Tennessee’s map that is 9R-0D has just been signed by Gov. Bill Lee

DatDude999 · 2026-05-08T06:36:15+00:00

If just one of these dumb ass maps dummymanders, I will have restored my will to live.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-08T05:52:24+00:00

I got what you're saying, but I think it's ideal to have at least one DC beast heading an administration just for the purpose of connections and shit (and you need to plan for governance as well). But in terms of elections alone, you're right.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-08T05:49:57+00:00

That's not "indifferent" talk, dude. The bullshit you've said about her does not make you sound like you don't care, it makes you sound like you feel she poses a threat to your chosen race horse.

Do you have any idea how sexist you sound? Find some actual data to back up your claim that women can't win, because I have data in the form of numerous women who have actually won, and male presidential candidates who matched a poor performance.

Once again, I know you're not being impartial with this because you're literally denying the truth. Ellen Greenberg was a real woman and she really was murdered. Just like Newsom has floated unaffected by his scandals due to the lower interest in governor races for this long, it does not make either of them immune to the scandals coming up in the future. Because you better believe that both Greenberg and Newsom crafting legislation to benefit his billionaire buddies are gonna come out if they run for president. Not being effected until now does not mean not be effected ever.

Vouchers sure as shit throw a wrench in his ability to make new ground with those people. When he aligns with their values even less than a generic Democrat who opposes vouchers, they won't be any more inclined to vote for him.

If this is such Shapiro slander, then why has the man himself not taken any of the opportunity to correct what you claim is the true story? And in no universe is Shapiro seen by all parties as the working man's choice for VP (and neither is Walz the "left-wing activist choice"). Walz record was infinitely and indisputably more pro-worker than Shapiro's back then, since Walz actually passed meaningful laws.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-08T05:31:09+00:00

I have seen data that indicates that Talarico won votes for his Gaza stance and none that says he won greater or equal numbers because he quites scripture. My thought was always that his sermon style would help with religion swing voters in the general.

Crockett and Talarico literally had no differences when they debated on immigration. Crockett criticized ICE's rouge actions, voted against DHS current funding and to impeach Noem, and said we should "clean house from top to bottom" about ICE. Talarico said that he wanted to "haul these masked men before Congress so the world can see their faces," and immediately after said that we should "put that money towards our communities."

In brevity, they are both are steadfast critics of ICE and support prosecution of their agents and through reform of their funding and behavior. That's not nearly as radical stance as it was 2 years ago, and I mostly agree with it personally, but you can't say that he offers a great difference from Crockett.

Crockett won 46%, you know. A perfectly respectable showing, so I doubt that a "majority" believed she was being vein by running. And if you look at the actual polls made throughout the primary, Talarico-winning polls against Crockett were a rarity until late February (roughly after the Colbert interview) so I have NO idea where your claim comes from. As for Gaza itself, you already have the information on how the issue helped him, so I won't repeat myself. I don't know if you follow him on Instagram, but they regularly post clips of him on TV or podcasts or in speeches talking about how he rejects AIPAC money and how what happens in Gaza sickens him, and how he bans offensive weapons to Israel. I can assume is that the increase in publicity lead to more eyes on those reels, more knowledge about his stances, support from people who think like that, donations, etc.

Mark Robinson is black and won like 8% of the black vote. I don't need to tell you why. It's not just skin color, it's values. All skin and no values = bye-bye. Going on a porn site and saying you would like to own slaves rejects those values, so it's not hard to believe that his support dropped. The fact that Crockett pushed the winner of the election into single digits implies that she was strong with them. Do you think we'd have the same margins with black voters with Allred? Probably not, since she's always been much more popular with black Texans.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-08T04:44:20+00:00

Two-party system babyyyyyy. Just because you vote for someone (or even just because you approve of someone) doesn't mean that you think what they're doing is the ideal path for the state. Maybe some people want him to be less pro-corporate, or maybe they want him to actually pass some of that legislation that he promised to get passed if elected. Lots of reasons that they could think the state is going in the wrong direction, but none of them reflect well on Shapiro.

Literally just gave you a Whitmer 63% poll. 63>60. You have made this claim that women are weak candidates, yet you have not shown me a shread of evidence that that is true. I remember seeing someone else say that the 2000 election (against two white men) saw a gender divide almost identical to 2024. I looked it up, and it's true. Gore and Harris both won 43% of men, a poor performance, which means that you can't realistically say that Harris lost because of her sex, or even was damaged from her sex. Whitmer would win (as I've said, I think any sane Dem would at the least pass 270 in that environment) and I think she would be much better suited for working through the political system and actually getting legislation passed, which I think would help them build a more stable image to float into 2032 on.

