Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently made headlines for calling perennial Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein “predatory” and “not serious.” AOC is right.

Giving voters more choices is a good thing for democracy. But third-party politics isn’t performance art. It’s hard work — which Stein is not doing. As AOC observed: “[When] all you do is show up once every four years to speak to people who are justifiably pissed off, but you’re just showing up once every four years to do that, you’re not serious.”

To be clear: AOC was not critiquing third parties as a whole, or the idea that we need more choices in our democracy. In fact, AOC specifically cited the Working Families Party as an example of an effective third party. The organization I lead, MoveOn, supports their 365-day-a-year efforts to build power for a pro-voter, multi-party system. And I understand third parties’ power to activate voters hungry for alternatives: I myself volunteered for Ralph Nader in 2000, and that experience helped shape my lifelong commitment to people-first politics.


Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

220 points

Jill Stein is a russian asset

permalink
report
reply
139 points

Supporting evidence for the 3 downvotes ATM:

Putin’s Shill Stein wants Nato disbanded, the US to give up their SC veto, and revoke weapons to help Ukraine defend itself while simultaneously forcing ‘peace’ (subjugation) negotiations with russia.

2015 Stein breaking bread with Putin, his senior staff, and Mike Flynn (later Trump’s national security advisor

More context:

For those that don’t understand how the Electoral College + FPTP voting works, voting for her means helping donald become president due to the spoiler effect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

Downvotes are probably the people still livid that Tulsi failed, and who want a third party to break into this hopelessly entrenched duopoly of an election system.

Fair enough, but thinking you can fix it by yourself isn’t going to fix it, just help Trump win.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Yeah you’re right. Their brainless response normally is to just shift focus away from trump as if he is irrelevant to the conversation

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Or people smacking their foreheads that anyone took her seriously after she was revealed to be a Russian plant way back in 2017.

I didn’t downvote, but I can’t upvote either, because seriously?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-42 points

I downvoted because disbanding nato is a good thing and arming an authoritarian government is bad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Just missing Lavrov and you’d have all four horsemen in the same picture

Nvm i mistook Ivanov for Medvedev, only two horsemen at this table with Jill Stein

permalink
report
parent
reply
-44 points

They are rigged and corrupted for sure just like every popular politician but let’s not forget that NATO is a terroristic organization and that producing or sending cluster munition to an authoritarian government is not a good thing.

We should take everyone into account for chilling with russian leaders and mafiosi not just jill stein

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points

Notice the group you call a terrorist organization grows when the nation they say they are organized to protect against invades other countries. If Russia wants NATO to go away all they have to do is stop invading counties and it will slowly dissolve and disappear. They invaded Georgia in 2008 and the world didn’t do enough, they invaded Crimea (Ukraine) in 2014 and the world didn’t do enough. 2022 they set out to invade Ukraine again, and finally the world started to do more. 3 strikes. Now NATO grows because counties in the region don’t feel safe from Russia. If they stop being a threat, counties in the region will slowly leave NATO.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-70 points

A spoiler is something that only exists in the mind of Liberals, even if there were no 3rd party candidates running, we would not vote for your right wing pieces of shit. There’s a better chance you would vote for a Republican than any of us would vote for either right wing party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

A spoiler is something that only exists in the mind of Liberals

Math. You’re disagreeing with math. Or are completely unaware of how FPTP voting works (I know this isn’t the case).

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

A spoiler is something that only exists in the mind of Liberals

Dude, I already showed it to you.

Election report for election "Plurality 2 Candidates"
Total people: 1047
11% of people supported the winner.

Kruger - 112 votes - WINNER
Sahl - 111 votes

Election report for election "Plurality 3 Candidates"
Total people: 1047
10% of people supported the winner.

Sahl - 109 votes - WINNER
Kruger - 93 votes
Maikol - 91 votes

The overlap of two circles means there will be an area shared in between. That’s the math, you can’t get around that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Given the hypothetical that Kamala and Donald are the only 2 available to vote for, who would you prefer win?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Lmao. I bet you always got your tests back face down.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Who is this “we” you keep referencing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
120 points

I agree. The only time I hear her name is around election time. It’s too late then, the work needs to be done in between.

permalink
report
reply
82 points
*

The way she, her party, and her campaign conduct themselves make it hard to avoid the conclusion that she’s running purely as a Democratic spoiler candidate (that is, with the intent of siphoning support away from the Democratic candidate).

