“With membership at new lows and no electoral wins to their name, it’s time for the Greens to ditch the malignant narcissist who’s presided over its decline.”

-38 points
*

If Harris wants to win over Stein voters, this is definitely not the way to do it.

permalink
report
reply
-1 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

Ahhh yes. And voting dogmatically for the “lesser evil” over and over makes you so morally superior.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Stein said Russia wasn’t entirely at fault for the war and their invasion of Ukraine. She refused to condemn Putin in a recent interview, with an independent progressive journalist.

You’re supporting a lesser evil too. You just don’t want to recognize it. And in that regard, yes, people who vote for Democrats and recognize their imperfections are morally superior.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

In the current 2 party system there is no alternative. An un-serious candidate like stein has no chance to win, no chance to get anything done as she lacks all down ballot support. So calling it dogmatically is nonsense it is realistically. With the razor thin margins, do you really want to run the risk of a trump victory?

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

So no thoughts on perennial sorta kinda candidate Stein making the Green Party a laughingstock then? Or the fact that with her campaign only surviving with the help of GOP operatives and Russian propaganda campaigns, she’s actually making it harder to take third party candidates seriously at any level of government?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-31 points

No thoughts on the democratic party completely capitulating to a reactionary right wing framework on Israel, immigration, and foreign policy? No thoughts on the Biden/Harris administration actively funding a genocide for the past year? No thoughts on Kamala promising to continue allowing Israel to “defend itself”? Blue maga is literally celebrating the endorsement of the architect of the invasion of Iraq. Did the Democratic establishment forget to at least pretend to be an opposition party?

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

“blue maga”

Oh, you’re one of those. Figures.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*

this post is about Stein and the Green party, nobody asked for your literal whataboutism. Shows just how effective geekwithsoul’s comment is that you couldn’t muster a single word in response and instead turned to “b-b-b-but democrats!!!”

That last sentence with ‘blue maga’ says everything about what you support, no surprise all you have are whatabouts.

how many Ds have eaten with Putin personally btw?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

dude she can’t unequivocally say Putin is a war criminal. save me the capitulation bullshit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Jill Stein does not know how many Representatives are in the US House of Representatives.

Anyone care to defend that? That the kind of President you want?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-33 points

What convinced you that the Green Party is a laughingstock and that Stein is responsible?

Or the fact that with her campaign only surviving with the help of GOP operatives and Russian propaganda campaigns, she’s actually making it harder to take third party candidates seriously at any level of government?

Which GOP donors and Russian operatives are you referring to? Donations are a matter of public record. Which ones are from the GOP and Russia?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Good thing then this is an opinion piece from a publication, and not something from Harris?

If Stein voters are offended by an article that a journalist writes about how ineffectual the Green Party is, and they blame Harris for that, that says more about the voters than it does anything else.

Namely that Greens will blame everyone except themselves for election losses.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They’re quoting people from the DNC in the article. Did you even read it?

permalink
report
parent
reply
33 points

Harris wants to win over Stein voters, this is definitely not the way to do it.

This is true, I’ve already spoken to all 7 of them, they’re mad.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

However it’s all their fault if Harris loses.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-44 points
*

I see a lot of anti Stein rhetoric lately I understand the push to not let her drag the ticket from Kamala but I wonder how much is true and how much is news trying to sway my opinion

edit; Imagine asking a reasonable question in 2024 lol

permalink
report
reply
-24 points

It’s because she’s strong on issues that Harris is weak on…especially the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Stein agrees with the majority of the Democrats: we should quit funding the genocide. Harris wants to continue funding it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
58 points

You’re seeing anti-Stein rhetoric lately because it’s a Presidential election year and that’s the only time the Green party tries to be visible.

I’m sure the two or three Green people at the local level believe in the party’s stated platform, but at the higher level it absolutely looks like the party exists only to siphon votes away from the Democratic party.

permalink
report
parent
reply
64 points

Stein has been a known Russian asset and Democratic spoiler candidate for about a decade now, being “Green” has never actually had anything to do with her political goals.

permalink
report
parent
reply
43 points

How much do you hear about the Green Party OTHER than the presidential election? That should tell you quite a bit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

That’s because corporate media has a vested interest in not covering them. Their membership has stayed the same since about 2011

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Could it be because they currently exist only as a spoiler party for the presidential election? The media doesn’t have a vested interest in not covering them, that’s republican “fake news” talk. Media LOVES conflict.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

I would suggest you do your own research, but she’s run several times, has no real experience or qualifications, and has been shown multiple times to be benefiting (either knowingly or unknowingly) from both GOP operatives and Russian interference.

Personally I fully support third parties - if they do more than just show up as spoilers every four years. Jill Stein has been doing zilch to push the Green Party forward except in presidential election years. And as a result she’s doing more harm to folks who want more options than not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

Note that I went to her own platform page and that was enough for me to be a hard pass even if I went worried about Trump and even I never heard anything from anyone about her.

