you think 4 years after 2028 MAGA and climate change will be gone? Will it bring back any dead kids? After we’ve accepted that trans people can’t be allowed in sports, what rights will we have to sacrifice in the next election? And the next? When is the point where you decide that actually there’s a line Democratic candidates can’t cross when it comes to trans rights, even in a primary?
Because it feels a whole lot like there is no bridge too far and people are real fuckin mad about trans people pointing that out.
Because it feels a whole lot like there is no bridge too far and people are real fuckin mad about trans people pointing that out.
Exactly. These people are just mad that the uppity trannies are daring to state the obvious - that if you try to take our rights away, you sure as Hell aren’t going to get our votes. This should be incredibly obvious, but some dunces just can’t see why this would obviously be the case. They don’t actually care about trans people. They’re not willing to listen to trans voices. They just want queer votes to win elections, but the queers need to STFU about actual policy.
I have trans family and love and support them. There is a difference between their rights, freedom, and existence, and their sports careers. They themselves do not place their sports career over every other issue that exists, and neither should you.
I don’t give a fuck. If you consider our rights and existence worthy of sacrifice, then I believe you fully deserve whatever evil a Republican president will bring down on your head.
Hell, you’re giving right in to conservative framing. You’re sitting here pretending this is about sports. But that never was the issue, and you damn well know it. Conservatives don’t give a fuck about women’s sports. They just want to banish trans people from public life. And you’re fully onboard with that project. Frankly, if we’re going to the camps, I hope they burn the whole country to ashes. If Democrats elect a transphobe, I will happily sit the election out, watch Republicans win, and gleefully watch as they tear the country further to pieces. A country that won’t protect its minority populations deserves to burn.
Don’t want this? Then try actually earning the votes of queer people. If our numbers are too small to make our rights worth fighting for, then obviously you don’t need our votes that badly. You’re asking us to believe two things:
-
Trans rights are minor things that affect few people and aren’t worth worrying about.
-
Trans people simply have to vote for Democrats, as their support is vitally important.
Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. Our rights and our votes go together. You want our votes, you damn well better stand up for our rights. If neither party will stand up for our rights, I’ll sit back, disengage from politics, and laugh as this nation collapses into dust.
-
Do you thinks “sports careers” are the only benefit of sports? Why are you okay with ripping children out of activities with their peers if Republicans decide it’s “controversial”?
Most trans people know how fraught even visiting a gym is, and how important protections for trans people are to even allow us to exercise the way cis people do. I don’t know any trans people that embrace Newsom’s statements or appearance on Charlie Kirk’s shows, and I highly doubt you do either.
Before you run out of oxygen and collapse, it’s simpler than that. Making trans people in sports a litmus test for any Democratic candidate is a fast track to handing Trump a third term. If we can’t prioritize any better than that, we anre done. And then you can kiss every issue that matters goodbye, including trans people in sports.
Yes, sweetie, I’m sorry to be the bearer of realism, but we must prioritize. And no, I’m no going over the existential edge for any fucking thing having to do with sports, period. We need to get a grip on the fact that we are hurtling toward extinction. You want to shriek about being able to compete on the team you choose as a do-or-die human right. Just no.
Yes, sweetie, I’m sorry to be the bearer of realism, but we must prioritize.
Democrats, telling minorities to sit down, shut up, and learn their place since 1965!
And no, I’m no going over the existential edge for any fucking thing having to do with sports, period.
For trans rights is what you mean. Trans kids being able to participate on the appropriate team under Title IX isn’t important enough. Just say that instead of pretending it’s about sports. You’re not fooling any trans people.
You know we can find other candidates to back than Newsom, right?
Fuck Newsom. I never liked him - mostly because he is a mental lightweight. The point is we should not make trans people in sports a litmus test for all candidates.
“Oh he isn’t on board with trans athletes? Piece of shit! Next!”
There are in fact more important things to worry about.