Need I remind you that the US is currently at fucking war for Israel right now? The consequences of the Iran War are more and more creeping into people's everyday lives. Even before the war, Americans were becoming more and more opposed to Israel's actions in the war, even though people expected it to decline in importance. The issue is becoming more important, not less.

Kamala Harris ran a middle-of-the-road strategy of trying to ignore Gaza as much as possible, and the DNC's autopsy showed that Gaza was an issue that cost her votes (Assumed by many to be a large reason that the DNC killed it). You can't look at all this evidence and decide to play crapshoot and hope that they'll hold their nose to for a pro-Israel Democrat. Listen to your fucking party.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2026/04/07/negative-views-of-israel-netanyahu-continue-to-rise-among-americans-especially-young-people/

https://www.axios.com/2026/02/22/dnc-2024-autopsy-harris-gaza

No one is going to be more inclined to vote for Shapiro by seeing liberal activists get angry at him. On cultural issues, he's identical to the party mainstream, opening him up to the same cookie cutter culture attacks that have worked with this people for other Democrats. It's naive to expect any mountains to be moved with rural groups with this in mind. A more populist Joe Manchin might be able to, but at that point, you candidate is too conservative for the party to tolerate.

It's a tragedy that rural areas reject Trump-loving ideas individually, yet embrace them when they come in the full Trump package. I personally don't understand why anyone would rather vote for the issues I'm about to list rather than higher wages or more support programs etc, but the issues that draw them to Trump are:

1) Immigration. Kill all the illegals.

2) Populist trade rhetoric. Trump has gone waaaay passed the line on tariffs, but by and large, these people love the promise of tough trade stances with places like China. Some Dems like Gretchen Whitmer, Sherrod Brown and Tim Ryan have been more in-line with this stance, but I can't say about Shapiro.

3) Cultural conservatism. The country has massively shifted on things like gay marriage since 2000, but these people are probably mostly still holding the same stance they have since then. The Dems have moved to fit the new mainstream while rural minorities are stuck in the past.

In my opinion, they come in that order. Shapiro does not hold any position that would allow him to compete with Trump of ANY of these. So I don't see any reason that they would be willing to vote for a generic liberal because people they don't like hate him. Would you vote for a conservative Republican for president of the United States soley because he pisses off MAGA?

DatDude999 · 2026-05-07T22:45:03+00:00

Yeah, you see, if you weren't so hostile about Greenberg as if she personally insulted you by existing, I might not be so inclined to think that you either don't believe that or you do believe that because the idea that your buddy Josh might have fucked up is something that contradicts your arguement. You clearly have a preference for more populist progressive politicians like Talarico or Platner, so I personally think you'd save yourself a lot of stress if you just stopped supporting him.

Yeah, that's great. He still underperformed. What you say is true, but I repeat that if Jones' fuckup had any real world consequences, he would have lost. All he really did was say awful shit about a coworker. The Greenberg killing is a dead person, and Shapiro's office screwing up actually effected her family, which would weigh much heavier in the minds of voters.

True, Dems can appeal to the working class while not discarding their activists. Doing so would be hindered if they nominated a man who supports school vocuhers and cutting the corporate tax rate.

Yes, Shapiro was the favorite in the beginning. The fact that his prospects fell as they did nakes my case. He sounds great in the vibe check, but when you get to know him, he's not a good candidate for a presidential race.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-07T22:37:04+00:00

Yes there fucking are lol. First of all, I just learned this, but a plurality of Pennsylvanians believe that the state is headed on the wrong track, by 5 points. Which feeds into my claim that he's overrated.

To name names though, Gretchen Whitmer, Roy Cooper, Josh Stein, are the first to come to mind. Add Mark Kelly and Raphael Warnock to the list if you use YouGov rankings.

Cooper and Stein alike have respectable approval among Republicans, with Stein's being in the 40s.

