629
Blue No Matter Who?: Jeffries Slammed for 'Gutless' Refusal to Endorse Zohran Mamdani
(www.commondreams.org)
this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
629 points (97.9% liked)
News
32128 readers
4457 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
When liberals tell me, a trans person, that I need to vote for militant transphobe Gavin Newsom after he's handed the 2028 Democratic primary victory, I'm going to tell them to shove it up their ass.
There's no nice way to say this, so mods delete if necessary. It's an election about numbers and progressives will now have to be recognized after the last loss and the success of Mamdani. That is some progress. But the issues of trans people will not be a deciding factor due to the ratio. I hope you get all the care and rights you deserve, but this doesn't sway the vote against literal dictatorship.
Trans people themselves are few. People who care about trans rights are not.
Care enough to change their profile picture or care enough to do something?
How is Newsom transphobic? Aside from his stance on trans athletes, I've never really heard anything on him to suggest otherwise, quite the opposite honestly.
This isn't about sports and it never was. Turns out when you're willing to give in to one aspect of unscientific bigotry (the trans sports moral panic), you'll be willing to give into others. And yes, opposing trans athletes in sports is fundamentally transphobic. Notice you never see transphobes like Newsom proposing narrowly targeted regulations that only address sports where some large and clear advantage has been proven. You never see transphobes like Newsom proposing that trans athletes in individual sports be given some handicap that would cancel out an advantage they've been scientifically proven to have. Instead it's all bigoted blanket bans that are no different from bans that used to exclude black people from whites-only leagues. They never start from a position of fairness and compassion and try to intervene as little as necessary. It's all about just keeping the filthy trannies out of polite society. These bans prohibit trans women from women's gymnastics, for fuck's sake. So yes, if you support blanket trans sports bans, you are a transphobic bigot. I'm sorry, but you can't just hand waive it away with, "well aside from this example of unambiguous bigotry, I don't see any bigotry here." You might as well be saying, "well aside from this person being a registered member of the KKK, I don't see any evidence that this person is racist."
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/newsoms-bizarre-interview-with-maga
I wonder if you'll continue to hold this stance after Trump starts putting trans people into concentration camps?
It'll be Democrats, or a continuation and escalation of what's happening now. If we have a fair election at all.
There is an easy solution to this. DON'T NOMINATE NEWSOME. Transphobia isn't an inherent stance for the liberal party. We can just nominate a candidate that doesn't proactively shit on civil rights to, for some reason, court conservatives who are never going to vote for us.
Shove it up your ass.
My question was not rhetorical.
It's unscientific that AMAB individuals are stronger than AFAB individuals?
not for kids until they’ve hit puberty… there’s no significant muscle mass or endurance difference between males and females until after puberty hits
so yes, in context of kids sports it’s absolutely unscientific
there’s possibly a conversation to be had about teen sports BUT:
Well, yes, I did mean teen sports and previously exposed to high levels of testosterone athletes.
We know from steroid research athletes who train on steroids and come off them for tests still get a strength bonus in competition since they don't lose all the benefits the second they stop using them (because they continue training to maintain)
It's not an imagined problem. Lia Thomas ranked 554th in 200 freestyle as a male and won 500 freestyle after transition.
She only lost 4-7% from her previous times, while women on average are 10 slower than men. So she went from unremarkable to top tier. The reason is she kept more muscle from male puberty than a woman who didn't go through it would be able to train.