Edit: to be clear, I am a staunch supporter of environmentalist causes in general. I just don’t believe the Green Party actually is an environmentalist cause at the end of the day. I judge these things by actions, not by policy documents.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Yeah environmental causes have a lot that can and must be done at the local level. I’m a staunch environmentalist, it’s my primary issue, and it’s why I’m angry at my local government. I wish we had a good third party because the election is decided in the democratic primaries. Get someone running on improving public transit, forcing all apartments to offer recycling (mostly concerned about glass and metal), improving bicycle infrastructure… But funnily enough the greens don’t seem to give two shits about that easy picking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

Especially using the name and clout to help the local races which are run more often. Get third parties well known regionally with serious candidates, you’ll see demand for them grow nationally.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

And some of these local places could use some good faith environmentalism. Co-opting the environmental cause to act purely as a spoiler is going to have consequences for hundreds of years in the US. Could you imagine if Ohio had had good faith green party elected officials raising a ruckus after the train de-railed? or the difference in Flint if there had been anyone there to say, hey wait a minute, that’s not how water works!

Instead we’re building more highway lanes, farming the deserts, and looking the other way as corporations make people homeless. (Humans are horrible at living with the land, it’s not just homeless people. Check out any tourist camping area by the end of September.) That’s what really pisses me off.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

As an Ohioan want to know what party doesn’t bother running in Columbus? The greens. It’s proof to me that they don’t actually care about trying to govern.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The Cheetos bag in the Carlsbad Caverns story says so much about our species in one breath.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-60 points

Just because you don’t hear her name doesn’t mean she isn’t putting in the work

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

the only news I can find for Jill Stein from 2021-2023 is

  1. She was running Cornel West’s presidential campaign at some point, not sure what happened with that [link]

  2. she got in trouble with the FEC for campaign finance issues [link]

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

It just implies it.

The records of what she does, and the performative activism, which takes place entirely and exclusively during presidential election years - that’s what shows she isn’t putting in the work.

After repeatedly losing in Mass, the only time she runs for anything is for presidential elections. This also demonstrates she isn’t putting in the work, or she would have more involvement in more local elections.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

Just because you don’t hear her name doesn’t mean she isn’t putting in the work

This is about a politician supposedly running for a presidential office, that’s exactly what it means. If people aren’t hearing your name this close to an election you aren’t really trying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points

I was responding to a comment that said they never hear her name outside of the presidential election cycle

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

I mean… maybe. So was she? What did she accomplish between her presidential bids?

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

crickets

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

< sound of wind blowing over desert sands >

permalink
report
parent
reply
113 points

These third party types always claim that they want to reform the system. That’s bullshit. If you want to reform this system then you need to start at the bottom. You need to recruit candidates and invest in winning at local and state level first. Those are the most winnable offices for an outsider/independent. Hell, win a few critical states and you can get enough states in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact which, while not an ideal solution, would be a good first step in reforming the system.

Once you have some power and recognition at the state level, you need to aim for Congress. Start winning seats in the House and Senate and you can really start making change. That is where the real power of change resides. How many times have we seen a president with a divided House and/or Senate have their policy goals effectively neutered by legislative antagonism? Without support from the House and Senate, a 3rd party president would be powerless.

Stein cannot possibly enact positive change even if there were a literal miracle and she became president. The only thing, literally the only thing she can do by running for President is get Trump elected.

permalink
report
reply
16 points
*

Without support from the House and Senate, a 3rd party president would be powerless.

Or consider it from the other direction. In a party line vote on new policy, imagine if the difference was a couple green or progressive congressmen instead of the Manchins of the world

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

If only they would run for Congress rather than screwing around every four years and knocking over the table.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Yeah, if the greens succeeded at things I might consider voting for them. As it stands I don’t like the democrats but when they do well I get some of what I want. The more votes the greens get the less I get of what I want. I’d love to see a state with a green-dem coalition doing big things to demonstrate that they can actually govern as opposed to just run for office, and not even do that well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Fully agree.