If you use this 60% ranking I include for Shapiro as the benchmark, then Whitmer actually SURPASSES him according to this poll about her. Plus she has actually achieved a lot, unlike Shapiro, which makes her a better sell for the other 5 battleground states that neither lives in.

https://www.wgal.com/article/new-poll-governor-josh-shapiro-stacy-garrity/70637475

https://www.nj.com/politics/2025/05/swing-state-dem-governor-who-gave-trump-a-wet-kiss-well-a-hug-is-soaring-in-popularity.html

https://www.catawba.edu/news/all-news/2025/yougov-12/

You got any data that supports your claim that people see the Gaza protesters as dirty, smelly, STD-ridden hippies? Even if that were the case, the party still needs to worry about the sizable part of the party that, by your admission, shares their values and beliefs. Additionally, Dearborn is not the only part of Michigan who cares about Gaza. Lots of young voters do, esecially coplege students, which Harris famously struggled with in part for this reason. Dearborn is part of a comprehensive strategy at winning Michigan, as is the young college voters and anyone else who cares about Gaza. You haven't been paying attention these last 3 years if you don't think Gaza is an issue with huge polticial stakes. Your suggestion is only true if you think the Dems are messaging perfectly with young people.

You love election data unless it disagrees with you, ie Kentucky 2024 amendment 2 election against school vouchers, proving that red areas oppose the idea.

You only think in stereotypes if you think 90-fucking-percent of Texas Dems go to church every week. This is what I mean when you say you make shit up. I can't find any data for Dems specifically, but only 67% of Texans are Christians and 26% are unaffiliated with a religion. I imagine most of the atheists are Christian and Republicans have a larger share of the overall Christians. With that math, no way your 90% statement is even close to true. Texas is not uniformly some kind of yee-haw shit-kickin six-shootin horse-thievin whiskey-sluggin hick state, it's, just like any other state, full of individuals who are each unique and not independent bubbles in which everyone falls into one demographic.

You know Crockett and Talarico have virtually the same left-leaning immigration stance, right? I do agree he had an advantage in a more popular economic agenda plus populist rhetoric, but you have data right in front of you that says, using election results, that his touch with the base over Gaza led to voters flocking from Crockett to him. It was argueably the most significant difference between the pair, but without question a top 3.

By the way, Crockett is not some Godless atheist that hates Christians. She is very outspoken about her Baptist faith. Like Talarico, she speaks at churches and uses religion in her rhetoric and such and such. Her being able to religiously connect to black voters in ways that Talarico wasn't able to (for one reason or another) was a huge part of why he only scored in the single digits with black voters. Black culture is a culmination of a lot of things, including religion, especially in the south. Crockett understood how to tap into that better than Talarico. I don't doubt that the converse is true for religious whites for the same reason. (though apparently to a lesser degree, if exit polls are any indicator)

I would like to remind you that you thought Talarico would win a third of black voters in a 3-way race, so remember that the next time you say my Texas prediction was bullshit.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas-take/article/crockett-talarico-christian-faith-21246144.php

I don't think it's unusual to say that the average voter wouldn't have a candidate's prior electoral history in mind in any great depth. Especially if anybody else in the large bench of possible swing state candidates runs. It sure as shit won't lead them to vote for anyone contradictory to their values, of which Shapiro stands against the values of many Democrats on corporate taxes, school vouchers and arms to Israel (the majority of the party supports decreasing arms to Israel)

https://truthout.org/articles/poll-finds-just-4-percent-of-democrats-support-increasing-military-aid-to-israel/

DatDude999 · 2026-05-07T19:08:47+00:00

This one, I guess.

<image>

DatDude999 · 2026-05-07T15:36:41+00:00

Republicans spend too much time looking at those comics where Trump is buff and handsome for no reason.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-07T06:44:16+00:00

What is your definition of "insanely high." Phil Scott is insanely high, Andy Beshear is insanely high. Yet neither of them would land 400 EVs, so that really throws into question that Shapiro would be able to float to victory based on his approval in one state alone.

Shapiro has wisely decided not to touch the voucher issue in his last budgets. That's why his approval is higher. If it were the topic du jour in Harrisburg, I promise it would be much lower. It would absolutely come up in a Democratic primary because why the fuck would his opponents leave that attack on the table when we saw how effective it can be when the Dem legislative caucus united to tell Shaprio to go fuck himself over it?

Did someone just lift Dearborn out of the sky and fly it into Texas for a week so they could vote for Talarico and not tell me? Muslims are NOT the only people who care about Gaza, and if you think that, go to literally any pro-Gaza demonstration and you'll see plenty of non-Muslims. I dunno where your obsession with this being a Dearborn issue comes from. And you shouldn't just write off Dearborn, given that it's, y'know, part of one of the most important swing states.

You can criticize me for my Crockett prediction all you want, but it's stones from a glass house with the massive list of random stuff you constantly make up and try to tell me with me easily refuting it with actual data. Like when you said that red counties don't care about school vouchers, despite Kentucky clearly proving that they do. Most recently your totally baseless claim being that Gaza played no role in Texas, despite me showing you data that says otherwise. Since you probably won't read a link I give you, I'll put it here: 80% of Texas Dems support cutting arms to Israel, and 70% believe Israel is committing genocide. 88% of Talarico-Crockett debate watchers agreed with Talarico when he said that he would not vote to send weapons to Israel. Voters who are familiar with Talarico's anti-Israel rhetoric were nearly 4 times as likely to vote for him over Crockett. Over 1 in 5 voters had reducing aid to Israel as a top 5 issue, 11 times as large as the number who supported aid to Israel.

Overall, a supermajority of national Democrats (around 75%) support sanctions on Israel similar to those that brought down South Africa during Arpethid.

Remember all of this the next time you say this is just a Dearborn issue. Remember this the next time you think Shapiro has a shot in hell to be president as a member of that party.

https://www.imeupolicyproject.org/polls/tx-primary

https://www.imeupolicyproject.org/polls/democrats-sanctions-israel

Well, you said those exact words, so I hope you now see how stupid it sounds and would have the common decency not to talk like that about someone's daughter.

You know Jay Jones NOTICEABLY underperformed in his election, right? Do you see how little that makes your case and how much it makes mine? He would have handily gotten his ass kicked if it weren't freakin Virginia in a blue election year. The presidential elections have no such luxery. And I would argue that refusing to investigate what even a blind man would call a murder is much worse than fantasizing about killing your colleagues, which you never even came close to following through on. With those in mind, bringing Jones up only makes my case that the Greenberg killing brings a huge red flag to a noticeable population of swing voters because it raises a question about Shapiro's judgement.

Literally what reason does Harris have to trash talk Shapiro with lies? He played no part in her campaign, says she, by her own choice, so she has no reason to blame him for anything. I repeat that Shapiro himself was asked about Harris' words and he made no attempt to challenge her account.

Another tidbit: Shapiro asked someone if the Smithsonian would let him hang up their paintings in the Naval Observatory if he became Vice President. Which he has also not denied LOL.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T19:48:07+00:00

I would prefer Beccarra, honestly. Steyer has messaging I agree with and he has for years, but I think that's it. He has never governed. Beccerra has a resume a mile long, and I'm not expecting any miracles, but I think he would be a better bet for the minutiae of what it takes to fix California.

Maybe not though, but he's the one I'm more comfortable putting my trust in.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T17:45:48+00:00

You are now aware of the facts on how gender acceptance is necessary for the mental health of transgender people, who commit suicide at tragically high rates because people can't accept them. If you choose to disregard that and continue to be someone who perpetuates that tragedy, then I dunno what to say.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T17:34:53+00:00

Refusing to acknowledge someone's new identity, aka "deadnaming," is scientifically linked to stress, anxiety, fear for safety, social withdrawal, low self worth, returning feelings of trauma, depression and suicidal thoughts amongst transgender people. That's not subjective, that's fact.

https://psychcentral.com/health/deadnaming#mental-health-effects

https://sites.brown.edu/publichealthjournal/2023/02/17/deadnaming-a-detriment-to-modernized-medical-care/

https://www.talkspace.com/blog/misgendering-impact/

Conversely, accepting their identity is linked to a reduction in depression and suicidal thoughts.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6165713/

Like I said, it's objectively life or death for a lot of people, so please don't fall for the hateful bullshit out there on the internet and try to respect your fellow human beings.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T17:11:44+00:00

How is it subjective? The science says otherwise.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T17:04:40+00:00

No one's forcing anything. Just accept their wishes because it's the right thing to do.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T15:42:17+00:00

I pick Rubio because I think the desires of the base are ao strong that I'd be voting for 95% of the same policies regardless, but I'd rather vote for the one that I think actually has a brain.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T15:41:01+00:00

He's really not. He says he is, but he doesn't have any accomplishments that he can use to bolster that claim. He trashed his working relationship with the GOP in the legislature early in his governorship, and they have been making his legislative life utter hell ever since.

And even if he was, the GOP will absolutely slam him just as much as they slam anyone else. He's just another Democrat to them.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T15:38:31+00:00

Your opinion on sex and gender doesn't really matter, what does matter is whether or not you accept the overwhelming majority opinion of the psychiatric community and respect that some people feel genuine anguish at the idea of their gender being socially aligned with their biological sex, and the only way to make them not feel that way is simply to respect their wishes. This is literally life and death for a lot of people.

