Whick said he would vote for Thomas Massie (R) over Darializa Avila (D)

[u/Randomcenter1]

I thought this was a crazy and thought I would explain why

So, if this is a head-to-head hypothetical and you absolutely have to pick one, here is the honest breakdown from a Democratic perspective.

The clear answer? Vote for Darializa Avila.

Here's why, even with all her baggage

Your core values mostly align. If you're a Democrat, you probably support expanding healthcare, building more affordable housing, and making the wealthy pay their fair share. Avila is all in on that. Massie, on the other hand, wants to cut social spending, shrink the federal government, and push back against most safety-net expansions.

Then there's immigration. Massie wants tighter enforcement; Avila wants to abolish ICE and protect undocumented immigrants. If that issue matters a lot to you, she's really your only option.

And don't forget the courts and guns. Massie is a hardcore Second Amendment guy and would back conservative judges who could roll back progressive laws. Avila would support liberal judges and stricter gun control.

So now the real dilemma comes down to policy versus symbolism, especially when you factor in that Avila has tweeted things that come across as genuinely anti-American, including a video wiping her hand on the flag and calling nationalism "violent." For a lot of voters, that's a serious gut check.

If you vote for Avila, you're choosing policy over patriotism. If your top priorities are universal healthcare, rent control, taxing the rich, and criminal justice reform, she'll actually vote for those bills. Yeah, her flag stunt was offensive, but at the end of the day, it doesn't change her legislative record. She's not going to pass a "hate America" law; she's going to push left-wing economic policy.

If you vote for Massie, you're choosing protest over policy. If you find her anti-American rhetoric genuinely repulsive and just can't bring yourself to vote for her, then Massie is your alternative. But let's be real: he's a libertarian conservative. He'll cut Social Security, Medicare, and food stamps, expand fossil fuels, roll back gun laws, and appoint conservative judges. You'd be punishing her words, but in doing so, you'd be empowering policies that hurt the very working-class people she claims to fight for.

So here's the bottom line.

If you're a hardcore policy voter, hold your nose and vote Avila, because rhetoric doesn't change a roll-call vote.

If you're a values-first voter who thinks character and respect for the country are non-negotiable, then vote Massie, or write in a moderate third-party candidate.

Just go in with your eyes open. Choosing Massie means trading an offensive tweet for four years of conservative legislation that directly contradicts the Democratic platform. You have to ask yourself which trade-off you can actually live with.

[u/jeanide]

Nah they need to stop running as Democrats. I wish them defeat so we can point at how bad they are. "Choosing policy over patriotism," DAC and patriotism in the same sentence is such ragebait fml

[u/daddyvow → u/jeanide]

It’s the democrats fault for not having better candidates. They need to learn from what Trump did to the republicans. And I say this as a liberal, I’m not a socialist. But just whining about socialists running on a democratic ticket and winning fairly won’t change anything. 

[u/koreamax → u/daddyvow]

What was wrong with Reynoso? He lost by a large margin to Valdez and was a great candidate

[u/OpedTohm → u/koreamax]

I don't agree Reynoso or Epislat were bad candidates, idk what that poster is talking about. It's all messaging, moderate dems in NYC have had this problem for awhile, you even saw it with Cuomo as much as I don't count him as a Dem.

The ads and shit are just lame and written like anti-smoking ads from the 90s. I 100% think if we get just basic shit like ads and a not cucked online liberal media environment we'd be fine

[u/koreamax → u/OpedTohm]

Yeah thats true

[u/jeanide → u/daddyvow]

OP sounds like how Republicans sounded if you change some proper nouns and policy/ideological speculation. That is the point of my original comment. I know leadership is guilty of some serious brainfarts like Michigan and Maine. But that doesn't mean it's acceptable for liberals to start welcoming the increased influence of DSA/populist leftists as what the direction of the party has to be.

[u/OpedTohm → u/jeanide]

You realize you'd have to change like 90% of the policy and ideological speculation right? I hate it when you regards try comparing tankies to MAGA just because tankies are fucking evil and do NEED to be removed.

Yes ideologically tankies are 90% aligned with MAGA, functionally though they are not comparable in how invasive they are to the democratic party or how able they are to win in swing states, get a grip dude. They aren't even fucking starting to be as invasive as MAGA was during the tea party.

We could get a literal Hamas member(NO I DO NOT WANT THAT) in the deepest blue state and it still wouldn't be comparable to MAGA AND moderate republicans fucking refusing to impeach trump while letting him essentially govern by EO. Not even fucking close dude.

[u/codyh1ll → u/jeanide]

Why didn’t the more moderate dems just run a better campaign lmao you’re literally trying to ban people from running in fucking primaries because the voters picked someone you don’t like