The point is we should not make trans people in sports a litmus test for all candidates.
Name a single political jurisdiction that banned trans kids from playing sports and was content with stopping there. Name one.
You would have to intentionally try to misrepresent what everyone opposed to Democrats embracing Newsom is saying to come to the conclusion that “Oh he isn’t on board with trans athletes? Piece of shit! Next!” is what anyone is saying. I have certainly been clear the entire time that putting pressure on Newsom to change is the goal.
Wouldn’t want to miss an opportunity to fuck over women. And they call themselves progressives. I guess overturning Roe v Wade is “progress” to them
ITT: Yet more righteous liberals extolling the virtues of not voting for the only party that can actually stand against the Fourth Reich, literally at all.
You should be sure to tell Newsom’s office he’s alienating voters with his transphobia, because for some people it’s a deal breaker. Telling people to shut up about it isn’t going to work and is also fucked.
It sounds like the backlash is at least working and making its way to him. The California capital started flying the trans flag a few days ago.
Performative actions are just that, performative. Until something of substance happens, they can shove their performances up their ass. They exist only to get us to shut up early.
I hadn’t heard that, so I guess that’s something. I just hope they know that waving a flag around and not actually addressing or walking anything back doesn’t change the situation.
Yes. Because Trump’s transphobia pales in comparison to big bad evil Newsom? Are you for real?
This reminds me of when so many left-leaning people were tricked into not voting for Harris because things are terrible in the middle east. Yes, Biden/Harris wasn’t doing much to stop the murder in Gaza. And yes, they weren’t doing anything to stop aid or weapons sales to Israel.
But, did they think Trump would do better? Did anybody think Trump gives a damn about some poor brown muslims? Of course not! Everyone should have known that Trump would gleefully help to burn Gaza to the ground to make room for a new casino resort and a 200 foot golden statue of himself. At lease with Harris, she’d be under a lot of pressure to do SOMETHING to help the Palestinians. But, do you think Trump is going to be swayed by protests? Get real.
So what was the plan? What was the point of hoping that Harris would lose? Was it to teach the Dems a “lesson” so that in 4 years they would get back into office and actually help Gaza?
WTF?!? There are two GIGANTIC flaws with this “plan”.
-
Project 2025 made it clear that if Trump won, the US would never see a free and fair election ever again. So even if the “lesson” was learned, it wouldn’t matter.
-
Even if the Dems DID somehow win in 2028, what would they be able to do after 4 YEARS of genocide? Gaza (and possibly the West Bank) would be completely destroyed by then.
Great friggin plan, genius!!
The problem is not with Dems. It’s with organizations like AIPAC, who will spend millions of dollars to unseat any Democrat who dares to suggests that we should cut off Israel. (just look what happened to Cori Bush in Missouri’s 1st district). US politicians are scared shitless of these groups, and of being called anti-semites for disallowing Israel.
So, to get back to the original point … If it does come down to Newsom and Trump/Vance in 2028, I will be sad. But I will vote Newsom, because at least I know he isn’t going to declare that all trans people are sex criminals, round them up, and send them to “re-education” camps for “treatment”. Or, something even worse.
That is what these fascist will do if they have the power do it. And they are doing everything they can to wear down our constitutional rights in order to do it.
So, don’t be stupid. Don’t vote (or non-vote) for the worst possible outcome. Because you are going to absolutely destroy people’s lives. Including your own.
So, to get back to the original point … If it does come down to Newsom and Trump/Vance in 2028, I will be sad. But I will vote Newsom, because at least I know he isn’t going to declare that all trans people are sex criminals, round them up, and send them to “re-education” camps for “treatment”.
What evidence do you have for that? He’s been speed running transphobia. This is what every trans person is shouting to the rafters about, but folks like you refuse to listen. That’s what people thought about Labor in UK, but then they went to enact the most transphobic policies in all of Western Europe.
