840
AOC is right: Jill Stein’s campaign is not serious
(www.salon.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2024
840 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2368 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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.
It doesn't count because a 3rd party candidate will never win.
It can decide an election because it's removing a vote from the candidate closest to you who is actually electable.
Let's say you think taxation is theft, but you can't vote for Trump because "reasons". You vote Libertarian.
You've taken your vote from Trump and given it to a candidate with no chance.
Harris +50
Trump +49
Libertarian +1
Flip it around, you support Roe vs. Wade but you can't vote for Harris because "reasons". You vote Green.
You've taken your vote away from Harris and given it to a candidate with no chance.
Trump +50
Harris +49
Green +1
In neither case will it ACTUALLY be that close, but you get the idea.
Why do liberals assume they are entitled to leftist votes? The entire DNC prevented anti genocide speakers, yet platformed former Republicans, the Israeli family of a hostage, etc. it's clear the party is more invested in appealing to conservatives, so good luck 👍
Project 2025 thanks you for your support.
Don't worry. Dick Cheney, the architect of the invasion of Iraq, stepped up and took my vote for Kamala instead. Birds of a feather.
In a first past the post system, you either vote Democratic or you get the Republican. 3rd party is not an option.
Your confusing that with the fact that an overlap of two circles is a venn diagram.
You pulled out your Facebook memes to say you wanted to break the two party system by voting third party. Nothing about my response is trying to address whether you should be voting, but your chosen action is stupid and has no potential to accomplish what you say you want to do.
Your username may be ironic, but outsourcing expressing feelings to a vague and not quite appropriate meme response rather than actually trying to say what you think and defend your personal opinions is one of the big reasons people shit on Boomers. Granted it's a step up from my old conservative acquaintances on account of not also being in service of the most vile opinions humans espouse, but it's just as tired and unwelcome.
Jill Stein supports ranked choice voting, Kamala Harris doesn’t even mention it in her platform.
Jill Stein says things and then does nothing to actually make them happen, like a lot of grifters. Weird how anti-establishment people can be so rightfully skeptical of Democratic politicians and hangers on, but then believe hook line and sinker that non-establishment voices are all in it for the ideology.
You are describing the Democrats not Jill Stein.
Jill Stein got gay marriage and the affordable Care act passed?
What did Jill Stein ever do?
And because Kamala Harris doesn’t mention ranked choice voting, somehow that’s magically supposed to happen?
It doesn’t take a meme to find the flaw in that reasoning.
I don't expect the Democratic establishment to implement it, that's why the Greens should actually get some state reps elected. Or even just compete in the places where they do have ranked choice voting. There's plenty of state level races that don't need a lot of money to be competitive. My rep was reelected with 3,000 votes.
But voting for Jill Stein for president isn't going to do anything. She has literally zero chance of winning, doesn't seem to even put in the effort to understand the position she's theoretically trying to obtain, and just pops up every four years to perpetually lose elections while grifting money away from rubes.
Sometimes you have to “Let the wookie win.”
And now we're in full mask-off accelerationist theory "it's okay to let Trump win as long as Democrats are punished" bullshit. You're unhappy with Democrats, so you're okay with letting throwing literally everyone on the left in the US under the bus, along with the entire country of Ukraine, and throwing even more bombs at Gaza.
What an entitled, smug, self-righteous, holier-than-thou position, utterly divorced from real life consequences. Thanks for admitting that you're a thoroughly unserious poster, though!
Sorry a genocide has inconvenienced you.
It affects the election, but not in the way you want. It is literally the equivalent of not voting at all. That does effect the outcome if you would have voted for one of the two main parties otherwise.
Oh ok, well here’s what it does: nothing at best, but when a third party does very well the major party they oppose most wins. That’s fptp, it’s not hard to figure out if you have more than a handful of brain cells.
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
Audre Lorde
Can't the master's tools renovate the master's house?
pol sci 101: fragile fptp systems (like the electoral college) tend to result in two parties.
It’s because there’s never any serious third party candidates.
Because no one is brave enough to vote for them.
Riiiiight….. It’s a lack of bravery that people aren’t voting for the useless 3rd party candidates that only surface every four years to split votes.
Maybe it’s that everyone else is smart enough to see it for what it is- and you’re just….. not.
Be brave, take your pick.
Might I suggest the Working Families Party
Read this and stop embarrassing yourself here.
You should encourage people to embarrass themselves so you can correct the record. The Green Party has been around since the 1990’s, and was founded in 2001. Jill Stein is not the Green Party, it will exist after her, provided people are brave enough to separate their identities from the two-party system in America. If you don’t like Jill Stein, have a look at the Party for Socialism and Liberation.
Right… so, vote the party, not the people- right? You’re as plastic as you accuse others of being. West and Stein are provenly useful idiots;
~ Donald Trump
This is all the Green Party does, and everyone knows it. Seriously man…. Grow up.
Such hostility for having thoughtful views, no wonder America is in this position. I’m voting for Harris, as a pragmatist. But I will not demean others for not voting for a genocide or voting third party. That is their right in a democracy. I’m simply pointing out that the choices we have been given are not going to change until we choose to step outside the paradigm. How can a third party that everyone seems to want develop, unless people choose to support it?
Fair enough, but as I said in the beginning- if the Green Party wants to be taken seriously- they need it offer up better options than a few clowns that show up every four years to spoil elections.
Stein and West are useless three years of every four. And you know this.
So stop offering up a non-point of choice when it’s proven that it only hurts our chances to save democracy.
And:
I never once “demeaned” anyone for not voting for a genocide. This is fucking stupid. So… Nice try playing the victim card. This is why I can’t take you seriously.
“It’s never the right time,”, cries liberalism.
The fact that you think an op-ed piece is relevant to this discussion shows how you lack the maturity to even be a part of it.
The Green Party is pointless. And the fact that it remains so even with people like you trying to prop it up- exemplifies that.
We’re done here.
There are ways to end a discussion without belittling others and hurling insults. We live in a society after all.
Whatever makes you feel better about being wrong.
Being right doesn’t justify animosity.
It’s funny how you accuse liberals of everything you can throw at them, call them names, and insult them on the regular- then switch at all to being a victim when it serves to make you appear to be on the high road.
I hope you don’t think anyone buys it.
I’m not a victim. Just as flawed as everyone else. I do fall into emotional reactionary patterns. But I try to be aware of it, and learn. I don’t hate individuals, just the ideology.
You’ll forgive me if I refuse to look past the shit ton of removals and bans you’ve had for incivility and trolling, while you casually try and pretend to take the high road here.
Don’t look to others (hypocritical moderators) to discern the truth, decide for yourself. I’m not voting for Jill Stein and the Green Party. Her interview with Mehdi Hasan was lacking consistency . But the slander and misrepresentation of third parties greatly disturbs me. I understand the desire to elect Harris to prevent Trump, but this smear campaign is at the expense of the truth, and only serves to limit the possibility of future third parties.
When an actual third party candidate decides to spend every year between elections doing the work to earn a vote- I’ll take them seriously.
But I’ve yet to ever see one do anything but show up at the eleventh hour with a bunch of speak-a-lot-yet-say-nothing rhetoric that only serves to divide votes.
First it needs to be viable:
Https://youtu.be/s7tWHJfhiyo