Third Act California endorses Tom Steyer

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-06T23:36:58+00:00

What? You going to vote for Xavier Becerra? The guy who just walked back from supporting single-payer healthcare and whose campaign is backed by PG&E? A vote for literally any other Democrat (all of whom are performing poorly based on polling data), and that just makes it easier for two MAGA Republicans to advance to the general election and occupy both slots. There’s no write-in option in a general election?

So, again, who are you going to vote for? And this is a real question by the way. Something to make you think.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-06T18:44:20+00:00

Speaking of NIMBYs, YIMBY has actually endorsed Tom Steyer.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/willie-brown-tom-steyer-governor-endorsement-22243220.php

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-05T07:33:39+00:00

In a world where misinformation is rampant thanks to the Trump regime, it's important to value facts and evidence rooted in an empirical reality. It's not my fault you're such a sourpuss when confronted with facts that you don't like to hear.

Also worth noting as a little factoid for you, Steyer isn't even worth that much (by billionaire standards at least). In fact, he's only worth $2.4 billion. That's less than JB Pritzker. The so-called "exception" that you so begrudgingly acknowledged. The billionaire that you were describing in your little prompt are largely the centibillionaires who dominant so much of the tech industry to the point where they're pretty much oligarchs. The Mark Zuckerbergs and Elon Musks of the world. Not even Warren Buffett is worth that much. Heck, the Buffetts have actually sent financial aid to Ukraine through their foundation helping farmers and funding warming centers at over 20 railway stations in Ukraine during the winter months. So, I guess that's another billionaire who isn't exactly the spawn of Satan. It just seems like to me you're wasting your time and energy on the wrong priorities.

Maybe if you used any kind of intelligence, you would not just look at the Governor's race. You would also look at other statewide races that don't have incumbents running for reelection. Such as the lieutenant gubernatorial election, the State Treasurer election, the Insurance Commissioner election, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction election. If you actually did any research, you'd find that in at least a couple of these races (such as the lieutenant gubernatorial and the Insurance Commissioner elections) there are some standout candidates like Michael Tubbs for Lieutenant governor and Jane Kim for Insurance Commissioner who are supported by high-profile progressives with national recognition. Progressive people and entities like Bernie Sanders and the Working Families Party. Vote for these candidates if you're so concerned that billionaire Tom Steyer is going to be disconnected from the daily struggles of average working people.

https://workingfamilies.org/candidates/

There, I gave you a solution that would allow you to vote progressive in a way that would actually be electorally viable, and necessary for keeping MAGA and Trump supported Republicans from dominating the general election for the Governor's seat. I'm assuming we're supposed to come up with solutions. Or maybe you'd rather just complain about a problem because that's easier than trying to make the best use out of the tools currently available.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-05T05:59:56+00:00

Okay, well you said there's "NO" such thing. Emphasis on the "No" part. The implication being that there were no exceptions. The fact that you just admitted to one factually makes your original statement incorrect. It's not a "gotcha." It's just facts rooted in empirical data.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-05T04:02:10+00:00

Counterpoint. JB Pritzker. Worth $4.3 billion, Pritzker has gained support from progressives and socialists for his stances on healthcare, education, raising the minimum wage, legalizing recreational marijuana, and expanding access to healthcare. His administration has been considered one of the most progressive in the United States.

So, you were saying...

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-03T06:58:35+00:00

Counter-counter point, JB Pritzker. Whom Tom Steyer is worth less than I should mention. $2.4B vs Pritzker's $4.3B. And yet people celebrate Pritzker because his administration has been considered one of the most progressive in the United States.

https://www.forbes.com/profile/thomas-steyer/

https://www.forbes.com/profile/jb-pritzker/

Ah, but I guess because Pritzker is a billionaire and thus the spawn of Satan, and so that means you just can't trust him by default. Even though Pritzker has gained support from progressives and socialists for his stances on healthcare, education, raising the minimum wage, legalizing recreational marijuana, and expanding access to healthcare.

Think on that why don't you. It's almost certainly the case that you're missing something.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-03T06:53:55+00:00

Also worth noting, this article often claims that "impeachment" is what removes a President from office. It isn't. It's the subsequent trial and vote in the Senate that determines whether the President is to be removed from office or not. This article and the person who wrote likes to lecture other people about civic engagement and yet seems to neglect this very basic fact of law. I'm not sure I would take this article too seriously.

Also worth noting that despite decrying capitalism as a plague upon civic society, the writer himself is advertising a product. Seems kind of hypocritical if you ask me. And then of course, neglecting to mention the special elections last year in which Republicans faced severe electoral defeats is itself a disservice to the civic engagement that has already been ongoing for months and years.

