Rainbow Cake
@bakingsort.bsky.social
The core problem with the "voters are never wrong" statement is that it is a contradiction
I am as just as much a voter as any Trump voter or non voter
Either I was right to vote for Harris and everyone else should have too, or I was wrong and others were right but then voters in fact can be wrong
I am as just as much a voter as any Trump voter or non voter
Either I was right to vote for Harris and everyone else should have too, or I was wrong and others were right but then voters in fact can be wrong
The inversion of electorial responsibilities by American libeerals is extremely bizarre to me. It's a mentality that Democrats cannot fail voters, the voters fail Democrats. If "your guy" didn't win it has nothing to do with the guy and everything to do with a disobedient electorate.
February 13, 2026 at 11:06 PM
The core problem with the "voters are never wrong" statement is that it is a contradiction
I am as just as much a voter as any Trump voter or non voter
Either I was right to vote for Harris and everyone else should have too, or I was wrong and others were right but then voters in fact can be wrong
I am as just as much a voter as any Trump voter or non voter
Either I was right to vote for Harris and everyone else should have too, or I was wrong and others were right but then voters in fact can be wrong
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
Imagine making that argument about a jury trial. Yes, both sides are expected to make their best case, but it would be crazy to suggest a juror has no moral responsibility to pay attention, to place his or her vote according to the merits and not, like, the color of the defendants skin, etc.
this isn't a binary choice; it is a candidate's responsibility to get votes, and it is the citizen's responsibility to vote for the candidate who will produce the best outcomes (or avoid the worst). you can argue all day about harris' campaign but citizens chose trump, an objectively terrible choice
The inversion of electorial responsibilities by American libeerals is extremely bizarre to me. It's a mentality that Democrats cannot fail voters, the voters fail Democrats. If "your guy" didn't win it has nothing to do with the guy and everything to do with a disobedient electorate.
February 13, 2026 at 9:37 PM
Imagine making that argument about a jury trial. Yes, both sides are expected to make their best case, but it would be crazy to suggest a juror has no moral responsibility to pay attention, to place his or her vote according to the merits and not, like, the color of the defendants skin, etc.
It's the job of the candidate to get votes, but by any remotely reasonable metric Harris did that conclusively. She had good policies and would have prevented massive harm
What did Trump do to get votes?
Not directed at this person just the formers idea Harris didn't because she lost 👍
What did Trump do to get votes?
Not directed at this person just the formers idea Harris didn't because she lost 👍
this isn't a binary choice; it is a candidate's responsibility to get votes, and it is the citizen's responsibility to vote for the candidate who will produce the best outcomes (or avoid the worst). you can argue all day about harris' campaign but citizens chose trump, an objectively terrible choice
The inversion of electorial responsibilities by American libeerals is extremely bizarre to me. It's a mentality that Democrats cannot fail voters, the voters fail Democrats. If "your guy" didn't win it has nothing to do with the guy and everything to do with a disobedient electorate.
February 13, 2026 at 10:49 PM
It's the job of the candidate to get votes, but by any remotely reasonable metric Harris did that conclusively. She had good policies and would have prevented massive harm
What did Trump do to get votes?
Not directed at this person just the formers idea Harris didn't because she lost 👍
What did Trump do to get votes?
Not directed at this person just the formers idea Harris didn't because she lost 👍
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
if you think she failed and you think she bears that responsibility, fine, i won't argue with you — but trump was a known quantity and nothing about his first 14 months has been especially surprising. shocking, enraging, destructive depressing, sure, but all of that was anticipated and warned about
February 13, 2026 at 8:20 PM
if you think she failed and you think she bears that responsibility, fine, i won't argue with you — but trump was a known quantity and nothing about his first 14 months has been especially surprising. shocking, enraging, destructive depressing, sure, but all of that was anticipated and warned about
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
*And* Kamala Harris, whose job it is to persuade voters, regularly warned all of those voters that it was gonna happen
and they didn't believe her
soooooo
and they didn't believe her
soooooo
February 13, 2026 at 8:25 PM
*And* Kamala Harris, whose job it is to persuade voters, regularly warned all of those voters that it was gonna happen
and they didn't believe her
soooooo
and they didn't believe her
soooooo
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
The biggest political divide on here is not between left and liberal but between "politics is real and involves real outcomes for real people" and "no it doesn't fuck you"
February 13, 2026 at 6:28 PM
The biggest political divide on here is not between left and liberal but between "politics is real and involves real outcomes for real people" and "no it doesn't fuck you"
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
Sometimes I’m convinced people want Dems to actually be anti trans so they can point and say they were right versus substantive laws/policies
February 13, 2026 at 5:18 AM
Sometimes I’m convinced people want Dems to actually be anti trans so they can point and say they were right versus substantive laws/policies
I do agree Newsom is more "politiciany" than a lot of other Democrats but I don't agree he cares about no one but himself. That is still just playing into a narrative that it will take massive effort to get him to agree with standard Democratic stances like being pro choice, which depresses turnout
This is the crux of this ongoing & silly disagreement: Gavin Newsom believes in nothing cares about no one but himself, & would destroy us all if it serves his purposes. He's also a member of a party that would under every feasible circumstance ensure it does not serve his purposes.
"had the state stand down"
California is actively suing a healthcare provider who stopped providing transition care right now as we speak
he also signed 47 other trans rights bills
nobody is saying that he's perfect but you are simply not living in the real world
California is actively suing a healthcare provider who stopped providing transition care right now as we speak
he also signed 47 other trans rights bills
nobody is saying that he's perfect but you are simply not living in the real world
February 13, 2026 at 7:50 PM
I do agree Newsom is more "politiciany" than a lot of other Democrats but I don't agree he cares about no one but himself. That is still just playing into a narrative that it will take massive effort to get him to agree with standard Democratic stances like being pro choice, which depresses turnout
This just gives the game away and proves its not about Newsom
Harris was like Newsom?
Biden was like Newsom?
Clinton was like Newsom?
So which is it? Specific things like Newsom's vetos or any "establishment" Democrat even ones like Harris with a total record of progressive stances?
Harris was like Newsom?
Biden was like Newsom?
Clinton was like Newsom?
So which is it? Specific things like Newsom's vetos or any "establishment" Democrat even ones like Harris with a total record of progressive stances?
This. I really don't buy the "Look, I don't like him, either!" stuff. They want to nominate him and then do the "You have to vote for the lesser evil!" thing again.
February 13, 2026 at 7:43 PM
This just gives the game away and proves its not about Newsom
Harris was like Newsom?
Biden was like Newsom?
Clinton was like Newsom?
So which is it? Specific things like Newsom's vetos or any "establishment" Democrat even ones like Harris with a total record of progressive stances?
Harris was like Newsom?
Biden was like Newsom?
Clinton was like Newsom?
So which is it? Specific things like Newsom's vetos or any "establishment" Democrat even ones like Harris with a total record of progressive stances?
This is just not true. It is such dishonesty to look at all the responses about stopping fascism even with a Newsom nominee and go "they are just lying about wanting to stop fascism unlike me who is actively taking the only action which doesn't stop it, not voting"
i think most (not all) of the "you must vote for Newsom" people are just Newsom supporters who want him to win because they like him and his policies, not because they have high minded ideas about harm reduction.
February 13, 2026 at 7:41 PM
This is just not true. It is such dishonesty to look at all the responses about stopping fascism even with a Newsom nominee and go "they are just lying about wanting to stop fascism unlike me who is actively taking the only action which doesn't stop it, not voting"
I think it is actually the voters job to literally not vote to end democracy just because they don't feel "represented"!
We live in a representative democracy. people vote for those who represent them. if a politician fails to make the case that they can effectively represent a sect of voters, that is on the politician, not the voter.
it is a politician's only job to convince voters.
it is a politician's only job to convince voters.
If the left does that it would their stupidity boosting fascists again. Newsom will be nominated if he gets the most votes. Don’t do this “well I don’t like him” crap that’s going to keep putting repubs in, haven’t you learnt the lesson yet?
February 13, 2026 at 6:59 PM
I think it is actually the voters job to literally not vote to end democracy just because they don't feel "represented"!
Yes the Presidency matters more than a mayoral race even if the hypocrisy is true. Which it isn't
The scale is completely different. The Presidency affects the entire country.
A lot of people could genuinely not care about NYC mayor
The scale is completely different. The Presidency affects the entire country.
A lot of people could genuinely not care about NYC mayor
Lots of people misunderstanding me here. The blue no matter who people I'm referring to is the crew of people going around harassing anti-Newsom people now, or who harassed leftists who were uncomfortable with Harris campaign stance on Israel last year
There was no militantism for Mamdani from them
There was no militantism for Mamdani from them
February 13, 2026 at 6:03 PM
Yes the Presidency matters more than a mayoral race even if the hypocrisy is true. Which it isn't
The scale is completely different. The Presidency affects the entire country.
A lot of people could genuinely not care about NYC mayor
The scale is completely different. The Presidency affects the entire country.
A lot of people could genuinely not care about NYC mayor
Where has anyone told leftists to shut up? When Biden passed the largest climate bill in history?
Democratic party leaders know they have a large percentage of voters who will always vote for harm reduction and yet the harm is always increasing. Yes the Republican party has agency too, but telling leftists to shut up for fucking years has gotten Democrats to this current situation.
February 13, 2026 at 6:01 PM
Where has anyone told leftists to shut up? When Biden passed the largest climate bill in history?
No one is saying you have to vote for him in the primaries. If you believe that those vetoes lost him your support then that's fine. That is what primaries are for
What Hasan said is that even in the general and the potential of another 4 years of what is happening now, he would not vote for him
What Hasan said is that even in the general and the potential of another 4 years of what is happening now, he would not vote for him
GTFOH with this "he's vetoed some bills I wouldn't have vetoed," as if we're talking about inconsequential shit. Hasan is 100% right about Newsom.
February 13, 2026 at 4:34 PM
No one is saying you have to vote for him in the primaries. If you believe that those vetoes lost him your support then that's fine. That is what primaries are for
What Hasan said is that even in the general and the potential of another 4 years of what is happening now, he would not vote for him
What Hasan said is that even in the general and the potential of another 4 years of what is happening now, he would not vote for him
No it's designed to genuinely ask if you actually want to stop fascism or actually understand the stakes of Republicans winning presidencies.
That so many on the left fail that simple test is not the problem of Democrats.
That so many on the left fail that simple test is not the problem of Democrats.
"will you vote for newsom in the general" is designed to undermine the left opposition to him *in the primary.* it's meant to show that the left can be ignored because they'll come around or that they can be ignored because they're a lost cause. the mission *now* is to make newsom lose the primary.
democratic primary voters keep fucking up and we're trying to get ahead of it this time by letting them know that newsom isn't electable
February 11, 2026 at 9:14 PM
No it's designed to genuinely ask if you actually want to stop fascism or actually understand the stakes of Republicans winning presidencies.
That so many on the left fail that simple test is not the problem of Democrats.
That so many on the left fail that simple test is not the problem of Democrats.
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
This is what’s frustrating. We can’t actually have an honest conversation about any of these members or leaders or strategy because the entire well has been poisoned by people who think 47 is larger than 53.
Again, this is not a stealth defense of Senator x or representative Y. This is instead a plea to people to actually think about the realities of power in even a closely divided Congress and to recognize the most likely outcome is a series of righteous Ls
February 7, 2026 at 3:16 PM
This is what’s frustrating. We can’t actually have an honest conversation about any of these members or leaders or strategy because the entire well has been poisoned by people who think 47 is larger than 53.
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
the democrats could actually literally BE evil or spineless or what the fuck ever and it would still be open and shut, trivially obviously morally correct to just vote for them all the time; the fact that ppl have to lie to make the Dems sound BAD just proves the pudding imo
the two parties are not the same.
your choice is between a party of pedophiles who shoots people in the streets or the party who doesn't do that. that is the reality in which we live. im sure it feels better to live in fantasyland, but look around. acting like this is true makes you the problem.
your choice is between a party of pedophiles who shoots people in the streets or the party who doesn't do that. that is the reality in which we live. im sure it feels better to live in fantasyland, but look around. acting like this is true makes you the problem.
February 7, 2026 at 6:33 PM
the democrats could actually literally BE evil or spineless or what the fuck ever and it would still be open and shut, trivially obviously morally correct to just vote for them all the time; the fact that ppl have to lie to make the Dems sound BAD just proves the pudding imo
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
"Is 53 greater or less than 47" quickly becoming the defining political question of our time
Love to see people in the year 2026 spend all day talking about what the Dems can’t do and shouldn’t try
I mean, sure, Congress should, they never should have given the money in the first place and there's about a million things Congress should be doing to assert Art I powers
But this whole piece is written like Dems have a veto supermajority in both chambers
But this whole piece is written like Dems have a veto supermajority in both chambers
February 7, 2026 at 9:07 PM
"Is 53 greater or less than 47" quickly becoming the defining political question of our time
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
Anyways, dear reader, this congress has been wildly unproductive, and that includes things like appointments. The democrats have literally been as obstructive as possible in the senate and forced Thune to change the votes multiple times -after- wasting tons of time.
February 7, 2026 at 9:21 PM
Anyways, dear reader, this congress has been wildly unproductive, and that includes things like appointments. The democrats have literally been as obstructive as possible in the senate and forced Thune to change the votes multiple times -after- wasting tons of time.
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
If all the leftists voted for Democrats, and Democrats still lost, that would logically mean that a coalition of Democrats and leftists is a losing coalition, and Democrats would be better served looking elsewhere.
I don't think people like Robert Evans #2 have really thought through this logic.
I don't think people like Robert Evans #2 have really thought through this logic.
February 6, 2026 at 3:30 PM
If all the leftists voted for Democrats, and Democrats still lost, that would logically mean that a coalition of Democrats and leftists is a losing coalition, and Democrats would be better served looking elsewhere.
I don't think people like Robert Evans #2 have really thought through this logic.
I don't think people like Robert Evans #2 have really thought through this logic.
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
"Democrats should listen to us if they want to win elections! But also: we're electorally useless" is just such a bizarre, schizophrenic message.
February 6, 2026 at 3:33 PM
"Democrats should listen to us if they want to win elections! But also: we're electorally useless" is just such a bizarre, schizophrenic message.
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
I don’t know why so many people think it’s commendable or noble right now to be “don’t worry, I never said anything good about the party that’s not in power while the other one is doing terrible things” … people like this would rather see the world burn than have their follower count go down.
February 7, 2026 at 6:05 PM
I don’t know why so many people think it’s commendable or noble right now to be “don’t worry, I never said anything good about the party that’s not in power while the other one is doing terrible things” … people like this would rather see the world burn than have their follower count go down.
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
“showing people that a ton of stuff is possible just by political will”
The people saying things like this to prove Dems could have pressed the “fix everything” button if they really wanted to has been driving me insane.
He represents the most liberal, diverse, and well-educated city in the US!
The people saying things like this to prove Dems could have pressed the “fix everything” button if they really wanted to has been driving me insane.
He represents the most liberal, diverse, and well-educated city in the US!
February 7, 2026 at 3:31 AM
“showing people that a ton of stuff is possible just by political will”
The people saying things like this to prove Dems could have pressed the “fix everything” button if they really wanted to has been driving me insane.
He represents the most liberal, diverse, and well-educated city in the US!
The people saying things like this to prove Dems could have pressed the “fix everything” button if they really wanted to has been driving me insane.
He represents the most liberal, diverse, and well-educated city in the US!
Reposted by Rainbow Cake
It's always "Democrats failed to win over a huge number of voters" and never "a huge number of voters made a really stupid fucking decision even when all of the evidence that it was a stupid fucking decision was thrown in their face over and over and over again."
February 6, 2026 at 8:39 PM
It's always "Democrats failed to win over a huge number of voters" and never "a huge number of voters made a really stupid fucking decision even when all of the evidence that it was a stupid fucking decision was thrown in their face over and over and over again."