I think the case I would make is that they are definitely emulating trumps style because they think it will help them 'win' same type of triangulation they always do.
I would agree that is Newsom's approach, and potentially the party leaders (though I think they are also incapable of doing it well, but thats a whole separate matter).
Edited to add: Btw, this is why I'm worried about the policy>soundbites>memes transition. Its going to lead to exactly the type of "fascist-friendly" compromises you're referring to, imo.
we can set 'blue maga' aside as we're probably not going to agree on that
Definitely agree to disagree :)
but there's absolutely a contingent of Democrats who see restricting trans medical care as a nonpartisan issue that they can work with Republicans on.
what worries me is how quickly they jumped to finding compromise positions with Republicans
And disturbingly damn true.
who are expected to them vote for them or they get called 'pro Trump's as I so often get accused of.
I will say I agree with both here, depending on timing. If we're talking at the general election - yes, a protest vote is fundamentally a pro-Trump vote. This is entirely a FPTP created problem, where the choice is between two dogshit options.
If we had proportional representation, ranked choice, approval, score, whatever, elections in the USA would be in a much better position for a whole host of reasons, but mostly because we wouldn't have this A/B restriction.
Before even any primary has happened? No, screw that, rip into them. Replace them with someone better if possible. Thats what I've been working toward with the WFP, the only 3rd party near me with anyone actually trying to run. Didn't work out last election but I'll keep trying.
Which was a long-winded and rambling way of saying - when it comes to FPTP, timing is important, and protest votes can be effectively a vote for the (much, much, much) worse option.
Especially running unopposed, I entirely understand a protest vote. I do think too often everyone assumes everything is a battleground, to me the biggest concern is strategy. I absolutely loathe the "part time candidates" like Jill Stein for the record, who only ever shows up at election time, and does absolutely nothing outside of election years. Just grifters wrapped in a different color imo.
I also think too often people who live in a "safe state" underestimate just how much of a battleground others can be though, which is why I'm not a fan of considering all democrats to be the same either. The leadership sucks, and so, so, so many of the long-standing elected representatives do, but using the "D" next to your name under the current structure of voting is substantially beneficial, and fracturing the vote with a third party in a local/state/federal election by competing on who can be more progressive is flirting with the risk of losing out entirely to regressive fascists, which also really sucks for us.
I just hope we avoid the accelerationist timelines, which I think will be far more horrifying than most people realize. Maybe its from me visiting places that have seen civil war and devastation, but I'm really hopeful that we never have to see that here (and still get rid of the fascists).