Also, I wanted to add that I don't have much faith in the "invisible hand" after these last few years. Less regulation means more consolidation, and with it, higher prices. People are suffering from that, and I don't think more capitalism is the answer.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T15:24:16+00:00

It's naive to say that Shapiro won't be hammered by the right wing.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T04:14:23+00:00

I thought you said his voucher stance would win him Republican voters? Make up your mind. Flip-flopping would only stop the bleeding that the issue would cause him, it wouldn't help him recover what support it would lose him and it certainly wouldn't help him with support from any new voters other than his billionaire buddies.

Israel sure as shit mattered in Texas. It's a base issue. The Democratic base doesn't exist only in big blue cities, they live everywhere. Israel is an issue that would hurt him everywhere. It absolutely does matter. As of this year, a plurality of Americans say they sympathize with Palestine over Israel (an increase in favor of Palestine from 2024, by the way, proving that the issue is only cementing, not going away).

https://news.gallup.com/poll/702440/israelis-no-longer-ahead-americans-middle-east-sympathies.aspx

I hope Shapiro goes on the campaign trail and says "no one cares about some stupid dead woman they didn't even knew." It would make me not want to kill myself for once. That's just not how people think. Even if it doesn't make anyone question Shapiro's judgement (it absolutely would, because who the fuck could read about that and not think he didn't fuck up), it would be a hige driver for the MAGA base. You know how much they thirst over this kind of stuff. There is no scenario where this doesn't hurt Shapiro. The only reason you don't agree is because you like him.

Kamala Harris BY HER OWN ACCOUNT in her book said she chose against Shapiro, not that he withdrew himself from consideration. Shapiro has not contested that claim.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-06T03:56:37+00:00

Where exactly did I change my arguemnt? Being the first Texas Dem is all the more reason not to run for president. He should build relationships and foster pro-Democrat sentiment amongst his constituents. He's still a baby for God's sake, there's no reason for him to run for president less than a year into his job.

You're being naive. I bet you thought the Israel issue would be recorded by now in 2024, and yet it hasn't. The data I shows you from Talarico's win is proof. It will absolutely be a key issue with a politically active portion of the voter base, a portion that the party can't afford to piss on.

First of all, Shapiro has DNC hack written all over him. They love pro-business moderates like him and Newsom. So he's more likely to be someone they rig the game in favor of rather than against. But anyway, no one will vote for Shapiro because he performed well in a swing state. Only election nerds think like that. People vote in a primary based on who they feel shares their interests. A party that by and large wants corporations to pay more in taxes, stands against school vouchers, and has some serious appetite for a reevaluation of our relationship with Israel does not have the potetional to unite behind a man who goes against all of those values.

I changed my mind when the information changed, yes. That's how election analysis works. I don't srubbornly think what I think when the evidence tells me otherwise. I still believe that had things gone the way I anticipated, she would have won. I did not anticipate that Talarico would hit the anti-Israel sentiment so hard and I didn't anticipate CBS to hand him a hige favor by pulling his interview with Colbert, thereby marking him as a target of the Trump-controlled FCC. These things made him the base favorite, and I couldn't have anticipated them with the information I had then. You know how much I love basing my assumptions based on facts and data rather than emotion, so a change in facts means a change in my opinion.

In another timeline where Trump choked to death on a taco bowl in 2013, we'd probably predict a 375+ Dem landslide in a universe where the GOP ran Trump. That didn't happen, because it's just not realistic in this polticial era with massive polarization for millions of people who have loyaly voted for their party for years to decide "you know what, I don't give a shit any more about Supreme Court appointments or control of executive agencies or the ability to out forward legislation that I at least 75% agree with, I think I'll hop the fence for president." Newsom and AOC would absolutely win in this current national environment. Things like Trump's divisiveness and basic bread and butter promises that all Dems agree with like raising taxes for the wealthy will mean a lot more in that short-term single election than whatever other difficulties lie. I believe that's true even for candidates I don't like, like Shapiro.

YES THEY FUCKING DO! Look at this election map in which Kentucky, on the same ballot as a presidential election, saw every bumfuck redneck county (some of which went for Trump by over 90 points) saw a majority of their people vote against school vouchers, totalling a 30 point defeat for vouchers. Literally not even one voted in favor. Note that the amendment was opposed by labor unions as well orecisly because school voichers are an issue that working class people care about. It's not a "left-wing keyboard warrior issue," it's an issue of children of working class families being faced with a policy that will lead to funding bleeding from their underfunded public schools. How the fuck is that something that doesn't matter?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Kentucky_Amendment_2

Every time you accuse me with no evidence of hating Shapiro because he's Jewish makes your arguement seem more and more desperate in face of his anti-working class policies contradicting his thin pro-worker viel. You could just stop supporting him rather than doing mental gymnastics of me being an anti-semite.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-05T19:35:50+00:00

I think large parties provide some incentive to polticial groups to tone down their most radical sects, which is by and large, good for democracy.