The deal breakers for me were:

  • Disband NATO.
  • Stop material support of Ukraine

There’s a bit more I find to be problematic, but those are sufficient.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points

NATO isn’t giving you ranked choice voting and healthcare

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

So why are disbanding NATO and stopping aid to Ukraine even policy positions of hers? Shouldn’t she be focused on ranked choice voting and healthcare instead?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

On the ranked choice voting, she wouldn’t give you that anyways. Here’s a clue, Alaska has RCV already. The president doesn’t get to pick how the states run their elections. The place to push for RCV is at the state level.

On healthcare, you’d need congress. There’s not even a whiff of that being a possibility, even less than Stein presidency. That’s a general issue with her platform that there’s very little “how” in how she could actually do anything, and much that isn’t even theory under the authority of the federal government, let alone the office of the president.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

And Stein’s answer every single time this comes up?

“What about Gaza?”

She is literally an operative for Russia and the Republicans. This isn’t even a meme or conspiracy theory, it’s simply a plain truth.

permalink
report
reply
-4 points

I don’t understand how a genocide can be taken so lightly. Some people have trouble casting a vote for any political party that sponsors one.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

The other thing I don’t understand is all the anger and vitriol from you guys. Everyone who lives in the US and contributes tax dollars to the federal government supports genocide. The US has been supporting Israel unconditionally for decades. Do you really think Kamala Harris is sincere about stopping this, given how Biden’s administration has handled the situation? Or any other Democrat or Republican since Carter?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Okay Mr better party choice. Here’s a scenario: You and your friends vote for Jill Stein over Kamala Harris. Now, Kamala Harris has something of a chance to get a ceasefire out of Israel and stop the killing she has stated that that is her goal. But she doesn’t get elected because you and your friends voted for Jill Stein. No, instead Donald Trump gets elected and he pumps the gas on the genocide in Gaza as he has stated several times that he absolutely will do. He pours every military asset we have into Israel and gives them carte blanche to wipe out everyone in Gaza. And then on top of that he pulls all of our aid out of Ukraine and Russia steamrolls over the ukrainians wiping them out.

Now who supports genocide?

I wonder what it was about your comment that made the mods remove it. I don’t see any rules broken.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I support the college protestors even when people say they’re hurting the cause, but I would say Jill Stein definitely hurts the cause.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

I think you’re suggesting Trump would be worse than Harris for the cause. But my point is that a lot of people feel that voting for either is sanctioning genocide, and Stein fills that niche by condemning it. It’s pretty low-hanging fruit for a politician.

I’m legitimately curious as to how college protestors could be hurting the cause.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I’ve given more details elsewhere, but the short version:

We can classify US presidential votes into three categories:

  1. Vote for the Democrat
  2. Vote for the Republican
  3. Vote third-party/independent or don’t vote

The most effective vote to make on an anti-genocide platform is #1.

Voting for a Republican is voting for a party that appears to be profoundly okay with the genocide in Gaza AND wants to start some genocides of their own (e.g. against trans folks, immigrants and racial minorities). This is the most pro-genocide vote.

Voting for a Democrat is voting for a party that has a fairly significant group that opposes the genocide, and which appears to be movable on the topic.

Any other vote is roughly equivalent to not voting. On the presidental front, there is no chance in this election that anyone other than a candidate from one of the main two parties is elected, and that’s also true for most senate or house races. (Possibly all, but I don’t want to make that strong claim since I haven’t actually researched all the races.) Voting for a candidate who you know won’t win is explicitly choosing not to have a say between the tho feasible candidates.

I do have one caveat though…

If you live in West Virginia for example, it’s a bit more complex. There your choice is essentially “the Republican or not the Republican,” so third-party/independent moves into category 1. However, then I’d argue that voting for the Democrat for president may still be the preferable response because if the Republican wins the electoral college but, (as has happened in every presidential election since 1990 except 2004) the Democrat still wins the popular vote, it further delegitimises the Republican’s presidency and the electoral college.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You put it much much better than I ever could. Best comment 10/10

permalink
report
parent
reply
-12 points

I know, it’s like when Jews bring up the Holocaust all the time. So annoying!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Imagine being such a scumbag that you make fun of the Holocaust because you don’t like a country that didn’t exist in 1944. Or is it maybe the race of people you don’t like

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Right, making a joke about a past Holocaust is so much worse then implicitly endorsing one your own country is perpetrating right now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

lol you guys give in to propaganda so fucking easily

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

😂 🤡

The ronald dump supporter thinks other people are the ones vulnerable and susceptible to propaganda.

Pure fucking comedy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-11 points
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
80 points

Who needs party membership when you have unlimited money cheat code from daddy Putin?

permalink
report
reply
58 points

What makes you think a politically irrelevant person like Stein would capture the attention of putin?

Oh hey wow who put that picture here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
-4 points

Isn’t that like accusing the maggots of killing the corpse?

permalink
report
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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. 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.
  6. 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

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 14K

    Posts

  • 412K

    Comments