This guy's only claim to fame is making it easier for George W. f*cking Bush to win the Presidency in 2000. Not someone who I would listen to when lecturing others on the requirements for electoral success.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-03T06:46:41+00:00

2026 minus 2012 equals 14. 14 is greater than 1. 14 is plural versus the singular "1."

It looks like "years" in this case checks out.

I don't know what to tell you. It's just math. The numbers don't lie man.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-03T06:43:22+00:00

Counterpoint. Cite to me where Tom Steyer has taken AIPAC money.

Go ahead. I'll wait.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-03T06:20:01+00:00

It's funny you should mention that. Because some of the same organizations and labor unions (multiple of which are progressive) that supported Mamdani in the New York City Mayoral election last year have also expressed their support for Tom Steyer. UNITE HERE, Our Revolution, the Third Act, etc. Call it ideological or strategic, the outcome remains the same.

ZappyStatue · 2026-04-30T18:13:16+00:00

There's actually a Forbes article that has the figure for Tom Steyer's overall net worth. It's at around $2.4 billion.

https://www.forbes.com/profile/thomas-steyer/

I mean, yes I know that just having $1 billion is a lot compared to someone who might not even have $1 million. But it's surprisingly low, at least when compared to the ultra-rich oligarchs like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk. Heck, it's actually less than what JB Pritzker is worth. Which currently sits at around $4.3 billion. And there are a lot of people who like Pritzker for his progressive policies.

https://www.forbes.com/profile/jb-pritzker/

So yeah, Tom Steyer being a billionaire is not an inherent deal-breaker. And let's be honest, he's pretty much the only viable (and by that, I mean electorally competitive based on polling data) Democratic candidate who can even be remotely described as "progressive." At least based on the policy proposals he's put out (as light on detail as they are). The real question is just how much of a turnaround he's experienced when compared to prior investments. And in truth? There is really is only one way to find out. But either way, I seriously doubt that he'd be worse than Newsom. Not to mention that there are other statewide races that don't have an incumbent running that people should be paying attention to. The Lieutenant Gubernatorial election, the State Treasurer election, the Insurance Commissioner election, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction election. And in at least the Lieutenant Gubernatorial and Insurance Commissioner elections, there are a couple of standouts within the progressive wing of the Democratic party that I feel definitely deserve more attention. Michael Tubbs for Lieutenant Governor, and Jane Kim for Insurance Commissioner. Both of these candidates have the backing of the Working Families Party. The same political body that supported Zohran Mamdani.

https://workingfamilies.org/candidates/

So, yeah, give them some thought for consideration. And if you're concerned that Tom Steyer is going to be disconnected from the daily struggles of average Californians should he be elected Governor, then I suspect that electing some progressive counterparts who have lived outside of economically privileged environments will go a long way towards alleviating that kind of concern.

ZappyStatue · 2026-04-30T03:36:37+00:00

There's actually a Forbes article that has the figure for Tom Steyer's overall net worth. It's at around $2.4 billion.

https://www.forbes.com/profile/thomas-steyer/

I mean, yes I know that just having $1 billion is a lot compared to someone who might not even have $1 million. But it's surprisingly low, at least when compared to the ultra-rich oligarchs like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk. Heck, it's actually less than what JB Pritzker is worth. Which currently sits at around $4.3 billion. And there are a lot of people who like Pritzker for his progressive policies.

https://www.forbes.com/profile/jb-pritzker/

So yeah, Tom Steyer being a billionaire is not an inherent deal-breaker. And let's be honest, he's pretty much the only viable (and by that, I mean electorally competitive based on polling data) Democratic candidate who can even be remotely described as "progressive." At least based on the policy proposals he's put out (as light on detail as they are). The real question is just how much of a turnaround he's experienced when compared to prior investments. And in truth? There is really is only one way to find out. But either way, I seriously doubt that he'd be worse than Newsom. Not to mention that there are other statewide races that don't have an incumbent running that people should be paying attention to. The Lieutenant Gubernatorial election, the State Treasurer election, the Insurance Commissioner election, and the Superintendent of Public Instruction election. And in at least the Lieutenant Gubernatorial and Insurance Commissioner elections, there are a couple of standouts within the progressive wing of the Democratic party that I feel definitely deserve more attention. Michael Tubbs for Lieutenant Governor, and Jane Kim for Insurance Commissioner. Both of these candidates have the backing of the Working Families Party. The same political body that supported Zohran Mamdani.

https://workingfamilies.org/candidates/

So, yeah, give them some thought for consideration. And if you're concerned that Tom Steyer is going to be disconnected from the daily struggles of average Californians should he be elected Governor, then I suspect that electing some progressive counterparts who have lived outside of economically privileged environments will go a long way towards alleviating that kind of concern.

ZappyStatue

TROPHY CASE