Transphobia follows a very very predictable path. You start by compromising on sports, an issue that conservatives chose precisely because it seems so minor. But by giving in to them, you’re giving in to the core principle - that trans people are somehow dangerous and that it’s OK to restrict our rights in order to “protect” other people. And once you go down that path, there’s no stopping it. There is no scientifically valid reason for restricting trans people from sports; it’s purely about conservatives being disgusted about trans people existing. And once you’ve given in to the bigots on one form of irrational bigotry, you just keep falling further and further.
Every state that has passed sports bans has also gone on to pass or consider bathroom bans, restrictions on care for minors and adults, ID restrictions, and a host of other vile policies. And each step you take down the road to Hell, the easier the next one becomes. By passing a sports ban, you are stating you believe trans people to be dangerous people that need laws targeting our existence. And once you do that, even once, you are on the road to Hell.
Yes. Because Trump’s transphobia pales in comparison to big bad evil Newsom? Are you for real?
Find a place where I said that. You can’t, because you just made it up. I am a trans person living in America in fear because of how Trump’s transphobia has affected my life. I’m not going to leave the country in the next 3 years unless it’s permanently, because I might lose my passport. My access to medication is in peril. I have spoken about all these things extensively. Demanding that be the subject of a post about Gavin Newsom is ridiculous and derailing from the fact that Newsom’s transphobia is also unacceptable.
This reminds me of when so many left-leaning people were tricked into not voting for Harris because things are terrible in the middle east.
Cool story, irrelevant since I both live in a blue state and voted.
If it’s super important to have trans people not bring up Newsom’s transphobia, there is one and only one way to solve it: put pressure on him now to not abandon us.
-
they didn’t say to shut up about it though, they specifically addressed non-voting.
The conclusion is clearly that trans people need to suck it the fuck up and vote for someone who wants them out of public life. This is effectively shutting up about it.
my bad, I guess I should’ve worded this better.
we have two choices:
- democrats win
- republicans win
which of those two outcomes would you rather have?
If you are approaching criticizing a Democrat before the primary this way you are not ready to talk about politics seriously.
The fact Democrats are the only path forward for trans rights is why trans people are freaking out so hard about Newsom’s turn to the right on trans rights. Like, you get those are related, right?
We unfortunately live in a two-party system. If these alienated voters are being forced to choose between the transphobe, or someone who wants to systematically eradicate trans people, I hope those alienated voters wisen the fuck up real quick.
At that point, their noble protest vote (or abstinence from voting) does nothing but make the world a worse place. Learn to fight for progress, instead of kneecapping everyone else from being able to do so because your candidate doesn’t toe the line with literally every single one of your values.
Which of your rights are you voting away with candidates that don’t “toe the line” with your right to exist as a human being?
Why are you so comfortable demanding other people give up their rights while doing none of that yourself?
Why is it more reasonable to you to demand trans people vote against their own rights than to do even the tiniest amount of work pressuring Newsom to stop the fucking transphobia?
Regarding giving up rights comment: who is most likely to change their stance if you were to personally talk to them directly:
Trump or Newsom?
Pressuring one to change their stance isn’t the same as vilifying them. Republican GOP pigs vilify. That’s their play. Let’s be better than that. At least to each other please.
Regarding giving up rights comment: who is most likely to change their stance if you were to personally talk to them directly:
Trump or Newsom?
They both have moved substantially to the right on trans issues. Both are just following opinion polls. So really, I think either are just about as likely. Both of them are amoral monsters that believe in nothing.
Trump or Newsom?
Neither one. They don’t listen to the public. They listen to the donor class.
Please point out where I have vilified Newsom. Because pointing out his transphobia isn’t it. Asking people to pressure his office to knock the transphobia the fuck off—the very thing you are suggesting I should take into account—isn’t it either.
If you’re saying I’m vilifying other users by asking pointed questions about why they’re so comfortable asking trans voters to vote for someone who is onboard with removing their rights, I don’t accept that as vilification either.
