Maybe if you read my comments, you wouldn’t be confused.
They’ve opposed nuclear for decades, and we’d be having a very different conversation about global warming if they hadn’t basically won there. They have opposed WiFi and cell phone radiation as “cancer causing”, and have supported homeopathy. If they ran on their policies, they would find a dwindling number of people on the left who actually support them, because they’re vestigial loons concocted in a 1960s hippie lab.
I am reading your comments, but I am still missing your point. Nobody that votes for the Greens in the US thinks they are in any danger of winning and outlawing WiFi.
And plenty of people thought roe was set in stone and the Republicans were just barking, but look where that got us.
But I’m guessing that was just a distraction to not answer the question because no, they can’t campaign on policy.
Then maybe they should start. I have to do a lot of qualification to justify voting Democrat. If I’m going to vote Green, I expect to be doing a lot less qualification than with Democrats. The only reason I would is because nobody holds Greens to account on what their actual policies are. Which only helps the Greens, because they’re fucking loons.
You have to care about all the dem policies because they stand a chance of winning and enacting (or not!) them. For (many?) potential green voters it may only matter that they are right about one or two acute critical issues. To be blunt: the dems don’t care about stopping the genocide of Palestinians. That issue is critical enough and acute enough that many people will simply never vote for anyone on the wrong side of it, but they still want to vote. In which case either the dems come around to the moral policy or those voters choose someone else. Like it or don’t like it, I’m just explaining how I see it.
