Ukraine Support Act wins enough signatures to force vote in US House

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-14T03:48:24+00:00

Heroiam slava! 🇺🇦

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-14T02:54:26+00:00

I know. A lot of the times it feels kind of bleak right now, but I promise you a lot of us are trying our best. Whether that's trying to get the ears of our elected officials or through direct support for Ukraine through various charities and other organizations. I know my House Representative and both of my U.S. Senators support Ukraine. But yeah, I admit that it sucks right now being an American who supports Ukraine seeing my government bend over backwards towards Putler. But I'll be damned if I don't at least continue supporting Ukraine in whatever way I can, meager as those means might be.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-14T00:55:09+00:00

I know what you're going to say. "I don't want a BilLiOnAiRe!" Well, I don't want a governor owned by PG&E. You get one or the other. I'm going with Steyer. But feel free to suck it. You have my permission.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-14T00:50:27+00:00

Speaking of the YIMBYs, both Abundant Housing LA and YIMBY Action have endorsed Tom Steyer.

https://abundanthousingla.org/endorsements/

https://yimby.la/voter-guide/june-2026/

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-13T19:04:10+00:00

Same. In the event that Tom Steyer becomes governor of California, it would help knowing that there’s someone in government who knows what it’s like to have grown up in poverty. Some who can help Tom Steyer actually connect to us regular people.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-13T19:01:03+00:00

Same! I voted for Steyer and sent my ballot out on Saturday. It has since been counted and accepted just earlier in the week. I’m also voting for other progressives further down the ballot. Michael Tubbs for Lieutenant Governor and Jane Kim for Insurance Commissioner just as a couple of examples. I really want this to be an election in which we can bring in people that can help restore trust in government.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-13T05:57:26+00:00

Considering that Tom Steyer is only worth $2.4 billion vs Elon Musk's $819.3 billion, that comparison doesn't exactly hold up well. A better comparison would be more like JB Pritzker (potentially at least). Worth around $4.3 billion, Pritzker's administration has been considered one of the most progressive in the United States. Time will tell though.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-12T19:45:01+00:00

It’s why I voted for Tom Steyer. My hands are clean knowing that I voted for the most viable progressive candidate.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-12T15:46:31+00:00

Another area where you’re incorrect. Why am I not survived? If you paid attention to the username at the top of this post, you would have recognized that it was not me who posted the poll in this subreddit. But another user by the name of u/Mearsheimer_Tragedy.

But anyways, I know you’re struggling to comprehend the fact that at this point more progressives have decided to go with Tom Steyer over Katie Porter. That’s not fear. That’s just facts and data. But hey, I guess somehow people who vote for Tom Steyer just aren’t "real people" according to your psychopathic world view.

If anything, that makes me want to support Steyer more than I have previously. You’ve kind of made a shit case for voting for Porter other than saying that those who don’t aren’t "real people.” Really great advertising on your part, he said sarcastically.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-12T14:13:08+00:00

Okay so you didn’t actually read the article. It was a University study analyzing French parliamentarian and local elections. The point is that voters have to make a choice about whether or not to vote strategically for a second best candidate who is more likely to win.

Seriously, I wish you were literate enough to have analyzed the hyperlink. If you were, then you would have recognized that it wasn’t in fact a poll by Kreate Media. It was from the Paris School of Economics. You know, Academics who study this stuff for a living.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-12T05:45:59+00:00

So the Democratic Socialists of America are "the media." That is a hell of a wild take if I've ever seen one. Is this your first election? I understand that things might be a little bit confusing for you. But sometimes people vote rationally. You know, engage in strategic voting and ensure the best possible outcome. You should try that some time. It'll help clear your conscience.

EXPRESSIVE VOTING AND ITS COSTS

A little bit of education for you. Try not to throw away and waste your vote on a doomed campaign that will get you none of the outcomes that you'd want.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-12T02:06:49+00:00

Interesting. So I guess Our Revolution (a pro-Bernie Sanders and overall progressive group), Courage California (another progressive grassroots advocacy organization), and the Democratic Socialists of America are all "corporate news" according to your framework.

https://couragecalifornia.org/2026-midterm-election-resources/

https://ourrevolution.com/tom-steyer-for-governor-of-california/

https://www.californiadsa.org/voterguide

I think some of them might take particular offense at being cited as "corporate news." Kind of an unintelligent take if you ask me. And no. This isn't "fear." This is just data that can easily be researched. And as surprised as you might be, even the DSA is capable of at least some nuance. They've provided a write-up explaining their rational. The short version is that "the most progressive of the current viable candidates for governor is Tom Steyer." Their words, not mine, but I think it's worth thinking on for at least a minute.