Fuck off with that virtue signalling. The point above remains valid. Vote out the one that WANTS TO ERADICATE MARGINALISED PEOPLE then focus on improving the less-bad candidate.
It remains the less-bad outcome.
Sorry. If trans people and their allies are such a small insignificant group that our rights are negotiable, then you’ve decided our votes aren’t important.
To liberals, Dems can sacrifice trans people because we’re so few in number. At the same time, they’ll demand trans people vote Dem because every vote counts. In the classic fascist fashion, we’re both weak and powerful at the same time somehow.
Sorry, but I won’t vote for a vice signaller like Newsom.
Then you’re a direct enabler of trump. Fuck you and your high minded puratism.
Newsom might listen and change. Trump will not. Choose your battle.
Then tell him to change his mind and stop telling trans people to vote for someone who actively wants them removed.
You’re telling black people on 1960s to vote for George Wallace.
If you think Newsom might listen you can contact him and put pressure on him to change now. If he can change it shouldn’t be hard to prove it, right?
Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Newsom, like Labor in the UK, shamelessly feed in to transphobia in an attempt to pander to the right. UK liberals haven’t listened. And corporate Democrats are walking the same path, completely ignoring their constituents. Trump is as likely to change on the issue as Newsom is. In fact, both have changed their views on trans issues to move substantially to the right. Both have walked the same road.
Sorry, but fuck you and your fascist collaboration. And specifically, fuck your lack of morals. The amorality of liberals like yourself is precisely why fascists are advancing. You’re a fascist enabler and collaborator.
Just listen to yourself. You’re condemning someone for having a moral center. That’s psychopath behavior.
“Wanting to exist as a human being in public” is now virtue signaling, very nice.
If it’s super important for trans people to all vote for whatever candidate Dems put forward, and you also believe Newsom is the likely candidate, then you should call his office and tell him that the transphobia is alienating voters. Because it is.
I agree! I so agree. But, and here’s the rub, I’ll vote for him even if he doesn’t change his position. Because he is not the existential threat posed by the GOP.
He is an existential threat. Newsom has opposed and vetoed bills advancing trans rights. This isn’t just rhetoric.
So you’ll vote for him if he keeps the Republican talking points, got it. You don’t care what they stand for, but the party they’re with.
Cool, not sure what you want me to do with that information. I don’t think it was ever in question whether you or any other liberal who is offended by trans people demanding Newsom drop the transphobia would ultimately support him, or any other candidate with his policies, no matter what.
The question is if other voters will. If you don’t think it will change anything, then criticizing his transphobia won’t matter. If you think it will affect who votes for him, then you better start ringing his phone off the hook about it and you better start quick, because the days of trans people being quiet about it are gone. If you want to be the party of trans rights that means you also have to listen to trans people, not just use us as a decoration.
We already lost some rights, roe v wade had been overturned now for some time.
Which Democratic candidate did you vote for to lose them?
Why do you assume that isn’t also a right I’ve lost?
Democrats are frankly quite complicit in the fall of Roe. They never bothered to codify Roe into law, because many of their own members found the topic awkward and icky, so they never bothered to do it. And they made the cold political calculation that keeping abortion as a continual political issue that they could run on was more important than actually protecting the right to abortion.
I said we.
Fair enough. Which democratic candidate did you vote for to lose reproductive healthcare rights? Because if the answer is “nobody” then that’s a disingenuous comparison. ‘Republicans took away our rights, so you have to vote for a Democratic candidate that wants to take away yours’ doesn’t even make sense.
There is no compromising with transphobes. Sports are just a way to get the foot in the door. It’s not like conservatives actually give a shit about women’s sports. It starts with sports. Next you’re “protecting women’s spaces” by forcing women to use the men’s restroom and locker room. Next you’re denying accurate ID documents to people to “fight gender fraud.”
I would call this a slippery slope fallacy, but this is the exact same track that both conservatives and liberals have taken. The UK liberal government is one of the most transphobic in the developed world.
