By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Right-wing influencers, including Nick Fuentes, have expressed potential opposition to Vice President JD Vance if he becomes the Republican presidential nominee in 2028, even praising Democrat Gavin Newsom. This stance highlights divisions within the right-wing movement, despite Vance being considered a frontrunner for the Republican nomination. Influencers like Clavicular and SNEAKO have made disparaging comments about Vance and his family, some of which were of a racist nature. These influencers and streamers, while controversial, do have a following among U.S. conservatives, thus potentially influencing the upcoming election.
Read the original article here
Right-wing Gen Z streamers blasting JD Vance and backing Gavin Newsom, it seems, boils down to a few key observations and a healthy dose of cynicism. The core sentiment is this: it’s not about policy, it’s about vibes. And in this case, the vibes are apparently very off with JD Vance.
The perception is that Vance is being targeted for his appearance. The criticism, as some see it, focuses on his perceived lack of charisma or what some might call a “negative charisma modifier.” The central point? He doesn’t look the part. And while that may seem shallow, the argument suggests that image often trumps substance in the world of online political engagement. This also feeds into a broader critique of right-wing political strategies, where optics and perceived authenticity are valued above all else.
This perceived shift in support towards Gavin Newsom is viewed with deep skepticism. Many see Newsom as a centrist or even right-leaning figure who’s out of touch with progressive ideals. There is a sense that Newsom’s policies are more aligned with corporate interests than the needs of the working class. The idea is, Newsom may appear attractive to some conservatives because his positions often align with their economic goals. This, in turn, fuels the argument that the Democratic Party is more interested in appealing to donors than serving the needs of the electorate.
Some express concern that supporting Newsom means a loss for the progressive left. The fear is that a Newsom victory might lead to a further rightward drift in politics, where the needs of the working class and progressive change would be sidelined. Instead, the focus will remain on the interests of corporations and the wealthy.
The overall tone is one of disappointment and a sense of being played. The idea that Newsom is now getting support from right-wingers because of his “chad” looks is perceived as an indication that the right is more interested in image than policy. The article suggests this is not something new, with some people even mentioning that those same right wingers were on the BLM and BernieBro bandwagons when they were winning.
The article takes a dim view of both current parties. The focus is to show that Democrats and Republicans will bring nothing of use to us. The call is for progressives and change. The idea is that the country needs Progressives, no more corporate stooges, and greedy rich reanimated corpses. The article ends with a sense of dread and unease.
The criticisms range from basic appearance-based assessments to deeper dives into policy and political alignment. The primary source of the reaction is a sense of betrayal. The right-wing Gen Z streamers that are turning towards Newsom are not to be trusted. Their politics is not based on policy. These streamers are not interested in the well-being of the majority.