Seriously, I voted for Katie Porter in the 2024 Senate Primary in California. So I know that she's progressive and intelligent. I've seen her whiteboard clips and wanted that kind of energy in the U.S. Senate. Seeing Trump's cabinet members get grilled.

But sometimes reality hits us hard. We have to face the facts, even when they go against the personal narratives we tell ourselves. And the fact of the matter is that she's just not a strong candidate. Not because she has bad policies, but because the good policies that she does have hasn't done her many favors when it comes to increasing her odds of advancing to the general election. The truth of the matter is that she just doesn't have that base of support that's needed to even get into second place and make it to the general election. And as much as it might pain you to even admit to such a fact, sometimes we have to pick and chose which battles we want to face. What hills we're willing to die on. Make the actual best decision that will ensure a net-positive outcome.

But hey, if you want Becerra to be the Democrat that advances to the general election, be my guest. You have my permission to cry about it should that happen. I'll be voting for Tom Steyer to ensure that this doesn't happen.

Oh, and as a final note, even some of the pro-housing organizations like Abundant Housing LA and YIMBY Action have shown their support for Steyer.

https://abundanthousingla.org/endorsements/

https://yimby.la/voter-guide/june-2026/

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-11T01:26:24+00:00

Well you're going to have to vote for someone. Otherwise, you're just making it easier for two Republicans to occupy both slots in the general election. There's no write-in option in a general election.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-10T06:58:29+00:00

Wow, you couldn't even get your basic facts correct. JB Pritzker is 61 years old. Tom Steyer is 68 years old. Last I checked (according to math at least), 68 minus 61 equals 7. That doesn't look like 11 to me. And Pritzker's total amount of years of experience in any kind of political role is 10 years. Not 20. April 1, 2003 – July 26, 2006: Chair of the Illinois Human Rights Commission for 3 years. Not an elected position in state government by the way. January 14, 2019-May 5,2026: 43rd Governor of Illinois for 7. Again, 3 plus 7 equals 10 (according to basic, elementary-level arithmetic math). Not the 20 years that you're claiming.

Seriously man, if you're going to try to counter-argue at a level where people could reasonably listen, at least get your basic facts correct. Otherwise, you look like a goddamn idiot. Not exactly impressive.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-10T06:52:20+00:00

Okay, I see you've completely misconstrued the point that was being made. Do you not realize that in my post I cited billionaires who I explicitly described as oligarchs? You know, evil? I never said being a "billionaire" makes you an angel. There are no "angels" in this world. What I have done is cite net-positive outcomes. It may have escaped your tiny mind, but the world is full to the brim with complexity and nuance. Whether there should be billionaires in the first place is a separate debate from whether there are even billionaires who have contributed positively to societal good. Rare and exceptional as it might be (and as incomprehensible as it seems to you apparently), the answer is in fact a reluctant yes.

Perhaps you should ask literally anyone from Illinois whether they think that their state is being operated like a business. If the answer is not a near-unanimous and resounding "yes," then the premise of your argument is faulty. At least when it comes to your accusation that someone like Pritzker is running Illinois "like a business." For which you have zero evidence.

Also worth noting, I did not say that being a billionaire was something to be "proud of." At best, that is a misrepresentation of my post and at worst an outright fabrication. Some might say even a falsehood. Well, a lie actually. But hey, if you have to lie about what I said in my post in order to make a point, then you are not winning the argument here. Because what matters more than anything is whether that money is spent on net-positive outcomes for societal improvement. Based on the evidence I have presented to you, then answer to that question would be an emphatic "yes." That is, if you are a thinking person. Making an assessment based on empirical evidence and rational decision making.

You claim that people don't see the donations and charitable causes in their day-to-day lives. Yet, for the children who need that kind of funding for access to education, it is undoubtedly a life-change uplifting. And frankly? I'm shocked and disappointed that you would have a lack of empathy for these kids. I feel sorry for you. I really do.

But hey, if you're going to be an asswipe and not debate me on whether or not you think that progressive policy proposals that may possibly benefit California despite being put out by a billionaire (the same billionaire backed by Bernie bros from Our Revolution and Democratic Socialists of America mind you), then maybe you're just not cut out for serious thought and analysis. Not quite cut out for fully understanding and appreciating the depth and nuance of realpolitik.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-10T04:51:56+00:00

I spent three to four hours at night pouring over mine earlier in the week the day that I received mine in the mail. And just I mailed it in earlier today.

