“Jill Stein is a useful idiot for Russia. After parroting Kremlin talking points and being propped up by bad actors in 2016 she’s at it again,” DNC spokesman Matt Corridoni said in a statement to The Bulwark. “Jill Stein won’t become president, but her spoiler candidacy—that both the GOP and Putin have previously shown interest in—can help decide who wins. A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump.”

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
44 points

Stein’s campaign manager, Jason Call, said via email that “the Democratic Party has no respect for actual democracy or the voting public,” calling the attack a “tired and sad commentary on a party that refuses to serve the American people with good public policy.”

Yes, this is true.

“We’re seeing a desperate empire now. We are seeing a desperate colonialist settler empire whose ways of the world and whose control over the world has been lost,” Stein said as she inveighed against U.S. healthcare, housing, and military policy.

This is also true. But she has no shot at winning and is literally only capable of helping the orange bad. We need rank-choice voting. Until we get that, she should shut up and drop out. Especially with the threat of the orange bad.

permalink
report
reply
-9 points

Here you go again. Not you personally, but everyone who says that you’re either with us or against us. That didn’t make sense, it doesn’t make sense now, it never will, and it won’t get Harris any more votes. If you don’t believe me, ask Hillary Clinton. Her supporters said the same thing, and then she lost. At some point you have to face the reality that people can and do vote for third-party candidates, and then you need to decide how you’re going to convince them that they ought to vote for your candidate, and usually that’s effective if your candidate has some policies that the voters appreciate. Or don’t try to get their votes and move on with life, that’s okay too.

But maybe you’re looking for someone to blame, in case Harris loses. You want to be able to blame those third-party voters. I’m not going to let you off the hook. If she throws away third party votes, she knew exactly what she was doing, she took the risk and it paid off or it didn’t.

But even if we ignore that, you’ve also forgotten that many people don’t live in swing states, and because of the electoral college, their vote probably is not going to impact the outcome. In that case, shouldn’t they feel free to vote how their conscience dictates? But of course you didn’t take this into account, because you didn’t think about their situation.

But let’s ignore the electoral college. Let’s assume that everyone is equal on Election Day, that all of our votes count for something. It’s well known that no one is asking for our vote the day after election day. As voters, we have power in the lead up to the election and in the election itself, if we have any power at all. But you want us to throw that away. Not only that, you keep repeating the same script every 4 years, which means we never have any power, and we never will, if we listen to you.

Obviously you personally did not write all of the arguments that I’m referring to above, but it’s important for people to deal with all of the above arguments if they’re arguing that third parties ought not exist or that nobody should even consider supporting them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

literally only capable of helping the orange bad

The folks voting Green have already folded on the other options. If you’re picking a fight with Jill, you’re only driving her base farther from your candidate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The point is she doesn’t have a base. She’s never actually worked to get one. She comes out of the woodwork every 4 years to poke holes in the liberal candidate talking points and cause these rifts in the left. The people who vote for her are almost all independent voters who are “sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils”. Yet not one of those people will get up off their asses to push their local legislatures to enact ranked choice voting in order to provide an actual avenue for a third party candidate to get elected.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

The point is she doesn’t have a base.

I’ve got perennial Green voters on my street. They’re in their 70s. The entire reason the Green Party exists stems from liberals who were burned out of the Carter/Clinton neoliberal turn during the Reagan Era.

She comes out of the woodwork every 4 years to poke holes in the liberal candidate talking points

We’ve had Democrats promising universal health care, public higher education, environmental protections, and global demilitarization for the last 50 years. She doesn’t have to poke holes, she simply sticks her fingers through the Swiss Cheese track record that half a century of corporate liberalism has created.

not one of those people will get up off their asses to push their local legislatures to enact ranked choice voting

That’s a flat out lie. The Greens and Libertarians are the only two significant activist forces for RCV, and state legislative races are some of the few spots where they can consistently win races. What’s more, these parties very often emerge from activist movements that are rejected by the ostensibly-friendly Big Two parties. Sierra Club produces Green voters in droves, not because they wouldn’t happily caucus with Democrats but because Democrats despise any kind of activist Green movement. Gun clubs and tax abolitionist groups churn out Libertarians for the same reason - mushy pro-cop/pro-war Republicans and Tax-and-Spend governors like Abbott and DeSantis drive libertarians nuts.