It's not an insurmountable lead since she didn't win every event, but someone who had better times before transition would be able to post even better times after.
well then there’s 2 parts here
adult athletes: nobody is really politically talking about this from what i can tell… the conversation is all about kids sports, because that’s the only thing that politics has any power to control
teen sports: okay, well again as i said in my post, this is a non-issue… why preemptively bar a whole class of people for an issue that just isn’t actually happening?
applies to all cases here: you seem to think transitioning is something people would just do to win a game… i really dont think that’s actually the case (and id argue your lia thomas example kinda proves that: nobody is transitioning to win, otherwise we’d see men ranked 50th, 70th, etc transitioning and winning)
so, what, you’re trans therefore you’re just not allowed to play sports any more?
but that’s not even relevant really… in the context that matters politically - kids sports - it’s absolutely an imagined problem
and if we were more accepting of people being trans without repercussions, maybe people would start transitioning before puberty and then, again, this wouldn’t be a problem… the problem here is transphobia causing people to fight against being themselves because of societal pressure
Easy solution: if you're trans and you transition after puberty, go into the open division. There is actually no such thing as men's sports.
Lia Thomas was a college athlete at the time. Why are you specifically saying kids sports? Every right wing talking point is grown "men" playing in women's sports. You're not addressing the other side's argument. Nobody ever complained about 1st graders
Swing and a miss.
Not an argument
Ah yes, putting his transphobic af stance aside and going "oh yea by removing transphobia, he's not transphobic"
You absolutely should tell those liberals off, all the way to the concentration camp.
Shove it up your ass.
Go fuck yourself, Republican shitbag.
Do morons like you not realize you are the reason for this mess? You're the reason the Democrats are shit? Stop applauding them for doing the bare minimum, join the people who want more from them.
It does not bode well for you when you call your moral and intellectual superior a moron. I am the reason that Democrats are shit? Lmao you should be in prison just for thinking that let alone writing it in a public space. You are a know nothing witless parasite that doesn’t understand the first thing about the world. Come back to talk when you can learn some respect for your superiors.
lol insane neckbeard energy
“You are the reason that Democrats suck”
“Lmao”
“Insane neckbeard energy”
what the fuck did u just say 2 ur superior
At least you have a sense a humor. Most right wingers don’t.
and you have the reading comprehension and reasoning ability of every other "vote blue no matter who" I've ever seen
That’s because you don’t understand voting or politics, son.
Got the answer to my original question :)
You didn’t ask me a question and you have no idea what you’re talking about. :)
Ok so I’m feeling kind of generous today. I will try to explain this to you as best I can. Vote blue no matter who is an Election Day-only strategy. It is not an advocacy for shitty right wing candidates to win in primaries or for decent people to support prior to the election.
As I mentioned a few days ago, the right wing corporate Democrats never adhere to vote blue no matter who, as Joe Lieberman, Byron Brown, and Andrew Cuomo prove. It is not a strategy for them, it’s a strategy for us; those of us who understand that when there is a guaranteed outcome of one of the candidates no matter what, we have a moral obligation to vote against the worst candidate.
The important part is that since this is an Election Day action, it does not have any effect on the Democrats. The (corporate) Democrats don’t learn lessons, that’s the thing that folks like you need to understand. When they win, it’s because they moderated their message; when they lose, they didn’t moderate their message enough.
If you think random people sitting out elections, even in larger numbers, constitutes collective action, you are sorely mistaken. Only something like a drastic highly organized boycott of the Democrats could yield something like that—and by the time you’re at that level of organization, you might as well be voting real socialists into office. I helped elect Kshama Sawant here in Seattle, so it’s not like that’s hopeless, but we’re talking about a different kind of race.
Democrats don’t get more right wing because voters just keep electing them. The alternative is Republicans in most cases. That’s where vote blue no matter who comes in. Once one of them is gonna win no matter what, you vote against the Republican. This does not have any effect on Democrats whatsoever. Real activism is done in the other 99.9999% of the time you’re not in a voter booth.
It’s time to recognize the stakes for decent folks here. Those of us who understand elections, voting, and politics know that the difference between a Democrat and a Republican can mean life or death for people. That trans person is being ridiculous. Gavin Newsom is a loathsome right wing corporate garbage monger, but he is infinitely better for trans rights than literally any Republican. The Republicans are trying to genocide trans people. Standing on principle that you refuse to vote if he happens to win the primary is insane, selfish, and treasonous.
tldr
Edit: ok I'm generous too, while you're not wrong about most of that low voter turnout is absolutely a signal, moreso than hundreds of thousands pinching their noses and voting Democrat again. Why should they ever bother being worth voting for when you and everyone else just wants your vote to be against something?
