It is shocking and disappointing to me that these facts are less disturbing to purity activists than Newsom's rising popularity. No one does circular firing squads better than the left.
Psychologist, photographer, amateur woodworker, intrepid explorer of the labyrinthine caverns of the mind, lives in Mt. Lebanon PA.
56 followers 21 following 551 posts
view profile on Bluesky
It is shocking and disappointing to me that these facts are less disturbing to purity activists than Newsom's rising popularity. No one does circular firing squads better than the left.
Ahem, I lived in the Bay Area for 14 years. It's why I know that CA progressive politics is so skewed and ineffective.
No one does white sanctimony like purity activists. What I'm offering is a path forward to power and advancement or rights. OF COURSE you will never get all you want. Neither will I. Neither will anyone except perhaps the rich. If that's your bar, then you've already ceded the game.
Nope, he has never said, "I'll sign a bill into law that prevents transition care below the age of 26." or even "I agree that there should be no transitional surgery until age 26." So, again, can you give me an anti-trans policy that he has unambiguously supported?
...it is self-defeating to try to stop someone from attacking your enemy. The purity left has long focused their ire on imperfect Dems, leaving a gaping hole for MAGA to slip through. I've yet to have any optimism that they've learned from this.
Not intentionally so, but that's the net effect, at least at this moment. If this were a primary, then sure, point out the flaws and advocate for your choice. But that's not happening right now. Right now, Newsom is simply fighting Trump in a way that's getting under MAGA's skin, and...
This might be a shock to you, but literally every politician who has ever lived cared about winning and power. Indeed, the people who don't care about it never get what they want. And another shocker for you, but Dems are completely out of power at the federal level and in most states.
MAGA thanks you for your pessimism.
Can you give me an example of what Newsom has said he would "do to Trans people"? Not rumors. Not interpretations of vague statements. Actual anti-Trans policies he has said he would sign into law. Anything?
FDR famously said, “I agree with you. I want to do it. Now make me do it.” That sums up how politics actually works. But first we have to get them into power. Working to keep imperfect allies out of power, or undermining them when they are punching a mutual enemy (MAGA), is counterproductive.
The US isn't the UK. Their electoral/representative system is very different than ours, so comparing apples to oranges isn't helpful or instructive. Sticking to US politics, historically, politicians follow the Window, not the other way around. Even the best presidents did this, like Lincoln and FDR
There is a deep ocean of problems we can assign to MAGA. But the damage they can do is very real. So regardless of their patheticness, the priority has to remain defeating them and burying their movement. When someone can help do this, that's a good thing, while it helps MAGA when we undermine them
Slippery slope arguments have always justified unilateral Dem disarmament, and most Dems are sick of it. This is why Newsom's popularity is surging. If there are Dems who can fight even better, then bring it on! But again, throwing a wet blanket on someone causing MAGA to cry is counterproductive.
You're putting the cart before the horse. The way to make politicians better is to get them into power and then move the Overton Window. That requires building large coalitions by pulling more people into your camp. That's how every major social movement has succeeded.
I think you're missing what the bar actually is. It isn't about the tweets; that's incidental. It's about getting Trump's goat and pushing back against the TX gerrymandering. The bar is this: FIGHT! If he's doing it better than anyone else, we should applaud that, not throw water on it.
They've been around for a while now and they aren't doing what Newsom is doing. They're all great, full support, but this is a bottom up phenomenon. Maybe they can start doing something different to meet the moment, but what?
My point exactly. He has institutional strengths that give his efforts extra punch, and he would be a fool not to take advantage of that. That his popularity is skyrocketing is evidence that rand-and-file Dems are hungry for what he's giving. Someone else might do it better, but who?
He might be and he certainly could win. It isn't his fault if Democratic voters don't like any of the other candidates better. And don't be too pleased by the idea of MAGA winning another term.
Nothing says "DOA" like skyrocketing popularity and social media attention.
Suggestion: find and support another Democrat who is willing to punch back at Trump/MAGA with the same attention-getting tactics and with the same advantages that come with being gov of the state with the 4th largest economy in the world.
In a way we are all activists, those who seek to influence voting behavior and public policy. The question is if your influence is effective or not or if you are support advocacy groups that are effective or not. With progressives on the ropes nationally, it's worth asking what problems need fixing.
"Centering Trans issues is not a winning strategy" is not saying "Dems have centered Trans issues." This is part of the problem—rather than listening, understanding, and seeking common ground, you seek out division, and invent it when you can't. This won't help you build your coalition.
...are ineffective. Scolding, insulting, and demonizing potential allies who simply disagree on specific policies is self-sabotaging and has created a huge cultural backlash. It isn't just you, it's all modern purity activists. You could actually get what you want if you changed your tactics.
...is advocacy, not purity. The job of activists is to build support for their goals, not to undermine allied politicians/voters who could potentially be persuaded. If a policy is unpopular, it's YOUR job to change that, not insist a candidate to lose on it. And right now, your tactics...
The problem is specific Trans policies, some of which are unpopular and/or easy to attack from the right. This is where purity activists go wrong. By insisting that Dems support such policies, they undermine their efforts to get back into power. This ultimately helps MAGA. The answer...
The Trans vote, by itself, is about .5% of voters. A candidate has to get over 50% to win. Thus a campaign has to center on the broadest issues pulling in the largest group of voters. Fortunately, about 75% of Americans support Trans rights in principle. So the Dems are on solid ground there. ...
The moment Newsom advocates for removing Trans rights, he will be banished from the Dem party, which is unambiguously in favor of Trans rights. Of course, he has done nothing to even imply that he would sign any bill into law that would remove a right for anyone. This is paranoid thinking.
Which can certainly happen. It's entirely possible that a better candidate will come along. But they will have to do it as Newsom is—going hard against MAGA and centering economic/affordability issues. But if he doesn't lose, then he will still be leagues better than any MAGA.
I NEVER said the Dems centered Trans issues. I only said they have unambiguously supported Trans rights for years, which is a simple fact. I also want policy that doesn't suck, but there is a difference between "this isn't as good as I want" and "you are literally trying to erase me".
...template that could actually be replicated in most urban areas in the US. The Dems are in the gutter in part because they haven't gotten enough done. Lurie is showing that Dems CAN get things done rather than just offer purity platitudes. This is a pathway to real progress.
Lurie is governing as a pragmatic liberal. The solutions are often imperfect as they always will be, but he's making positive changes that the citizens clearly like. He isn't letting the perfect stop the implementation of the good. He is trying for solutions, not purity. This approach is a...
Mamdani has been hailed as the new template for progressive leadership in the Dem party. But let's look at the mayor of the most progressive city in the US, San Fran, Daniel Lurie. He currently has a 73% approval rating, and is positive among all groups. Asians like him best; progressives less so.
MAGA is your enemy. Newsom might not advance your rights as much as you want, but MAGA is actively trying to hurt you. It is bewildering that this isn't more obvious to the people who are most at risk from MAGA. But clearly it isn't.
I guess I just have to keep repeating this. No politician is perfect. Newsom certainly isn't. You keep missing my point (on purpose?). It isn't about Newsom, it's about GETTING MAGA OUT OF POWER. You keep putting all your energy on attacking the WRONG PEOPLE. Newsom might not be your friend, but...
So you can call him a bad candidate, and you can hate him all you want, but he's doing what it takes to win. That's how candidates get into power. A flawed Dem in power is better than a ideal candidate in the wilderness while monsters tear the US apart.
...put their quiet policies into action. This is how politics/power works. Newsom is trying to counterbalance the far-left reputation of CA in order to become a viable national candidate. He has to in order to have any chance nationally. And face it, it's working based on current polling.
You are so close to understanding. The example on the opposite side is the pro-life stance, something most voters dislike. It became a liability for the GOP, so candidates rarely centered it. They simply pushed it to the back. Once they got into power and the time was right, they were able to...
...a liability for most Dems in most places. Yes, the Dem party still supports Trans rights, but because purity activists are never satisfied and demand priority status, they have become more of a political albatross rather than a benefit to most campaigns. Even Mamdani didn't center Trans issues.
