I disagree. Celebrities are paid for movies, music, tv, ads, etc, and at any time, they can say they only did that one thing you didn't like because someone paid them money. They take a chance by endorsing a candidate because they could potentially lose lots of money, jobs, friends, or more. The type of people that do vote for candidates based on endorsements are also the type of people that don't generally follow politics, but when you talk to them, you'll find they are for the same issues as the candidate.
That endorsement could be the one that made some 18-21 year old go and look up the endorsed candidate. When they look up the candidate, they may not be really interested, but then they may find something that the candidate supports, and that makes them want to vote. They never would have voted if they didn't find that information, and they wouldn't have looked up the information without the endorsement.
Have you ever bought something that you saw an influencer endorse on social media? Have you ever gone to a new place because someone else recommended it? Have you ever found a new friend because one of your friends was friends with them? What about dropping thousands of dollars into a stock because someone said you should? All of these are just other forms of endorsements from people you pay attention and listen to. Maybe someone recommended a show on Netflix that you passed on previously but decided to watch because of the endorsement, and you really loved it?
Don't forget, Shapiro didn't just say you shouldn't base your vote off of an endorsement. He said that people who do should have their rights stripped. What does that mean? Does he want your Google searches to be checked to see when you started looking things up? He also wants to raise the voting age to 21. He wants voters to be tested to even qualify.
Look at what conservatives scream about during elections. Voters where their signature is slightly different, when their name matches a dead person, when purged voters try to vote because they haven't voted in awhile, illegals voting in mass, voting by mail, voting at the wrong location, etc. They're trying to stop people who most likely won't vote for them. They push wild conspiracies, but if you believe their conspiracies, they think you are good to vote. Problems exist on both sides, then again, if two cars caught fire in opposite sides of the same city on the same day and one of them was a Tesla, which one would be all over the news the next day?
The moral here is never let anyone tell you that your inspiration is wrong. Ordinary individuals are inspired to do extraordinary things every day, and all it takes is that spark of inspiration. Now, go out and do something cool or something!
Someone asked me once if I had the option to save one life or the other, which would I choose? It wasn't about abortion, but more like diverting the train. I said, "The moment I decide who to save is also the moment I decide who dies. There will either be an action or inaction, but that decision is what makes me a murderer. People may tell me it's not true because I only did it to save a life, but one life was already about to be lost, and I didn't change the outcome. If someone walks into traffic and you decide to risk your life and push them to safety, you are putting yourself at risk where there was no risk before and therefore potentially trading your life for another. You could both die, but you could both live, and that's the difference. If someone is trying to kill you, but you kill them, you prevented a decided action to kill, and therefore, it wasn''t your decision."
The decision should be made between the mother and the doctor.