OK I'm depressed and anxious so let's talk about some game theory: under no circumstances should *ANYONE* in 2026 admit that they would vote for Gavin Newsom for president.
-
@xgranade@wandering.shop @glyph@mastodon.social @dave@alvarado.social I feel like the "vote blue no matter who" card is one you can only logically play after the primaries. But of course, with Mamdani, suddenly no one played that card after the primaries...
-
OK I'm depressed and anxious so let's talk about some game theory: under no circumstances should *ANYONE* in 2026 admit that they would vote for Gavin Newsom for president.
@glyph Until a year and a half ago, I'd have grudgingly voted for him. But not now, his fascist turn has destroyed any tolerance I had for my former mayor.
-
-
Type A people, even if they *will eventually* vote for Newsom in that very unfortunate circumstance in 2028, should *say* they won't vote for Newsom in 2028, because the more people that stand up and say this, the *less likely* it is that he will be on the ballot in the general. If this strategy works it won't even have been a lie! No way to prove a negative!
@glyph
I'm basically Type A and this reasoning is sound.So here it is:
I will not vote for Gavin Newsome. -
-
@glyph Until a year and a half ago, I'd have grudgingly voted for him. But not now, his fascist turn has destroyed any tolerance I had for my former mayor.
@7leaguebootdisk forgetting about our personal opinions for the moment, if we are just talking about focus groups and polling, what normal people think: he lost the 2028 general at the French Laundry in 2020. Kimberly Guilfoyle's ex-husband is never going to motivate the nationwide Democratic base.
-
@glyph@mastodon.social @xgranade@wandering.shop who knew that "blue no matter who" turned out to be "so long as they're a neoliberal who will support a 'soft' white supremacist position that is oligarch friendly", huh*
* well, lots of people did, but they really did make it super obvious with their "you should vote for governor grab ass over the actual DNC candidate who won the nomination", didn't they. -
@dave@alvarado.social @xgranade@wandering.shop @glyph@mastodon.social AGREED. And I think they need to realize that isn't such an ironclad strategy for voters, honestly. It's gotten us here: a bunch of "winter palette fascist" candidates (THAT'S SUCH A GOOD TERM) because they were consistently the lesser of two evils... and a TON of lost elections with massive consequences while we get the full fat no skim fascists in charge.
Their "safe" candidates are increasingly right wing shitheads and they feel safe to run them because they assume the base is solid. The "base" is not solid: we keep giving them votes and money and they piss it away on increasingly regressive candidates (just less regressive than the other side).
They can see how wildly popular people like Mamdani are; they know it's a winning strategy for the people and the party... just not a winning strategy for them, I suspect. -
@glyph
I'm basically Type A and this reasoning is sound.So here it is:
I will not vote for Gavin Newsome.@ohmu sometimes posting stuff like this feels like either screaming into an uncaring void or agreeing with people who are also not really able to change much. So knowing it actually convinced someone, even just one person, is actually a huge relief, thanks for saying so.
-
@xgranade @aud @glyph yeah I hear you, which is why I'm on the fence. I voted for Obama twice, I got gitmo still open and more deportations than W did. I voted for Hillary. God help me, I voted for Genocide Joe. I voted for Kamala, knowing she was a loser.
I stand by my statement, a vote in the US is full-throated support of everything that candidate does. I'm getting tired of full-throated supporting fascism lite instead of giving the party I want to see change a swift kick in the ass.
-
@dave@alvarado.social @xgranade@wandering.shop @glyph@mastodon.social AGREED. And I think they need to realize that isn't such an ironclad strategy for voters, honestly. It's gotten us here: a bunch of "winter palette fascist" candidates (THAT'S SUCH A GOOD TERM) because they were consistently the lesser of two evils... and a TON of lost elections with massive consequences while we get the full fat no skim fascists in charge.
Their "safe" candidates are increasingly right wing shitheads and they feel safe to run them because they assume the base is solid. The "base" is not solid: we keep giving them votes and money and they piss it away on increasingly regressive candidates (just less regressive than the other side).
They can see how wildly popular people like Mamdani are; they know it's a winning strategy for the people and the party... just not a winning strategy for them, I suspect.@aud @xgranade @dave most popular elected democrat in the country and AFAIK his numbers just keep going up https://www.newsweek.com/zohran-mamdanis-popularity-hits-new-highpoll-11461031
-
@xgranade @aud @glyph yeah I hear you, which is why I'm on the fence. I voted for Obama twice, I got gitmo still open and more deportations than W did. I voted for Hillary. God help me, I voted for Genocide Joe. I voted for Kamala, knowing she was a loser.
