Go fuck yourself Jill.
I always thought she’d make a better VP, particularly on the same ticket as Barney Frank.
Then I could vote for Frank And Stein.
Wish she just fuck entirely off instead.
It’s a transparently self-serving, irrational, and counterproductive decision to run again as a third party candidate. It just exposes her arrogance and lack of actual consideration for the health of the country. If she thought she could realistically win, then she should try to primary Biden on the Democratic ticket. Anything else is actively destructive. So disappointing.
Did you miss the part where every other time she’s run, she was funded by Republicans for the sole purpose of being a spoiler?
The mentality of people who just hate and drag anyone who identifies dem, in this day and age, drives me crazy. Because “democrat” is just not a political identity. The only core philosophy behind being a democrat is belief in evidence-based policy, fairness and justice at least some of the time, and that government should fundamentally be allowed to do the work of governance. Any political view that fits in that framework can make it under the tent.
To be distinguished from the modern conservative wing, who think government should be butchered and sold off to the highest bidder, that fairness and justice are part of the woke mind virus, and evidence is conspiracy.
That description could fit any political party. They all believe that their policies are “evidence based” and they’re fighting for fairness and justice, and that “government should fundamentally be allowed to do the work of governance”. The disagreements are over what qualifies as evidence, what fairness and justice is, and what “the work of governance” should be. For example, Republicans think that the role of government should be much smaller than the Green Party does.
No one wants a more intrusive and powerful government than the modern Republicans.
They just don’t want it involved in any form of governance. They want it to be used to murder trans people, enforce evangelical christian dogma, and make them rich. They want it to look like Hungary or Russia.
The Republican Party has shown in so many ways that it does not believe in evidence-based policy. When a GOP politician talks about a faith-based policy, that’s because it’s not supported by evidence. It’s like that joke: “if alternative medicine worked, it would be called ‘medicine’”.
In your example that the GOP believes the government should be small, you’re buying their bad-faith boilerplate excuse for getting rid of things they don’t like. If they didn’t use this excuse, they’d have to give specific reasons why a program should be gutted or eliminated, and probably provide evidence as well. So they just say “small government”. But when there’s something they want, they happily expand the government and run up the deficit.
I want to see someone hold her feet to the fire on her more pseudoscience remarks now that conspiracy theories like that have drifted firmly into the conservative camp. Namely:
-
Does she still believe there are reasons to be hesitant about vaccines? Is her response to “Do vaccines cause autism?” more than a two letter word?
-
Can she provide the scientific papers which show that “wifi causes cancer”?
-
Could she explain why she’s against nuclear energy despite all of the information showing it to be safe? And if she would support new reactor designs that are inherently safer?
-
If she recants all of it, what’s her explanation for previously saying those things? Was she just pandering? And if so, what does that say about her “support” for a Green New Deal?
As someone in STEM who works for a green energy company, she needs to adequately answer all of these questions if she wants to earn my vote. Until then, she can go fuck herself.