The singular reason why Democrats are terrified of the Green Party in this election is that it offers an outlet for all those disaffected Arab-American voters no longer welcome in the party. Its the same reason Republicans shat the bed over Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. They know they can’t deliver on their promises and keep their mega-donor funders happy, so they need to be the only voice in the room making these campaign pledges. Otherwise, people start testing the water with alternatives.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

I’m tired of people being stupid. I’ve been tired of it for 20 God damn years. I’m folding on stupid people. I don’t care if I drive them away anymore.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

I hear this from Trump voters all the fucking time. Are we really are just getting a choice between Red MAGA and Blue MAGA?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-17 points

This just isn’t true. Third party candidates put pressure on the duopoly candidates to adopt a diversity of policies that better represent the interests of the country.

If the democrats wanted to make the Green and PSL parties irrelevant this election, all they have to do is drop their unconditional support for Israel’s genocide.

Democrats desperately want to be able to run with status quo positions without risking a loss, and stein makes that just barely difficult enough as to go after her candidacy, because that’s easier than attacking her policy positions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

all they have to do is drop their unconditional support for Israel’s genocide.

First off they are not unconditionally supporting the genocide. Both Biden and Harris are working for a ceasefire. The fact that Israel is not complying or even giving it any serious thought is because we have a plurality of people in this country who do unconditionally support Israel and will not vote for a party that does not actively show support for Israel. So if Biden or Harris actually came out and said they would stop providing weapons and money to Israel they would lose 10 times more votes than the number of people who are voting for Jill Stein because she’s being critical of them for “unconditional support of Israel’s genocide”.

If you are voting for Jill Stein because of the whole Israel issue. Then you deserve to lose all of the rights that get taken away if and when Trump wins. For reference see Roe versus Wade.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I remember arguing with several cons on various comment sections, and more than a a few, when made to answer the question, basically said the U.S. must support Israel no matter what. The no matter what part was true even after asking them hypotheticals about behavior including finding out they were carrying out actual genocide. This was before Gaza.

So when dingus lefties talk about “Genocide Joe”, my first thought is “I remember when I turned 14, too”. The cons - including donnie - would be far, far worse. The cons say we must support Israel. No. Matter. What. And it’s not because they give a damn about Jews, no matter how much crocodile tears they spill over “anti-Semitism”. Many of them think the Jews have to be there for their precious son of Yahweh to come back on a cloud or whatever, and start condemning Jews that won’t convert to infinite torture. While these people supposedly watch from heaven. Seriously, the “morals” of psychopaths…

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

They have not conditioned their lethal aid on anything, despite the fact that US law prohibits the sale or transfer of weapons to states engaged in war crimes. Even though it’s literally illegal for them to be sending them weapons still, they refuse to even suggest that stopping arms transfers is on the table. That’s a far cry from ‘working for a ceasefire’.

they would lose 10 times more votes than the number of people who are voting for Jill Stein because she’s being critical of them for “unconditional support of Israel’s genocide”.

A majority of Americans Say Biden Should Halt Weapons Shipments to Israel

Regardless, if a majority, or even an electorally-important minority of Americans wanted to nuke Iran, it would still be morally abhorrent to defend doing so simply because “if we don’t, the other guy will do it himself”. Americans love to pretend like they would have been anti-fascist rebels if they had lived in Nazi germany, but this is exactly how the Nazis were able to take power in the first place. Liberal moderates, desperate to hold on to power - or, more charitably, limit the power of fascists - will concede all but the most immediately tangible of human atrocities to fascists. They will happily hide behind their privilege and sacrifice the subjects of the fascists’ violence just so that they can remain at the table now completely taken over by fascists and fascist enablers.

Democrats don’t have to simply fall in line with what “”“”“the majority”“”“” of voters want; in fact, they themselves have been actively messaging and defending the very support you’re arguing they are powerless to resist. They were the ones making the case for continued support for Israel. They could be making the case that Israel must be brought to bear for their crimes, or at least sanctioned/embargoed until their hostilities and escalations stop. But they don’t - because they know that the US’s interests lie in ignoring the war crimes that Israel is committing. Without Israel, the US would lose influence in the ME, and by extension risk being cut off from the abundant resources that exist there to the waxing multi-polar influences that are building in the east.

Leftists don’t simply oppose the sale of arms to Israel simply because they’re committing genocide with them; we oppose the strategic imperialist asset Israel itself represents.

Then you deserve to lose all of the rights that get taken away if and when Trump wins.

Oops, your mask slipped a little there, friend.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I agree, but that doesn’t mean Jill Stein has a chance of winning or that she doesn’t help the orange bad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Nobody said she has a chance of winning. She only helps “the orange bad” if you blame voters when a candidate loses rather than that candidate fucking around and finding out with their policy positions. We learned this with Hilary. You can’t just coerce people into voting for you by threatening them with the other guy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

If the democrats wanted to make the Green and PSL parties irrelevant this election, all they have to do is drop their unconditional support for Israel’s genocide.

There’s a lot more in the table than that. But it would be a good start.

Kamala doubling back on Fracking is driving off as many environmental voters as her endorsement of the Israeli genocide is scaring away Arab-Americans.

But that’s the joke. People think if Greens just vanished, all their voters would be forced into the Dem block. Instead, repeatedly calling them Trumpies means they’ll be that less likely to vote for you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

People get upset when you point to multiple things you’re looking to concessions on, otherwise yea, I’m 100% in agreement.

In an effort to meet those people halfway: Harris only needs enough of green/psl protest voters (or at least needs to not loose too-many democratic votes, depending on your philosophical bent) to win. How many voters that is, and which issues are the ones to win them to her ticket, are questions very much up for debate. Even if she can even win them back is questionable at this point.

But the one thing that is certain is that if she were to somehow loose despite everything that’s going right for her, it’ll be because she abandoned those issues in favor or courting anti-immigrant and status-quo republicans. Her loss will be 100% attributable to the fucks not given for the issues driving voters to third parties, and that’s nobodies fault but her own.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

The Green party is already irrelevant. Their only power is siphoning away votes every 4 years. If they actually wanted to affect political change, they would establish a broad presence in local politics, establish a voting and policy record, and build a third party that’s actually viable as their local candidates advance to the national stage.

That takes a lot of time and a tonne of effort, though. Apparently it’s just easier taking money from Putin to gum up a presidential election.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points
*

What constitutes power to you, exactly?

A voting block big enough to spoil a victory is power: that’s what makes organizing of all types valuable to begin with.

Nobody, not even Jill Stein, believes she has a chance of winning against Harris and Trump. The reason why it’s still important for her to run is because she represents a dissenting group of voters who find something unacceptable about Harris and Trump, and if that group is enough of a threat then Harris will be forced to address it else risk loosing her campaign.

Liberals are mad because that threat is potentially big enough to spoil their victory, and that’s reason enough to be happy she’s around. Harris needs to cut her support of Israel, otherwise Green and PSL voters (and uncommitted voters) will remain a threat to her campaign. That’s reason enough for me to cheer them on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

Well said.

Sort of shocking how the common opinion here is, “vote how I tell you or you are a Hitler enabler”.

And then they wonder why they aren’t changing peoples minds.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

lol…. This is what you actually believe?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply

I remember when I turned 14.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

Yup! This exactly.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to “Mom! He’s bugging me!” and “I’m not touching you!” Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 9.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 213K

    Comments