Sorry, I’m not going to vote for a candidate that’s going to support destroying my life, even if they happen to be a Democrat. If Newsom gets the nomination in 2028, I’ll stay home on election day. Sorry. You don’t get to throw minority groups on to a pyre and then whine when they refuse to support you.
“I just stabbed you, but why aren’t you voting for me???”
This exactly. It’s almost like they want Trump to remain in office, or someone just like him. I’m so, so so tired of that attitude.
Force people to vote against their rights, why dont you?
They are anyways. Just because ypu choose not to vote doesnt mena youre note subjected to the result. And every vote not cast against fascism is a vote for it.
Then after many years of voting for the slightly lesser evil, you look up and realize that both candidates are fascist. You never bothered to hold the “good” side accountable, so they just kept sliding further and further into evil.
The only reason Newsom is a Democrat is because he lives in California. If he lived in Texas, he would happily be a Republican. He doesn’t actually believe in anything.
Last I heard, Newsom was not currently a candidate for any election, criticize all you want.
The dude’s whole career goal is to be president.
That’s what primaries are for. Come the general, you get two choices, and one of them will take the office. That’s when “taking a stand” or “checking out of the process” ends up putting the worse person in the presidency.
Are the Democrats going to even allow a primary this time around?
Zero reason to suspect they ever will again. They argued in court they don’t have to, and won.
Then the Dems better put up somebody that will excite voters and get them to the polls
What he is currently saying is that we are likely not have another election while others are laughing: https://youtube.com/shorts/cZpka6EX1l8
When it’s someone they don’t like the discussion turns around “electability”. But they always want us to get in line for a pro-establishment center-left corporate Democrat.
Center-right. They haven’t had someone any amount on the left since Carter.
They keep trying to court voters who will never ever vote for them instead of the people who they claim to share values with.
R stopped with that shit and surprise surprise they got Trump in. Tell me again how we could never have gotten Bernie in or how AOC is too radical…
It’s almost like if you create a platform that completely disenfranchises your voting base to try and appeal to your opponent, people won’t continue to support you when you show that you no longer protect their interests.
It’s always, for decades now, attempt after attempt to appeal to the “moderates” and “reach across the aisle” to get R’s to flip but never are they allowed to move the needle to the left otherwise they get ousted as being “too radical”, in order to pull in the gigantic swatch of the population who do not participate because they see that no one actually gives a shit about them.
It’s always, for decades now, attempt after attempt to appeal to the “moderates” and “reach across the aisle” to get R’s to flip but never are they allowed to move the needle to the left otherwise they get ousted as being “too radical”
100% entirely correct!
I’m sure one of these days conservatives will vote for the (D). We just have to keep trying to meet them in the middle for another thirty years! Let’s try putting one of the Cheneys on the ballot next time.
Now whose rights are we gonna sacrifice first? I vote old people’s.
Overton’s carrot.
Dems became center left? When did that happen?
They’re center-left when compared to a literal fascist dictator.
They’re a right-wing party when compared to the rest of the world.
They’re experts on electability. Countless counter-examples to draw on.
I’m blue no matter who. Fuck yeah go new York Mayor (why the fuck is this getting so much attention), fuck yeah go newsome (why the fuck is this getting so much attention before the primary has even been announced? Before the midterms…)
Blue no matter who and asking again. WHERE THE FUCK are the EPSTEIN FILES? Me and my autocorrect friend 🦆 need to know.
Blue no matter who is for the general election though. That’s still over 3 years away. I’ll be here shitting on Newsom every day up until he’s a nominee in a competitive race against a fascist.
No. There are elections every year. This is another massive problem with the voting base. Ignoring all local politics. Theres more to running this country than the presidents office.
I agree people don’t pay enough attention to local elections but we’re talking about Newsom specifically here. He’s not on the ballot and likely won’t be until 2028.