In most places this is simply a fact. You are angry at the messenger and not the fact that Trans activism has failed to expand its coalition. If a large sustained movement had been built, then centering Trans issues would be safe or even mandatory. But because of purity rhetoric, it has become...
I didn't say the platform "centered" Trans rights, I said it clearly supported them. Which it does. No Dem advocates for taking away Trans rights. There is no Dem abandonment of Trans people. Insisting so simply persuades Dems you cannot be satisfied and therefore energy should be put elsewhere.
The other was AB 957, which also wasn't good. It didn't define "affirmation" in custody battles and judges already have the power to consider it, however defined. The veto had nothing to do not supporting Trans rights, and passing it would not have forwarded Trans right in any substantive way.
With MAGA in charge, of course I'm desperate for every potential vote. The problem is YOUR lack of desperation; your willingness to tolerate MAGA in power is bizarre to me. In 2023 he vetoed two Trans bills. One was about med licenses, and that one needed to be vetoed.
Uh, no, tone politicking is when an argument is ignored based on the tone used. I haven't done that. I've pointed out that constantly harassing, undermining, and not voting for Dems is a good way to be ignored and to help MAGA. All you are doing is isolating yourselves.
Lumping Newsom in with MAGA simply makes you either uninformed or irrational or both. You are free to be as uninformed and irrational as you want, but you can't also expect to be influential.
They have to listen to their *entire* coalition, moreso to those who are actually reliable voters. That's who they listen to. If you want more from them, you might want to stop pushing them away. Your choice.
He vetoed a bad law. He didn't do it to be a jerk, several advocacy and medical groups explained that it had the potential to undermine health access for other groups. He has approved other policies to expand healthcare, however. I'm guessing you didn't know that or don't care.
Supporting and voting for people who will protect and expand their rights. If you have any other suggestions, I'm open.
...effectively shut down conversation or debate. They immediately accuse the critic of being a horrible monster who wants them all to die. Any suggested moderation or change in tactics is "throwing them under the bus". For purists, compromise = death.
In my purity swarm I saw several patterns. Here's one: purity activists do not discern between their approach to advocacy and the thing they are advocating for. So criticizing their political behavior is the same as rejecting or opposing their political aims. This is done to...
I've noticed a pattern of accusations against Newsom, painting him as a rightwing monster who is actively trying to hurt Trans people and workers. And when I look at it, the evidence never shows this. He compromises, yes, but so will all politicians. It just likes like purity to me.
...by undermining him from the left. I am genuinely bemused by this behavior.
So don't support him if you believe that. The problem I keep seeing here is a focus on imperfect Dems and not our shared enemy: Trump/MAGA. The reason we're even talking about him is because he's getting so much attention fighting back. The purity left's instinct is to then help MAGA...
But you're right that the Dems need to lean heavy into economic populism in most places. The question is if the left will be satisfied with that to get a Dem into power. Based on what I'm reading, I'm worried the answer is no.
...her policies were solidly left-of-center. Harris mainly lost because she just wasn't a great candidate and the left flank abandoned her. Mamdani is running in a very liberal city with no real GOP challenger; so that's apples to oranges.
Hillary attempted a base campaign, but it didn't work; the press shivved her over emails. Biden didn't need to because Trump had been such a disaster, he actually leaned further left than any presidential Dem had in decades. Harris appealed to Repubs disturbed by Trump's lawlessness, but ...
Google is your friend: democrats.org/where-we-sta...
...until we can identify the problems. The question is if the purity left can ever be purged of this self-sabotaging behavior or if we need to advance your causes without you. Probably the latter, alas, which will slow down progress. Anyway, nothing personal and I wish you the best.
I wanted to thank you for the many examples of purity politics that I've been talking about. Your hyperbolic, scolding, abrasive, and insulting rhetoric is a perfect example of why you fail to build a coalition or advance your cause. I'm certainly sad about it, but we can't start fixing things...