I stand by my statement, a vote in the US is full-throated support of everything that candidate does. I'm getting tired of full-throated supporting fascism lite instead of giving the party I want to see change a swift kick in the ass.
@dave@alvarado.social @glyph@mastodon.social @xgranade@wandering.shop I could have written this exact post and have thought all these things so many times. I am still so pissed about Gitmo.
-
@dave@alvarado.social @glyph@mastodon.social @xgranade@wandering.shop I could have written this exact post and have thought all these things so many times. I am still so pissed about Gitmo.
-
@dave@alvarado.social @glyph@mastodon.social @xgranade@wandering.shop I could have written this exact post and have thought all these things so many times. I am still so pissed about Gitmo.
@aud @xgranade @dave I care a lot less about vindicating my personal feelings than I do about actually winning, but this is the argument the moderates make: you gotta moderate if you want to win. you have to split the difference. you can't argue too stridently for anything. don't have values.
it would be bad enough to follow this logic if it were correct, but it's *wrong*. we keep doing the experiment! "tacking to the center" gets you zero conservatives and loses you progressives.
-
@xgranade @aud @glyph yeah I hear you, which is why I'm on the fence. I voted for Obama twice, I got gitmo still open and more deportations than W did. I voted for Hillary. God help me, I voted for Genocide Joe. I voted for Kamala, knowing she was a loser.
I stand by my statement, a vote in the US is full-throated support of everything that candidate does. I'm getting tired of full-throated supporting fascism lite instead of giving the party I want to see change a swift kick in the ass.
@xgranade @aud @glyph the fence I'm sitting on is whether it's more harmful to do this faster/slower fascism slide, or to live with four years of godawful after showing team D they have *zero* support for their current trajectory.
Like, we got Trump a second time. I kinda wish Joe had gotten single-digit percent of the vote and the Democratic leadership had spent four years in stunned self-reflection. Instead we get fucking Gavin Newsom making a run.
-
-
@aud @xgranade @dave I care a lot less about vindicating my personal feelings than I do about actually winning, but this is the argument the moderates make: you gotta moderate if you want to win. you have to split the difference. you can't argue too stridently for anything. don't have values.
it would be bad enough to follow this logic if it were correct, but it's *wrong*. we keep doing the experiment! "tacking to the center" gets you zero conservatives and loses you progressives.
-
@aud @xgranade @dave I care a lot less about vindicating my personal feelings than I do about actually winning, but this is the argument the moderates make: you gotta moderate if you want to win. you have to split the difference. you can't argue too stridently for anything. don't have values.
it would be bad enough to follow this logic if it were correct, but it's *wrong*. we keep doing the experiment! "tacking to the center" gets you zero conservatives and loses you progressives.
-
@xgranade @aud @glyph the fence I'm sitting on is whether it's more harmful to do this faster/slower fascism slide, or to live with four years of godawful after showing team D they have *zero* support for their current trajectory.
Like, we got Trump a second time. I kinda wish Joe had gotten single-digit percent of the vote and the Democratic leadership had spent four years in stunned self-reflection. Instead we get fucking Gavin Newsom making a run.
@dave @xgranade @aud on an emotional level I 100% get you. but on a decision-making level I feel like you are constructing (or rather, giving in to) the framing that "everything happens in the general election". and obviously, everything culminates there. but primaries are important, intragroup discourse (hey, we're doing discourse!) is important, legislative races are important… preparation and organizing and coalition-building is way more important than the "do I / don't I" at the last moment
-
@xgranade @aud @glyph the fence I'm sitting on is whether it's more harmful to do this faster/slower fascism slide, or to live with four years of godawful after showing team D they have *zero* support for their current trajectory.
Like, we got Trump a second time. I kinda wish Joe had gotten single-digit percent of the vote and the Democratic leadership had spent four years in stunned self-reflection. Instead we get fucking Gavin Newsom making a run.
@dave @aud @glyph I am quite firmly opposed to accelerationism as a philosophy, if only on the basis that the collateral damage is nearly incalculable in scope.
It's the primary basis on which I concede any rhetorical ground to VBNMW. Quickly making things quickly is worse than slowly making things worse.