Based
Even if Newsome skews transphobic he will be infinitely better than any Republican on the issue. We can beat up Newsome all we want now but if he “wins” the nominee acting like he’s the devil incarnate is a really dumb position to take. I would prefer a ton of other people over him but he won’t be pushing insane policies like the right is.
Even if Newsome skews transphobic he will be infinitely better than any Republican on the issue.
That’s what they said about Labor in the UK. Then the UK liberals became even more transphobic than the conservatives.
The UK has a Liberal Democrat Party and a Labour Party as well as the Conservative Party and now Reform (formerly UKIP, Farage is trying to be the smarter, more British Trump).
It’s confusing when you call Labour Liberals, because Labour is strongly in support of free universal healthcare and workers’ rights, introduced and regularly raised the minimum wage and is generally pro union. They’re considerably to the left of the American Democrats.
Having said all that, three Prime Minister, Keir Starmer seems to be the most Biden-like Prime Minister we’ve had.
They’re considerably to the left of the American Democrats.
How convenient. You’ve left out the one issue that we’re actually talking about, the rights of innocent trans people. On those, Starmer is as bad as any Republican. The UK labor party is one of the most transphobic parties in the western world. And I’m referring to them as liberals as they are, in terms of political alignment, a liberal party. And like most liberal parties, scratch them and a fascist bleeds.
Why are you insisting on calling them liberal, when the policy you’re objecting to is so illiberal?
Words have meanings, and just because you like to call centre left parties that you feel aren’t left enough liberal, it doesn’t mean the labour party is liberal. They’re just not. They’re mildy authoritarian centre left and you’re criticising them for not being liberal left.
We have a liberal democratic party in the UK, and it’s not called labour.
I know leftists like to see liberals as the enemy because they’re not left wing enough, so because the UK labour party is far too centrist for you, you call them liberals, but it makes no sense because they’re not very liberal, and the very thing you’re disagreeing with is them being the opposite of liberal!
If everything you said in the last 24 hours used the word centrist instead of liberal, it would all make sense and it would all be true, I wouldn’t be disagreeing with you at all. Think about it.
You are lib left. Your favourite enemy to criticise is the centrists and you will shit on them all day long before you have three words to say against the conservatives (which you will dismissively do after being called out on it), but for goodness sake stop calling them liberal when you’re objecting to their authoritarian policies!
The UK labor party is one of the most transphobic parties in the western world.
It seems you have no idea whatsoever about what the conservative party and the reform party are saying on this issue, and you aren’t aware that the source of the transphobic policy is our supreme court, (the members of which can be vetoed politically but selection is independent). Yes Labour and Starmer have publicly come out in favour of it, but that makes them auth, not lib.
Please try harder to get your facts straight.
You have no idea what I think about the policy because you’re too busy insisting on using the wrong word for the labour party. It’s weird and counterproductive.
But he isn’t running yet and you still have a chance of not having an asshole like him in eventual primaries.
Already pretending that he’s the best choice now is borderline stupid.
Seeing Phil Ochs in the wild is… Wild. It often feels like he’s my own personal thing, because no one knows him, even among my leftist friends
Newsom also shills harder for corporations than Trump does which means Newsom has a real chance of winning. Whoops.
Newsom also shills harder for corporations than Trump does
(X) Doubt
If only this was the most embarrassing thing he’d done.
“Everything’s computer!”
Newsom sucks but when you lie it’s just weird. Are you saying you prefer Trump?
It must be difficult constantly living in denial with paranoia, huh?
You’re going to have to elaborate. Do you really have nothing of value to say or add?
This is like trying to figure out which ocean is bigger by looking out from the shore. I just couldn’t say.
Anything that isn’t a vote to remove the small fingered vulgarian is a vote FOR the small fingered vulgarian. You choose. You may not like your choices but if you don’t vote to oust him you are voting for him.
This is the type of thinking that got him there in the first place.
You want to beat him or whoever succeeds him, find someone people want to vote for