Can you please give me an example of a quote or policy by the Dem party giving "full-throated support for genocide" in Gaza? This will help me understand what you are referring to. And can you please explain how this is related to a mayoral race that has nothing to do with foreign relations? Thanks
You are conflating sending arms to Israel with "full-throated support of genocide". This is the kind of hyperbolic rhetoric that makes you seem unhinged and dishonest. This in turn makes it difficult to align with you, which isolates you politically. This makes it harder to get what you want.
Yes, about 86% voted for her precisely because she campaigned on protecting and expanding their rights, as Dems have done for years. As I've said before, the purity knife in 2024 was Gaza, not GLBTQ rights. I have no idea what you mean by "falling in line".
PS. I will continue to be a progressive ally despite your idiotic, dishonest, and self-defeating rhetoric. Just know, your irrational and hateful language does nothing to hurt me, but it absolutely hurts you. I'll keep fighting for you even as you continue to make it as hard as possible.
He literally did not do that. He only agreed that brains do not finish maturing until around 25, which is true as far as it goes, but at no time did he say, "So I agree they should not transition until then." When you dishonestly portray people in this way, it undermines your ability to influence.
At this point I'm just repeating myself, so I'll end it here with you. Just remember, when you use hyperbolic language, frame every policy proposal as life-or-death, and define every disagreement as hateful betrayal, you weaken your odds of getting what you want and you help the actual monsters.
No Dem has advocated for denying medical care to anyone. Again, your fact-free framing is preventing you from advocating for your own interests because you make it impossible for a majority of people to align with you. You drive rational people away. This helps MAGA.
False equivalence. No Dem has advocated to taking away Trans rights, Newsom included. This is what I mean—when you frame things in ways that are divorced from reality, you are doing MAGA's work for them. Knifing your allies because they don't support every policy you want is helping your enemies.
The only Dem to give any support is Sen. Fetterman. If you can't get basic facts right then you can't be persuasive. Serious people immediately blow you off, as I'm about to do—because you have nothing to add to the conversation: no solutions, no ways to build coalition. Purity has neutered you.
Yes, hyperbolic. You know who puts people in actual danger and doesn't care about it? MAGA. You are knifing your allies in ways that make it much harder to fight the real enemy. Every time you talk like this, you help MAGA hurt homeless, Trans, and ALL OF US. But I can tell you won't stop, sadly.
Again, this kind of absurd, hyperbolic language is why no one takes you seriously. It isolates you politically and enables MAGA to advance. You are literally making fascists more powerful and dangerous. You are helping the people most trying to hurt you.
So long as you identify any position not at the far left edge as "rightwing", you make it impossible for any Dems to associate with you. Your isolation is of your own making. Thus Dems must appeal to the center for more votes. Your tactics neuter your political influence. Foolish.
Which is why we don't want MAGA in power. Being less than perfect isn't "sacrificing vulnerable groups." This kind of hyperbolic rhetoric makes you sound unhinged and thus no Dem wants to be associated with you. That isolates you and eliminates your influence. Your tactics are counterproductive.
Why do you people keep making this about me. It's about you. You want people in power who will help you. This requires voting for imperfect candidates. You can wait for the fantasy politician to come along if you want, but until then, MAGA will keep stripping your rights away.
This isn't about me. This is about you getting what you want: getting people into power that will protect and further your rights. This can only happen through voting coalitions. This requires compromise. It sucks, I know, but so long as you reject it, the right will keep winning. Your choice.
Dems hear you talk like this and realize that nothing will satisfy you. This kind of hyperbolic rhetoric forces Dems to distance themselves from you. Your language is toxic and isolates you. Your tactics are self defeating.
Using hyperbolic language like this is why Dems run away from you. You sound unhinged and politicians generally don't want to be associated with extremist framing. If you could learn from MLK and use language that draws people into your coalition, you'd get a lot more of what you want.
The left could change this if they decided to join the coalition to get Dems elected. If they became reliable voters, then Dems would have reason to appeal to them more. The less they vote, the less reason Dems have to appeal to them.
The reason it isn't working as well lately is because the right flank is still a reliable voting block while the left flank isn't. So the GOP has a larger coalition of voters. Since Dems can't depend on the left, they are forced to try to get more in the middle, which makes them bland.
The more a candidate can depend on their ideological flank, the more they can shift towards that ideology while still holding on to a large-enough chunk of the middle. If that flank isn't reliable, then the solution is to get more of the middle. It's just math.
It's a numbers game—there are simply more of them to draw from. Also, they tend to be less ideologically rigid, so it's easier to appeal to them. No candidate can win without getting a large chunk of the middle (wherever that middle is, depending on location).
You don't see it, do you? That's a chart of what happens when Dems learn that the left will not support them unless they offer only perfect leftist policy, which will not win most elections. Therefore the Dems have to move towards the center. This is YOUR doing.
MAGA are coming for the Trans people because they were allowed to get into power due to the Dem alternative not being perfect enough. MAGA will keep coming for Trans people so long as purity prevents the Dem alternatives from winning elections. Please figure this out.
The homeless were ALREADY suffering. Getting them off the street and into programs is the ethical thing to do. He signed off on $3 billion in grants for services and housing for them. There is no perfect way to do this, but letting them suffer on the street isn't better.
No one has provided any evidence that he has "done" anything to anyone. He has signed many good laws and vetoed a few that were questionable. When you categorize that as "hurting people", then that is the very definition of purity.
The Democrat you are describing would not be a Democrat, they would join the GOP. So your hypothetical is pointless. I would vote for any actual Dem over any MAGA. That is the way to protect and help literally everyone.
The irony, of course, is that if the left committed to anti-MAGA, they would push Dem candidates leftward. If Dems believe that the left are unreliable (they are), then they would be foolish to appeal to them while risking pushing away more gettable moderates. Why haven't the left figured this out?
Alas, the purity left have not learned their lesson. They are still waiting for their ideal candidate before giving support and votes, no matter how bad the MAGA candidate might be. Moving forward, we anti-MAGA cannot expect them to help. We have no choice but to seek a majority with moderates.
I do, too, despite hating everything else about the man. So does about 70-80% of Americans. It's a fringe position that promotes competitive unfairness. Focusing on basic rights and protections is the priority.
Ironically, I'm the one trying to help you change the world by avoiding counterproductive purity tactics. I hope I've planted a seed and when it comes time to act, you'll do yourself and those you care about a favor and do what you need to defeat MAGA. The world is depending upon you.
This question is like asking "When did you stop beating your wife." So, that's two strikes. You get another chance for an adult conversation.
"I'm going to ignore what Ash is actually saying so I don't have to face the consequences of my actions." Be serious, RM, like a grown up.
You keep strawmanning me because you don't have an actual rebuttal to my points. If you do, I'll happily re-engage.
Not in the least. That's a major misunderstanding. I don't care which Dem it is right now. At the moment, it happens to be Newsom, and I support any Dem fighting MAGA. You don't have to like any Dem to not undermine their efforts to fight MAGA. Note: Newsom hasn't engaged in anti-Trans rhetoric.
Let's take out your strawman argument and get to the facts: MAGA represents the actual threat to your life/rights. If you don't vote for the candidate who can defeat them, then you are helping the MAGA candidate. Either vote to protect yourself or harm yourself. Your choice.
Ok fair enough, thanks for the link. So he wants to slow new legislation, which ain't great. But that isn't the same as wanting to eliminate Trans rights or to halt all movement forward. That's assuming the story is accurate.
Right on.
He was right to veto that bill. Several advocacy and medical groups determined that it could have negative impacts on medical licensing. Newsom didn't reject the goal, only this solution. In fact, he signed two bills to help expand med care in the state.
Harris never said that Trans issues cost her the election, and no other Dem did either. There is no quote from Newsom telling Dems to avoid pro-Trans legislation, nor any report from another Dem saying he did. This is just innuendo.
This is a great argument for robust activism. Create strong messaging that grows your coalition, push candidates to adopt your policies, and work to win primaries. Then when we get a candidate, vote for them to beat MAGA. Otherwise, we get John Thune in charge.
It can be disorienting to talk with someone who lives outside of your silo, because you begin to believe that what you hear in the silo is reality and hearing facts from outside it is distressing. It's one of the major negative consequences of social media.