Over the long term, you created these conditions. The sooner you stop letting them get away with it, the sooner they'll have to start serving the people
So let’s assume that you’re right. What is the proposal exactly? Like, what are you saying is what gets us where we need to go? Because as I said before, I’m only talking about when we get to the voting booth. The rest of the time, we organize a mass movement.
Another thing that is important is who can be pushed by a mass movement. Would you rather have a Trump or a Harris when we’re making our demands? These things are entirely strategic in the moment, but I don’t understand how this somehow makes Democrats any worse.
What will the ass-shoving accomplish?
Not my problem. You advocate taking my rights away, you don't get my vote. What kind of arrogant son-of-a-bitch would think they're entitled the votes of those whose rights they are dismantling? The sheer hubris of that is despicable.
What do you plan to do instead?
I'm focusing my efforts on helping people in my own community, the people folks like Newsom and yourself are leaving for dead. I'm quite involved in political and activist circles. But I will be damned if I vote for someone that wants to take away my rights.
If you don't have any red lines, you're no different than the literal historical Nazis. They also thought they were doing what they did for the greater good. The road to Hell is paved with the lesser of two evils. You have to have some standards, some lines that cannot be crossed. Otherwise there is no end to what evil you will endorse. You'll find yourself working as a concentration camp guard, after somehow convincing yourself you're taking the less evil path. After all, who better to be a concentration camp guard than yourself? You're not hateful yourself, better you than an actual militant racist, right? Why shouldn't you work as a camp guard? It's for the greater good.
I'd be interested to hear what you plan to do when the Democratic blackmail stops working?
It already has. They're still going anyway.
This is your strategy? Vote for us or your life will be hell?
Vote for us, we won't do anything for you, but surely you don't want your life ruined otherwise, right?
Good job.
All I’m going to say is, in the general election, don’t do what many protestors of the war in Gaza did because that did become a deciding factor in giving Trump Michigan.
This is a flawed understanding. Many of the Arab voters in Michigan were not solid Democrats to begin with. Unlike the racist notion that brown skin means Democratic votes, the people inside that skin have a range of views, just like any human. Just pointing at the other side and saying it's worse fails when voters didn't think the other side is worse. The party has to win their votes, and aiding the war machine massacring their relatives is for some reason a poor way to do that.
Anti occupation and genocide people didn't make Harris lose , dems and Harris incompetency and the two party system made trump win
Shove it up your ass.
In fighting is why Trump won and is why the left will never accomplish anything. I hope Mamdani wins and he is the catalyst to reshaping the Democrat party so they actually will put up a real progressive like Bernie and not someone who is anti trans. However, letting the Republicans rat fuck our country another 4 years isn’t something I’m going to support in 2028.
If you were living in 1930s Germany, you would have signed up to be a member of the Nazi party. Don't kid yourself, you personally absolutely would have done it. Maybe you wouldn't have been one of those actually enlisting in the SS. But you absolutely would have been one of those that joined the Nazi party to keep their job. Do you have any idea how many regular Germans did that, just to keep their ordinary civilian jobs? They convinced themselves that it was for the greater good. After all, let's say you're a judge or college professor. If you don't join the Nazi party, then an actual militant Nazi might get your job instead. Wouldn't it be better to just join the Nazi party, keep your job, and just try not to do anything too evil in your role? Joining the Nazi party is the lesser of two evils!
When you have no red lines, there is no limit to how deep into Hell you will fall.
Comparing me to Nazis isn’t helping your argument nor is it a good analogy. At this point, I doubt we will even have free or fair elections again. If it comes to a Civil War 2, then I’ll lay my life on the line to protect people like you from fascism. I am not afraid to fight for a better future.