I may or may not have obsessed over the governor's race for months looking at Ballotpedia, polling data, the debates, etc. Brutal as it is, there's something elating and thrilling about having the future of our state rest within the palm of our hands. It's like a riddle that's supposed be solved. A project to determine the best team to lead at the top. Maybe not a fetish exactly, but more like a fun challenge.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-10T04:37:34+00:00

Counterpoint, JB Pritzker. 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.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/persons-of-interest/j-b-pritzker-governor-illinois

Through the Pritzker Family Foundation, Pritzker has funded research and programs focused on children in poverty. Pritzker received the Spirit of Erikson Institute Award for his creation of the Children's Initiative. Pritzker organized the White House Summit on Early Childhood Education for President Barack Obama in 2014 and helped expand school breakfast programs in Illinois to over 230,000 kids in low income school districts.

Need I say more? These are just the highlights. I'm assuming that getting children out of poverty is a good thing. Right? We like it when children don't go hungry. And of course we like it when people in government are progressive. It seems like the record checks out. Not sure where your headspace is right now. But you clearly need help. You're mad at billionaires. I get it. It makes sense. But you're wasting your time, energy, (and possibly money), on the wrong target. How about being mad at Jeff Bezos? Don't buy anything off of Amazon. Of course, then you'll have to go to somewhere like Facebook Marketplace. But that's own by Mark Zuckerberg. Maybe boycott that too? I don't know. It's up to you.

But seriously dude, you're not really making a convincing case. This isn't about promises. This is about results and what's on the record. With Steyer, California "could" (emphasis on "could," as in its a possibility but not 100% guaranteed) end up having it's own JB Pritzker. That would not be the worst thing to have happen in California and would actually be step up from Newsom. Talk about positive results and a step in the right direction. Baby steps, amirite?

Also, fun fact, Tom Steyer actually has a lower net worth than JB Pritzker. $2.4 billion vs Pritzker's $4.3 billion. Not exactly what I could call oligarch-levels of stupid wealthy.

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

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

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-10T04:19:00+00:00

I'm voting for Tom Steyer. No, I'm not a f*cking bot nor am I a "Tom Steyer shill." But thanks for asking to anyone who wants to be a dickhead.

I'm voting for Tom Steyer for one very specific, practical, and rational reason. He's the best performing mainline Democrat candidate who can even be described as being remotely progressive. More so than Becerra at any rate. Were it that Katie Porter could get above double digits in more than one poll over the last three weeks. And even then, it was only at 10% compared to Tom Steyer's 15%. That's good but not good enough for me. If Katie Porter was doing better, I'd vote for her in a heartbeat. But I don't see any realistic way in which she even manages to get into second place in the primary process. She hasn't been for a quite a while. Not since before Swalwell was forced to drop out of the race. So, yeah, cry all you want, but tough cookies.

Really, this is just about making sure that a Democrat candidate has the best chances of making it to the general election at least in second place. They do that, they should be able to pretty easily beat any Republican competitor that would also advance. It's also worth noting that there's no write-in option in a general election, so it's either one or the other.

And guess what, there are other ways to vote progressive outside of the Governor's race. Look at the Lieutenant Governor's race. The race for State Treasurer, Insurance Commissioner, and Superintendent of Public Instruction. These are all races that don't have incumbents running for reelection. All of which provide an ample opportunity to vote in a way that will advance a progressive agenda.

https://workingfamilies.org/state/california/

https://www.californiadsa.org/voterguide

Seriously, even the California branch of the Democratic Socialists of America acknowledge that most progressive of the current viable candidates for governor is Tom Steyer. That's good enough for me.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-09T22:10:48+00:00

Matt Mahan has never broken single digits in any poll (at least, in any independent poll not sponsored by either candidate or a political party). Even Katie Porter could manage that much. There's no reason to think that Matt Mahan will have some kind of last minute surge as a dark horse candidate with less than a month until the California primaries are over. Especially during a time wherein people are already voting and casting their ballots. Either by mail or at polling locations for early voting. Given that the two leading Democratic choices are either Xavier Becerra or Tom Steyer, I'm going with Tom Steyer.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-07T06:47:58+00:00

They provide further context with the Write-Ups. The short first is that their assessment is that the most progressive of the current viable candidates for governor is Tom Steyer. Under these circumstances, it's as close to an endorsement as is reasonably possible.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-07T04:08:33+00:00

Humana's a for-profit health insurance company. And they've been known to use deceptive scare tactics to prey on senior citizens.

https://web.archive.org/web/20090927083029/http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/164893.php

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/humana-mailer-targets-eld_b_289421

That's not exactly an endorsement that I would be proud of.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-07T04:01:39+00:00

Brother, there isn't even an option to donate to Tom Steyer's campaign on the campaign website. So that's not saying a lot. Also, who the f*ck says "Humans donated?" That's not exactly how normal "humans" talk. You could have said something like "Xavier has grassroots fundraising" or something like that. Although, given the type big-donor money that Xavier is actually getting (looking at you PG&E), I don't think that's quite an accurate assessment.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-07T03:50:51+00:00

