753

The Green Party leader has hired a GOP consulting firm and worked with Trump-affiliated lawyers.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 152 points 2 weeks ago

I'm sure the usual suspects will be along shortly to explain how this isn't what it absolutely, positively is.

[-] darharrison@lemm.ee 49 points 2 weeks ago

"Anything to beat the 'duopoly' of political parties, even if the party is tainted by neo-fascist dark money!"

Absolutely wild mental gymnastics lol

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] KnitWit@lemmy.world 37 points 2 weeks ago

Probably at the stage where it turns into ‘it doesn’t matter since she won’t win anyway, this is just a protest vote to show support for third party.’

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 43 points 2 weeks ago

Third party that are just Russians. What a pathetic way to protest.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

The same ones that jillsplain to everyone how her sitting there with Putin is no big deal.

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 14 points 2 weeks ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 13 points 2 weeks ago

You called it!

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 81 points 2 weeks ago

With all this stuff about Jill coming out, it’s no wonder all the Lemmy.ml and Hexbears are so supportive of her. She’s a Russian asset!

What is the Russian word for Wumao?

[-] logos@sh.itjust.works 21 points 2 weeks ago

It could just be she made a career out of unsucessfully running for president and doesn't care where the money came from.

That's supposedly how the whole Trump mess started.

[-] ravhall@discuss.online 16 points 2 weeks ago

You mean him just wanting to make money by running for president never actually expecting to run and regretting every minute of it while trying to be so vile he could never get elected again only to realize that’s what his base wants?

load more comments (30 replies)
[-] Cheems@lemmy.world 49 points 2 weeks ago
[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago

...I would argue that even insurrectionist is being far, far too lenient. They should be called terrorists. But, yeah, calling them "rioters".....barf.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] nexguy@lemmy.world 34 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Nothing about this story or Jill is important except for one thing. She is aligned with Putin in denying Ukraine weapons to defend itself. She may not be purposefully supporting Putin but she is supporting his position and making his position stronger ignoring Putin's past patterns of behavior.

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 32 points 2 weeks ago

Jill was always a double agent

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 29 points 2 weeks ago

In Nevada, the Democratic Party initiated a lawsuit to exclude the Green Party from the ballot, claiming the party used the wrong form to collect signatures from voters. The Green Party appealed the case and was represented by Jay Sekulow, an attorney who defended Trump throughout his impeachment trials (last week, the Nevada Supreme Court rejected Stein’s bid to be put back on the ballot).

In Wisconsin, Democratic National Committee employee David Strange sought to remove Stein from the ballot by arguing the Green Party can’t nominate presidential electors without legislative candidates eligible to do so. The Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear the case. Stein was again legally represented by a Trump-affiliated lawyer, Michael D. Dean, who was involved in lawsuits that attempted to overturn the results of the 2020 election, the Journal reported.

From another article:

The affidavit originally submitted with the Green Party’s petition in July 2023 was the correct one. However, because the petition that the Green Party submitted contained a separate mistake, an employee in the secretary of state’s office sent the party a sample petition that included the wrong affidavit – for use with petitions to put initiatives and referenda on the ballot. As a result, the affidavits that the Green Party later submitted with its petitions did not contain the attestation required for access to the ballot.

The secretary of state eventually announced that the Green Party had submitted enough signatures to qualify for the 2024 general election ballot.

The Nevada Democratic Party went to state court in June of this year, arguing that the signatures were invalid because the Green Party had used the wrong affidavit.

On Aug. 12, the state trial court ruled in favor of the Green Party, but on Sept. 6 a divided Nevada Supreme Court reversed. It concluded that the attestation that the Green Party had failed to include “serves an essential purpose.” Therefore, the majority reasoned, allowing the Green Party to have its candidates on the ballot when it had not fulfilled all of the prerequisites to do so would nullify “the requirements that were put in place for the public’s benefit.”

SCOTUS ruled with the Nevada Supreme Court and chose to keep the Green Party off the ballot. Their only real mistake here was really just some legal red tape filled out incorrectly. It doesn't really matter if Jill Stein is a terrible candidate or not, the two party system will clearly go to the ends of the earth to kill 3rd parties from every becoming a thing lol. I guess it matters more for democrats since green party would be taking out more of their votes than republicans.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 weeks ago

See also: the Dems suing to kick Claudia De La Crúz off the ballot in Georgia and PA. "Democrats" in name-only.

[-] Krauerking@lemy.lol 12 points 2 weeks ago

The DNC seems overly happy to use bureaucracy as a cludgel to reduce options "legally" to themselves.

While I get the fear beating down your competition in an underhanded manner doesn't inspire a whole lot of good will and also seems extremely unlikely to get the people you have just disenfranchised to vote on your side.

They resist any movement or adoption of new policy in favor of it staying as stagnant as possible. It's a deeply confusing and long term failing idea. Just look at how Kamala is now polling worse with each passing week. She felt like change and initial momentum of "joy" was able to carry her a little but it's not a permanent state and the initial dopamine is running out.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 20 points 2 weeks ago
[-] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 26 points 2 weeks ago

I think he’s still under his temporary ban ;)

[-] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 30 points 2 weeks ago

Only 21 hours to go before we get graced with their wonderful presence again!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago
[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Honestly, I think the mods should be promoted to sainthood for the level of patience they've shown with Monk (who as of late runs what seems to be a community related to MGTOW but without the toxicity called MRTOW) which is so beyond what I feel I'm capable of. I hope Monk appreciates the level of leeway they've been given here.

[-] ccunning@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

I’m honestly not sure if sainthood is the way I’d put it. It feels negligent to me. But in fairness I’d love to hear the mods perspective on what they consider the threshold for trolling. It almost feels like it’s a secondary offense here. Like they won’t ban you for trolling, it’s got to be trolling aaaand [pejoratives|hate speech|etc].

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] borari@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 2 weeks ago

I thought that username felt familiar, so I clicked through to their profile. Yup, already blocked lol.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago

I have more respect for people who don't vote then I do for people who vote for her.

[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

And I do NOT respect people who don't vote at all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

The Green Party in the USA is f'n weird.

[-] NateNate60@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

The Green Party has no incentive to act professionally because voters cannot punish them electorally for it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] MisterScruffy@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 weeks ago

I never see positive posts about Kamala because centrist Dems know that there isn't anything they can post about her that will be actually appealing so their only tactic is to beat up on the anti-war leftist candidate as much and as often as possible

[-] kescusay@lemmy.world 31 points 2 weeks ago

You're kidding, right? Right now, the front page consists of whatever stupid shit Trump has done recently, downvoted crap pushing Putin's favorite "anti-war leftist candidate," and positive news about Kamala Harris and her campaign.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
753 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19077 readers
3448 users here now

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.
  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

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS