I'm not calling you stupid. I'm questioning the rational of somehow Heinz products being barred because John Kerry, who has absolutely NO stake in running the company at all, married Teresa Heinz, who also has NO stake in running the company.
I'll repeat that... Neither John Kerry nor Teresa Heinz have any control of or say about the operations of Heinz foods.
John Kerry has never said "We make Proletariate Pickles for the masses!"
Teresa Heinz has never proclaimed "Our Communist Catsup makes Marx proud!"
Their faces aren't on every bottle of Revolutionary Relish that comes off the line.
That situation is VERY different from the Ben & Jerry's situation (or Paul Newman foods). That company was founded by two commie hippies who made progressive social issues front and center to their brand identity and marketing.
That's calmed down quite a bit since aging hippies sold the company to MegaFoodConglomorate (can't remember who bought it), but the B&J's brand still espouses progressive/socialist ideals (to some degree) so it makes sense to boycott those products.
But to boycott a company just because a politician you don't like is now married to the widow of one of the heirs to part of the family fortune (FYI, John Heinz also NEVER had any control over Heinz foods. Family control passed to a corporate board and out of the family about 2 generations before he was born).
Yeah, that's not just virtue signaling, that's virtual signaling failure 101.
But, I suppose that if someday you find yourself in need of, say, a medical device or a drug to save your life, you'll do your homework first and make absolutely certain that the maker of that product in no way supports John Kerry, right?
And if you DO find out that Kerry owns even 1 share of that company's stock, you'll do the honorable thing and go to your grave unsullied, right?