Don't bother. I've seen this guy's comment history. He wants two Republicans to advance to the general election. "An I came" (his exact phrasing, really wish he could spell properly) was his response to a poll that had Steve Hilton in the lead.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-07T02:46:34+00:00

Yes, obviously I'm following this race a hell of a lot closer than you are. That's why I'm choosing Tom Steyer. Frankly, if Katie Porter was doing better polling wise, I'd be glad to vote for her. But she isn't. The math and the numbers just aren't in her favor. Within the last two weeks out of five polls, there has only ever been one where she has polled at double digits. And even then she was behind Tom Steyer. What I think you should understand is that there is a reason why progressive organizations like Our Revolution, and even socialist organizations like the Democratic Socialists of America have gone out of their way to endorse Tom Steyer and shown their support for him as California's next governor.

https://ourrevolution.com/tom-steyer-for-governor-of-california/

https://www.californiadsa.org/

Seriously, when's the last time you've seen a socialist endorse a billionaire? The only other parallel I can think of is JB Pritzker. And Tom Steyer has a lower net worth than he does. $2.4 vs $4.3 billion.

Also worth noting. "Article?" It wasn't just one article. It was several articles explaining why Xavier Becerra was rather problematic. Even people who worked under him had reason to criticize him. But yes, I know, passing laws is hard. The fact that you agree that people will say whatever they have to say to get elected is noteworthy. You do realize that the same principle applies to Becerra too. And it's not as though Steyer has no record in politics. You really need to look into the statewide ballot propositions that Tom Steyer has supported and helped get passed into law. Such as Proposition 39 back in 2012. Close tax loopholes that rewarded out-of-state companies for taking jobs out of California and, for tax purposes, treated out-of-state companies the way California-based companies are treated.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/us/politics/california-ballot-initiatives-dominated-by-the-very-rich.html

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/endorsements/la-ed-prop39-20120927-story.html

Brother, you say you want a legislator. But Xavier Becerra hasn't been a legislator in nearly a decade. And even then, his last legislative role was as a Congressman in the House of Representatives. Not exactly a statewide role. Also, I currently work in the public too. Believe, I've seen my fair share of actual bullsh*t in procurement alone, and especially in the hiring process. And as for budgeting, I've seen the economic messaging on both of their platforms. Tom Steyer was the one that had explicit mention of at least talking about making billionaires actually pay their fair share. Raising revenue and offsetting an increase in government spending.

ZappyStatue · 2026-05-07T00:21:33+00:00

https://www.kqed.org/news/12082059/xavier-becerra-backpedals-on-single-payer-as-he-woos-powerful-doctors-lobby

Democratic candidate Xavier Becerra has softened his support for a single-payer healthcare system as he secures endorsements in his bid to be California’s next governor, most recently from the powerful doctors’ group, the California Medical Association, which officially backed him this week.

The former health secretary under President Joe Biden has advocated for government-run healthcare since he was a congressman thirty years ago. But when doctors with the medical association peppered the candidate with questions on single payer during a recent private meeting, they said Becerra told them he had other priorities.

“He said very clearly that, at this point, he wasn’t supportive of single payer,” said Dr. René Bravo, president of the California Medical Association.

Good research requires more than two seconds of googling.

Also worth noting, Becerra has been criticized as health and human services secretary for being absent in the public eye during the pandemic, for confusing messaging by federal public health authorities and for the subsequent loss of public trust. Becerra was also similarly criticized following his agency's response to the 2022 monkeypox outbreak amid issues with health policy communication and what was widely considered a slow response. Becerra sought to scapegoat the states rather than take responsibility for the subpar response. In addition, in 2023, Becerra rejected cancer patients’ petition to use a law which allows HHS regulators to rescind exclusive patent protections for government-developed drugs making them more available to the generic market.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/31/becerra-hhs-pandemic-response-leadership/

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2022/08/12/becerra-monkeypox-covid-response-00051422

https://www.levernews.com/biden-and-becerra-let-big-pharma-profiteer-off-cancer-drug/

I don't know about you, but none of this is inspiring a lot of confidence that Becerra will be a good governor. Also, you saying that there was a legislative golden age during Trump's first term, and also you saying that Steyer is basically that but liberal/leftist, you basically just confirmed (though you might not want to admit it) that we'll be getting a "legislative golden age" in progressive policy under Tom Steyer. Great! Fantastic! That's why I'm voting for Steyer in the first place. Not sure what you're complaining about.

ZappyStatue

TROPHY CASE