I have to ask: even if it's him or Trump (doesn't have to be Donnie Darvo, could be one of his idiot sons)? I'd prefer the mock personality cult of the Californian guy, who looks like he puts homeless people thru a woodchipper for fun, over the real one that's turning the USA into a shithole.
If those are the choices, we're fucked either way Like yeah I'm sure *you* would prefer the guy that doesn't remove *your* rights, but if the USA is a shithole for trans people either way, why would they care?
Cultural rot and gerrymandering aside, turning the nation around has to start somewhere. I can imagine some far better alternatives to the current regime of shitler that still require compromise in some pretty godawful ways.
i.e. the nation is pretty messed up already, we've crossed that rubicon, so I find it a useful political thought experiment to ask: "who would you still have voted for in 2024 (or 2020, or 2016), despite their flaws, to keep the USA from being run by a despotic personality cult?
Did Biden "turn the nation around"? Or did he rake the yard for a second Trump administration?
Would Trump 2020-2024 have been better?
it absolutely would have
Definitely, yes! Do you think we're doing well now? You do realize that we gave Trump 4 years to radicalize further, strengthen his forces, while Biden presided over a country that was *still* moving right, even under a Democrat, right? That Biden's ineptitude is what brought us here?
So the radicalization, rightward movement and gathering of forces would have stopped if shitler's second term commenced in 2021?
No, that wasn't the stakes or the question. It would have been *better* than 4 years of Biden, and then another Trump presidency. The last Trump era was bumbling and moronic compared to this one. He would have more likely imploded then. Biden gave Trump all he could dream of.
"He would have more likely imploded" seems vaguely accelerationist. Leave a fascist movement to run its course before it learns from its mistakes, so it can crash and burn, right?
The two options are: Trump after Trump, or Trump after Biden. We have Trump now, and I believe it's a more malicious Trump era than the last one. If I was accelerationist I would have assumed that a more malicious Trump era was preferable. Biden proved that centrism has no defenses against fascism.
Without Biden, Trump would have kept running the U.S. into the ground and we could have, in theory, had a better candidate than a senile conservative piece of shit, and a sustained movement on the streets. Unless the DNC would have done everything to prevent that happening, which is a toss up.
The gleeful hostility to trans folks and homeless folks is part of the fascist brainwyrm. If you want a dem president who will cement fascist phantasms as consensus, then go ahead and vote for this freak.
That kind of attitude is exactly what got us this second Trump administration and our nation's headlong, accelerating slide into 21st century fascism. Is that really the side of history you want to be on? I understand the anger, but the histrionics helps no one.
No, the attitude of all the peasant-brained rubes lining up to support Newsome is what got us the second Trump administration. The idea that pivoting to the right, joining the right in attacking their current scapegoat, is a way to win is what got us the second Trump administration.
That doesn't even make sense but I'm not going to argue with you about it. Do you know what Gavin Newsom WON'T do? He won't erase us the way Trump has. He won't round us up the way Trump WILL. We've seen all this before 85yrs ago, we know where it leads. Is that what you want?
I don't really believe that Newsome won't do those things. He's to the right of Kid Starver on terf island. He'll do it if he thinks it would benefit him, and he evidently *does* think lending his voice to the brain wyrm chorus benefits him.
It's cute you think he won't do that. I wish I was that naive. Also Newsom is using the exact same concerntrolling rhetoric that got what my country did to the jews, queer people and disabled started 85 years ago.
He's just like Starmer - he'd send us to those same death camps as soon he got the chance to.
Friendly reminder, we're talking about a hypothetical here, where Newsom wins the presidential primary in '28. In that scenario, one of the two psychopaths is a clear and obvious better choice. Dems being the lesser of two evils has always been a problem and letting Republicans win won't fix it.
And in this scenario Newsome won't actually be a lesser of two evils if you're trans or unhoused. So if you don't agree with the Anglosphere's current fascist hysteria about trans folks, then the thing to do is to not let it get to the point where Newsome is in the ticket, because he'll lose.
I would much rather see MN gov. Tim Walz win the Democratic primary. But if Gavin Newsom does instead: the whole fucking planet is dying from fossil fuel emissions and at least he's not a climate denier, and encouraging a symbolic abstention / third party vote is morally questionable at best.
So, you should probably try to stop Newsome from getting the nomination, since we won't vote for him if he's the nominee
Newsome's handling of PG&E doesn't I soiree a lot of hope in his ability to do what is necessary to minimize the climate chaos. That's something we can probably say about any democrat who might win though. Walz would be better. Pritzker would be better. Both are more electable too.
Great news then! He's also willing to streamline oil drilling and exploration if it means he might get to sit in the Oval Office. Guess the planet dying from fossil fuel emissions doesn't seem so bad if your chair is comfy enough. sjvsun.com/business/ene... calmatters.org/politics/202...
Bummer. Welp, I guess we got our work cut out for us to promote a different dem governor like Walz or Pritzker. If the guy leading the perpetually on-fire and drought-ridden state is so devoid of empathy as to be conflicted on curbing fossil fuel usage then he's lost my vote full stop.