Oh, to have the view that the perfect politician will eventually show up and win. It doesn’t work that way. And don’t act like you have a monopoly on being targeted by this administration.
Do you really think (assuming a 2028 election) that a Vance admin would be better for you than Newsom?
That’s my beef with single-issue voters. “Welp, no candidates support my position, so I’ll stay home.” This is what the GOP has masterfully avoided by keeping red meat on the table so they can steal the entire country.
Every single plank in the Nazi Republican platform is discriminatory and oppressive. You’re engaging in false equivalence.
Do you really think (assuming a 2028 election) that a Vance admin would be better for you than Newsom?
OK, this explains a lot…
you are living in a reality that you’ve made up in your head, where the Democratic primary for 2028 has already happened, and Newsom won it, and now we all need to unify around him in the general election.
I’m guessing you’re not even doing it consciously, it’s just a kneejerk reaction you’ve developed over the past few years where any criticism of a Democrat coming from their left can be shouted down with “don’t you realize this will help Trump win???”
meanwhile, over here in the consensus reality everyone else is experiencing, there’s 2 years before the 2028 primary even starts.
and I’m not really clear how this whole system works, maybe you can explain it to me?
according to you, criticism of Newsom isn’t allowed, because it might help get JD Vance elected. OK, does that extend to the other possible candidates on that list, besides Newsom?
and is there like, a form I’m supposed to fill out and give you, so I can get a permission slip that allows me to criticize one of them?
to quote Billy Bob from S1 of Fargo, I just want to know the policy.
Whoa. Extrapolate much? I said nothing about the acceptability of criticizing Newsom, yet you’re taking that as my thesis. This isn’t a rabbit hole I care to go down, as your entire comment is question-begging.
I said nothing about the acceptability of criticizing Newsom
ahh, maybe I misunderstood. when you say:
While I get where you’re coming from, turning into a single-issue voter won’t do anything
and
Pick your battles.
maybe you’re saying that criticizing Newsom is OK…but that we’re all obligated to vote for him anyway, regardless of any criticism we have?
here’s the thing. “I dislike this guy so much that if he’s the nominee, I won’t vote for him” is criticism. it’s criticism you don’t like, that you disagree with. but it’s a form of criticism that you’re trying to argue should be off the table.
it’s pretty much the strongest criticism you can make of a potential nominee, especially at this point in the election cycle. so I guess criticism of Newsom is allowed, according to you…but only if it’s ineffectual? maybe criticism should only be done Schumer-style, in the form of a strongly-worded letter?
here’s a thought experiment that I mentioned briefly in another comment - imagine a Democratic politician, let’s call him Navin Gewsom, who announces he doesn’t care about marriage equality, and would be fine with Obegerfell v Hodges being overturned by SCOTUS.
there’s a married gay or lesbian couple who says that as a result, they’d never vote for Navin Gewsom. would you give them the same “don’t be a single-issue voter, pick your battles” scolding? if not, what’s the difference between them and a trans person refusing to vote for Newsom?
That’s all well and good, but we’re talking about someone seemingly positioning themselves for an election that won’t happen for three years, and we have no idea who the candidates will be.
I’m well aware of Newsom’s Kirk appearance, but it doesn’t seem central to this piece. You want an LGBTQ±advocate presidential candidate who can win red states that have disproportionate electoral votes? Not going to happen.
This is just how politics work, and that’s not changing ahead of 2028. If you want to vote for the fascist instead because Newsom isn’t liberal enough to win a national election, that is of course your choice.
Oh, to have the view that the perfect politician will eventually show up and win. It doesn’t work that way. And don’t act like you have a monopoly on being targeted by this administration.
Do you really think (assuming a 2028 election) that a Vance admin would be better for you than Newsom?
That’s my beef with single-issue voters. “Welp, no candidates support my position, so I’ll stay home.” This is what the GOP has masterfully avoided by keeping red meat on the table so they can steal the entire country.
Every single plank in the
NaziRepublican platform is discriminatory and oppressive. You’re engaging in false equivalence.OK, this explains a lot…
you are living in a reality that you’ve made up in your head, where the Democratic primary for 2028 has already happened, and Newsom won it, and now we all need to unify around him in the general election.
I’m guessing you’re not even doing it consciously, it’s just a kneejerk reaction you’ve developed over the past few years where any criticism of a Democrat coming from their left can be shouted down with “don’t you realize this will help Trump win???”
meanwhile, over here in the consensus reality everyone else is experiencing, there’s 2 years before the 2028 primary even starts.
here’s the list of speculated Democratic candidates.
and I’m not really clear how this whole system works, maybe you can explain it to me?
according to you, criticism of Newsom isn’t allowed, because it might help get JD Vance elected. OK, does that extend to the other possible candidates on that list, besides Newsom?
and is there like, a form I’m supposed to fill out and give you, so I can get a permission slip that allows me to criticize one of them?
to quote Billy Bob from S1 of Fargo, I just want to know the policy.
Whoa. Extrapolate much? I said nothing about the acceptability of criticizing Newsom, yet you’re taking that as my thesis. This isn’t a rabbit hole I care to go down, as your entire comment is question-begging.
ahh, maybe I misunderstood. when you say:
and
maybe you’re saying that criticizing Newsom is OK…but that we’re all obligated to vote for him anyway, regardless of any criticism we have?
here’s the thing. “I dislike this guy so much that if he’s the nominee, I won’t vote for him” is criticism. it’s criticism you don’t like, that you disagree with. but it’s a form of criticism that you’re trying to argue should be off the table.
it’s pretty much the strongest criticism you can make of a potential nominee, especially at this point in the election cycle. so I guess criticism of Newsom is allowed, according to you…but only if it’s ineffectual? maybe criticism should only be done Schumer-style, in the form of a strongly-worded letter?
also, to not lose sight of the broader context of this thread - the “single-issue voter” you were chastising is a trans person. Newsom invited right-wing shitbag Charlie Kirk on to the first episode of his podcast, and said he agrees with Kirk completely about trans issues. I generally agree with you about “single-issue” voters being misguided, but in this case, do you really think that a trans person has an obligation to vote for a politician who does not think trans people have the right to be trans?
here’s a thought experiment that I mentioned briefly in another comment - imagine a Democratic politician, let’s call him Navin Gewsom, who announces he doesn’t care about marriage equality, and would be fine with Obegerfell v Hodges being overturned by SCOTUS.
there’s a married gay or lesbian couple who says that as a result, they’d never vote for Navin Gewsom. would you give them the same “don’t be a single-issue voter, pick your battles” scolding? if not, what’s the difference between them and a trans person refusing to vote for Newsom?
That’s all well and good, but we’re talking about someone seemingly positioning themselves for an election that won’t happen for three years, and we have no idea who the candidates will be.
I’m well aware of Newsom’s Kirk appearance, but it doesn’t seem central to this piece. You want an LGBTQ±advocate presidential candidate who can win red states that have disproportionate electoral votes? Not going to happen.
This is just how politics work, and that’s not changing ahead of 2028. If you want to vote for the fascist instead because Newsom isn’t liberal enough to win a national election, that is of course your choice.