My take as of late is that any 3rd party candidate who runs in our two party system can’t possibly be serious. They make a huge show, maybe get a message out, but almost always torpedo the party closest to them.

With the Stein’s and RFKs in the news, it’s all sexy flashy publicity without any serious effort to have a 3rd party win.

That said, there is another 3rd party personality that you might not have heard of in a while: Andrew Yang.

I actually believe he is serious about electoral reform, in fact that’s the one issue his Forward Party is about. He and his team have worked quietly to help get ranked choice vote in local elections. He is not running for president as a spoiler candidate. He is not running for senate as an independent. He is putting in the work along with fairvote.org to make the structural changes needed to have viable 3rd party campaigns. We saw what happened in Alaska when ranked choice vote was present- they kept Sarah Palin from holding a Senate seat and elected a Democrat instead.

If we had the NPVIC and ranked choice vote, our democracy would be much more representative, collaborative, and stable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points
*

AOC has not managed to enact the change she promised from within.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points
*

She’s actually been fairly effective for a new congressman. But in order to get meaningful change she needs both position and allies in congress. She has a number of allies (AKA The Squad) but because Congress is so full of old fucks, getting a position in a committee with any power at all is difficult at best.

Meanwhile Jill Stein goes on TV, snipes at the democratic party and collects paychecks, all while eroding the party’s position all for literally no benefit whatsoever. The Green Party has been the single most ineffective third party in the history of the country. The only thing they’ve accomplished is siphoning off votes from Democrat presidential candidates and getting Republicans elected.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-21 points

The Green Party has been the single most ineffective third party in the history of the country.

oh, so the democrats have no interest in the green new deal? or expanding renewables? i know they don’t give a fuck about stopping war, but i think you are mistaken about the effectiveness of the green party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-38 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
30 points

Because it’s literally not a solution. The absolute best case scenario is causing the closest ideological party to fail for many elections in a row before it disintegrates and reforms in the third party, which is now the second party in a two party system and filled with many of the same politicians and beholden to most of the same voters.

Voting reform is the solution for everyone complaining about the two party system. Get ranked choice and leftier challengers who actually care about the results of elections will run against establishment politicians more often.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points

keyword “system”. It’s the system that formed the two party dynamic. In order to change that we must change the system that led to the problem

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points
*

“the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.”

Audre Lorde

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

pol sci 101: fragile fptp systems (like the electoral college) tend to result in two parties.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It’s because there’s never any serious third party candidates.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

Because no one is brave enough to vote for them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

First it needs to be viable:

Https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo

permalink
report
parent
reply
92 points

AOC is correct indeed.

permalink
report
reply
81 points

If Left-Wing Third Parties are serious, they will start by running their candidates as spoilers in the Democratic Primary and appealing to voters to listen and add their platforms to the list of priorities to push the Dems on. They’d simultaneously work hard to get Ranked Choice passed nation-wide as that system is the most compatible with our country’s political system. Once they get that passed, they would join efforts to reform the Electoral College so it doesn’t require 270 votes, an then implement a more effective voting system for President that ensures that left-wing voters don’t get a Right-Wing president elected voting for Third Party options. They would also push hard to win at the City, County, and State levels, as well as in the Congress, so the Jill Steins of the world have friendly legislators to rely on.

Ocasio-Cortez is right to call this out.

permalink
report
reply
-23 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Did you just turn Success Kid into an angry/upset reaction? Rude!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

I’m saving lives:

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Honestly, yes. You can’t vote third party, and you can’t not vote, if you don’t want Trump in office. If you vote Third Party or stay home, you’re good with Trump being in office, which means you’re good with leaving minorities, non-Christians, transgendered people, and gay people up Project 2025 Shit Creek without a paddle. Given my wife is a Black bisexual Goth pagan, that means you want my wife to be hurt, and that pisses me the fuck off. And judging from the 15 other downvotes you have, I’m not the only one who feels that way.

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

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 16K

    Posts

  • 476K

    Comments