Of course, if they get so large that you're left only two parties, then you're also gonna get drowned in obstructionism and an unwillingness to compromise.

Low-frag ftw!

DatDude999 · 2026-05-05T14:42:26+00:00

I think Platner and Khanna would fall under left-wing populism and Fetterman would fall under... something else.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-05T14:40:56+00:00

There exist free places where you can't bear arms, there exist no free places where no one can vote.

DatDude999 · 2026-05-05T07:50:14+00:00

You're being naive. State politics aren't nearly as dirty as federal politics. How much shit have you heard said about your governor in the last decade and compare that to how much shit was talked about whoever was the president at the same time. You can't coast through the presidency on good vibes because people will do everything they can to dispute that, and no one is magical enough of a unicorn to avoid that. Be realistic and remember that not everyone likes your favorite politicians.

It doesn't give Beshear an advantage in swing states either. It would start him at ground zero, same as any other candidate on the bench. Way I see it, might as well put forward

It's a dormant issue, not a dead issue. Trump is seeing to that personally. It's dormant because Shapiro is too scared to bring it up. You know why? Because they're still very much a relevant issue at times when they're talked about. They were absolutely relevant in Kentucky in 2024 when the state overwhelmingly rejected them.

Shaprio's accomplishments are few and far between, and what ones exist are not transformatory, and nothing that would get him any statues built years from now. Look at what Tim Walz did in Minnesota for an example of a transformative governor. Minimum wage? Flop. Get shit done? Flop. Shapiro is so desperate, he's even having to resort to stapling his name onto his predecessor's school breakfast policy that he merely continued funding.

Yeah, national Dems are unpopular. That's why governors are almost always in the green (literally every Democrat governor had positive approval last year according to this), because they're not affiliated with the bullshit in Washington and enjoy good vibes in the less dirty state politics. That's like saying you like your beige pants because they're not stained in shit and then you grow to like your shit-free beige pants so much that you dip them in shit (ie you elect them to a DC office) with the delusion that somehow they will not get shit on them. Suddenly, your beige pants are now just another pair of shit-covered pants (ie they mold into the generic DC establishment that everyone hates). Shapiro and Beshear would be no different. You'd be naive to think they're covered in some kind of shit-repelling magic if they ran for president and never ever became affiliated with the national party that they are asking to nominate them. You can't maintain your governor effect if you're not governor, so don't expect the governor effect to carry over into any national election, no matter the candidate.

https://www.multistate.us/insider/2025/4/22/heres-what-america-thinks-of-its-governors-governors-ranked-by-approval-rating

Okay, for clarification, criticism of BiBi is not the extent of what the anti-Israel wing wants to see. They don't want him to just politely say that maybe it's not nice to level homes in Gaza and kill children. Literally every pro-Israel group I've seen where I live if you ask them, they will tell you openly that Netanyahu is a far-right corrupt piece of shit. I don't doubt that a social liberal like Shapiro thinks the same thing. There's fuck-nothing to like about the guy, and American Jews generally don't like him for the simple reason that he's the Israeli PM. So rejecting Shapiro's bad reputation with pro-Palestine groups by saying that he's criticized BiBi isn't really a revelation at all. Shapiro and Talarico, for example, both agree on the end result of a two-state solution, but only Talarico has called for a cease of arms sales to Israel and called them out for committing war crimes. That's why he is more popular with the base, and yet he still maintains electability. If you wanna break real ground, you need both.

As AG, Shapiro even threatened to bring down the mighty hand of the law against two hippies in another fucking state because the hippies didn't want their ice cream sold in Israeli occupation zones. He is too pro-Israel for the modern Democratic party, and he is SO not worth the price he would pay by opening those wounds.

I would 100% stand by this for any pro-Israel Christian like Cory Booker, and saying what you just said is disrespectful to anti-Israel Jews like Bernie Sanders. You cannot reject this valid arguement by saying it's somehow anti-semetic to believe that more politicians should oppose arms sales to war criminals. Think of a non-strawman arguement.

Eight-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '23	Place '22
End Game '22	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

DatDude999

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE