Didn't seem to have much issues trusting them in 2020.
Oh I forgot, we're not supposed to acknowledge that because it doesn't fit the narrative. I guess 83 million people is "no one". The standard leftist excuse for a moderate winning is that "they didn't win by enough".
Anyone who thinks the NYC constituency is the same as the entire country is a delusional fucking moron. That's a completely indefensible argument that has no basis in reality. It's just stubborn hubris from people who think they can "punish" their way into geting what they want by actively harming the causes they pretend to care about.
Spanberger won a tight race.
- She beat Earle-Sears 57% to 42%. Arguing that this was a "tight race" is disingenuous.
She lacked endorsements from UMWA, USW, UAW or CWA:
- She was endorsed explicitly by the CWA. She was also supported explicitly by other unions: SEIU 32BJ, AFGE and LIUNA. The AFL-CIO didn't endorse her but that certainly does not mean they preferred her opponent.
She ran virtually unopposed in the Democratic primary
- If she ran unopposed in the primary, why didn't Progressives put up a challenger? Is it HER fault she ran unopposed?
She isn’t evidence of the value of centrist politics
- The primary was uncontested so among Democrats you really can't justify this statement. She then went on to convincingly win VA, which is not a certain blue state. It seems pretty clear to any honest person that her policies combined with Trump backlash are why she won the race.
She’s currently wildly unpopular.
- Recent polling cannot possibly be interpreted as "wildly unpopular". The worst has at 44% approving/47% disapproving.
She vetoed populist left-wing bills.
- Some argument here, granted, but it's still misleading. Some of the vetoed measures were bipartisan, rather than "left wing". The drug affordability bill passed the Senate 36–4 and House 95-4. She has also singed hundreds of positive bills, including regarding housing and the environment. Also brought the state back into the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Acting like all she has done is oppose progressive policies is misleading.
She provided no input, and legislators didn’t know what she wanted
- The Democrats who spoke out about not hearing opposition until the veto phase are your hated "centrists", by the way. Seems your happy to listen to them here. Also, her policy staff worked with legislators throughout the session; she submitted approximately 180 amendments, many of which lawmakers accepted. Yes, there were communication issues here but NO it wasn't some deliberate attempt to scuttle progressive policies.
The "session" shit is ridiculous to begin with. They only meet for 30 days on odd numbered years? That's supposed to be enough time to go from introducing a bill to passing it? In any event, as stated above, the administration did chime in on the considered legislation over 100 times.
Why am I not surprised to see such a misleading comment from a supposed "leftist"? You contribute to this "post fact" bullshit just as much as the right does.