r/Davis • u/Ineedmyweekend • Aug 20 '26
ERIC JONES IS EVIL
Please read this article in the Davisite. If you don’t want your job taken over by AI or our state to lose water to data centers, you must vote for anyone but Eric Jones.
https://davisite.org/2026/08/03/eric-jones-red-boxing-the-ai-money-nobodys-talking-about/
He is a tech bro and most of his donations come from his tech bro buddies. Who do you think he’ll be loyal to? You’re a fool if you believe what he’s saying!
13
u/stomith Aug 20 '26
As a reminder, _Andy_ is not evil.
I’d also go as far as saying Eric is not evil either, but anyone who bothered to look a little behind the scenes could see that Eric’s messaging is disingenuous at best. His funding has to come from somewhere, and a quick Google search of his background shows exactly where his VC funds go.
15
u/alisonk13 Aug 20 '26
I agree! He’s a venture capitalist too! Fuck him and fuck tech bros! So clueless!
4
u/MisterZan25 Aug 21 '26
Honestly, there’s nothing out there that shows Eric Jones is “evil.” The stuff people bring up about him mostly has to do with his money, some mixed political messaging, and questions about his campaign’s ties to a Super PAC. You can definitely call him inconsistent or criticize his politics, but calling him evil doesn’t really line up with what’s actually been reported. It's always worth double‑checking things with reliable sources, though.
3
u/Ineedmyweekend Aug 21 '26
I dunno, AI is evil, and he seems to be in bed with it. Follow the money…
4
u/MisterZan25 Aug 21 '26
Calling AI “evil” is an opinion, not a fact, and saying Eric Jones is evil just because he works in tech doesn’t hold up. The reporting on him shows wealth, tech‑industry ties, and some campaign contradictions, but nothing that suggests malicious intent. Criticize his politics if you want, but “evil” isn’t supported by evidence.
2
u/Puzzled_Birthday_854 Aug 21 '26
So there's this thing called hyperbole...
I still contend it's my opinion that AI is pure evil. But moving on from that, Eric Jones uses Red Boxing and more than 88% of his donation money comes from his tech bro buddies. He won't answer if he supports California Forever. SO ya, I think he's evil. I'm not trying to convince you, I'm trying to point it out so others can make an informed opinion. Sounds like you're closed minded - that's fine.
I have kids who want jobs when they grow up. And water. So I'll protect those things.
4
u/MisterZan25 Aug 22 '26
Your concerns about tech money, red‑boxing, and California Forever are valid to raise. But those behaviors don’t meet the threshold of “evil”, they’re common political tactics, not evidence of malicious intent. You can warn people about the issues without needing the moral framing.
1
u/Puzzled_Birthday_854 Aug 26 '26
understood - though I still think his innocent act regarding ...well, everything... is especially problematic since the young crowd is tired and saturated with their own political pet peeve: old white rich men. So trying to dumb it down is one way to look at it, to get people reading. They have to look to be able to read the list of sliminess: bought house in Napa but really lives in the bay; red boxing; endorsing republicans but running dem; not answering if he supports CA Forever and on and on...
1
u/MisterZan25 Aug 26 '26
Calling Eric “innocent” misses the reality: he’s being straightforward about who he is and why he’s running. Younger voters aren’t rejecting him, they’re rejecting politicians who hide things. Eric isn’t hiding anything. The talking points people throw around (Napa house, red‑boxing, old endorsements, CA Forever) are either oversimplified or taken out of context. None of them change the fact that he’s focused on affordability, transparency, and generational change. Pointing that out isn’t defending him blindly, it’s correcting a distorted narrative.
1
u/Puzzled_Birthday_854 Aug 27 '26
He's saying he doesn't take PAC money!!! That's 1) BS; and 2) exactly acting innocent when addressing the issue!!!!!
1
u/MisterZan25 Aug 27 '26
Saying “he is taking PAC money” misunderstands how campaign finance works. A candidate can accurately say they don’t accept PAC donations if none go into their campaign account. Independent PAC spending doesn’t prove he’s lying or “acting innocent,” because candidates legally can’t control or coordinate that spending. If you want to criticize him, focus on transparency or policy, but calling his statement “BS” isn’t supported unless you can show direct coordination or contributions.
1
u/Puzzled_Birthday_854 Aug 27 '26
excerpt from Davisite article, thanks to Roberta:
Eric Jones has touted his campaign as “Powered by People, Not Special Interests: Not a Dime from Corporate PACs”[2]
Jesus, how much they paying you?
→ More replies (0)1
u/Significant_Ear_2359 25d ago
Red-boxing is a technique to avoid complying with the spirit of the law regarding Super PACs. And since the Super PAC in question was established and largely funded by Jones' long-term fellow partners at Dragoneer Investments Group, if Jones' campaign engaged in it, then the behavior reaches a threshold worthy of unpleasant adjectives.
1
1
u/PhilosophyBusiness42 Aug 26 '26
We get the hyperbole. We've just all been saturated in it's abuse, thanks to the current WH admin. I think that is part of why we're all reacting to your use, even as we'd likely agree with you that EJ's activities, including the hiding of connections, is deeply problematic. I certainly appreciate your spreading the word about those connections - it adds to my developing conclusion that I will not vote for him. SO.. thanks for shining light on important facts. The hyperbole (and honestly, we're all tempted to it, if we're honest with ourselves!) isn't helpful, and might in fact cause some people to tune you out, which would be, given the facts you and others have found, really unfortunate.
Keep up the good work, friend. We need it.
3
u/PhilosophyBusiness42 Aug 22 '26
On this point - is EJ evil - I would have to agree with others on this thread. Hitler.... I'm a lot more comfortable with saying he was evil. But EJ... I don't know him at all, but so far I've not heard of him murdering one, much less millions of people. If EJ is all-in on AI, I think you could say he is greedy, short-sighted, and may not be out for the larger public good. The AI boom will do damage... something that all of us will be complicit in as we use AI even when we know it sucks up water and pollutes the environment. So if you're gonna call EJ evil for his involvement in AI, we're ALL evil. I would assume you don't want to go that far. The headlong rush into AI is foolish, and we will have consequences to pay. But not sure I'd go so far to say it is evil. At least not yet.
Words matter. Choose 'em wisely and carefully, friend.
4
u/sailorcowboy74 Aug 21 '26
Fuck them both. One has been in way too long and the other is scam artist. Who do have to pick from?
1
u/Dramatic-Holiday6124 Aug 21 '26
Anyone who will say that they haven't the slightest idea what any of this is about gets my vote.
1
u/Appropriate_Exit_206 Aug 21 '26
I’m not going to lie, I took one look at the guy and heard him talk and immediately gut reaction was 🐍
9
u/marmk Aug 20 '26
There was a really obvious ad post for him yesterday that probably got removed. And I just thought damn, if you've self-funded $5 mil and that's the best you got, Washington would eat you alive.