“Jill Stein is a useful idiot for Russia. After parroting Kremlin talking points and being propped up by bad actors in 2016 she’s at it again,” DNC spokesman Matt Corridoni said in a statement to The Bulwark. “Jill Stein won’t become president, but her spoiler candidacy—that both the GOP and Putin have previously shown interest in—can help decide who wins. A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump.”
i’m glad the “you’re pro-genocide if you vote anything but 3rd party” morons finally shut the fuck up around here
edit: LOL
have you had ANYONE turn around and say " you know what, you’re right!" on lemmy? or ANYWHERE?
gtfo russian cumfarts
Probably doesn’t help that Stein refuses to call Putin a war criminal.
https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-vladimir-putin-war-criminal-1954965
"Hasan later asked Stein why she had labeled Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal, but not Putin.
“Well, as John F. Kennedy said, we must not negotiate out of fear and we must not fear to negotiate,” she replied. “So, if you want to be an effective world leader, you don’t start by name-calling and hurling epithets.”
“So, how will President Stein negotiate with Israel then if you’ve called Netanyahu a war criminal?” Hasan asked in response.
“Well, because he very clearly is a war criminal,” Stein said, prompting Hasan to ask: “So Putin clearly isn’t a war criminal?”
“Well, we don’t have a decision—put it this way—by the International Criminal Court,” Stein said.
The ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Putin, alleging that he is responsible for war crimes. No such warrant has been issued for Netanyahu, whose war on Gaza has killed more than 40,000 Palestinians. However, the chief prosecutor of the ICC has applied for an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister.
“There’s an arrest warrant for Putin and there isn’t an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, so why is Putin not a war criminal, but Netanyahu is?” Hasan asked.
“Yeah. Well, let me say this. We are sponsoring that war. We are sponsoring Netanyahu,” Stein responded. “He is our dog in this fight. That is why we have a responsibility to pull him back.”"
Fwiw after that whole thing made news she released a press statement that did call him a war criminal
EDIT: citation - https://www.jillstein2024.com/war_criminals_and_diplomacy
“Hey, Vladimir? I need to actually call you a war criminal now, yeah, I almost got found out. Thanks! I knew you’d understand!”
LOL! That makes it sound like she’s a Russian plant or Russian asset rather than a useful idiot - the latter wouldn’t need to report back like that.
And anyone paying attention realizes she only put out the statement after she got called on it and had time to think about what it meant that she was actively avoiding doing so. This is 100% optics and nothing more.
Her statement is about as believable as a kid with crumbs on their face saying they didn’t eat all the cookies…
Unfortunately, third party candidates are made exactly for people not paying attention
Way too little, way too late. Medhi cut her up so surgically I don’t even know if she’s gonna have the stones to resurface four years from now. Hopefully being a Russian asset pays well, Shill is done
Aha, you fool! You think she feels shame?
LMAO no
Makes sense, but citation requested.
That being said, she’s so ill informed that she didn’t know how many House Reps there are. Of course she wouldn’t have known about the ICC arrest warrant for Putin until a reporter told her so she could look it up.
Citation as requested: https://www.jillstein2024.com/war_criminals_and_diplomacy
If anything, if he’s “our dog” as she says, doesn’t that mean he’s just a tool rather than a war criminal?
Why is this interesting? Here’s another point of view, one that’s a bit more consistent. Israel, while not being a member of NATO, has a special relationship with it and is basically a major defacto ally.
If you are pro-(Putin’s) Russia and believe NATO’s actions are war crimes, then it’s no leap at all to consider Israel in the same group. In fact, hurting Israel (the country) then benefits Russia as it weakens NATO (by weakening a close ally of theirs).
LOL, that just proves his point. I read the transcript, and Stein had every opportunity to clearly and definitively repudiate Putin. Not only did she refuse to do so, she continues to refuse, dishonestly misrepresents being called out on her bad faith as a “misunderstanding,” and doubles down with bullshit "both sides"ism.
In fact, that press release has sealed the deal on convincing me that she’s a deeply unserious piece of shit and a Russian asset.
So congratulations troll farm vatniks, you’ve played yourselves.
She had to get the fax from Putin. Puppets don’t talk for themselves
I like how everyone who is aware of the terror America has caused all over the world is immediately a Russian asset.
I like that she has the balls to rightfully call our living current and past presidents war criminals. Not every american is so brainwashed.
And before you ask I’m voting Democrat. I like that Jill Stein is putting pressure on the Democrats, and I can’t say I disagree with anything in the statement they released.
Clearly she has no problem with calling world leaders war criminals, so why did she stop so short with Putin?
Probably because she was trying to make one point and the interviewer was trying to make another one.
The interviewer won rhetorically. I think it takes self awareness and humility for the green party to realize this mistake and immediately issue a clarification in plain words.
You actually cannot truthfully say that she has not called Putin a war criminal anymore, but that hasnt changed how people here are talking.
People need to ask themselves why the democrats would throw mud rather than debate policy with the green party. In my opinion, its shameful and makes me feel worse about likely voting democrat this November.
Look at me wishing for clean politics though.
Agreed! Good post, friend.
I must’ve missed when Kamala Harris called Netanyahu a war criminal.
Just out of curiosity, do you think it would help her win the election if she did? She boycotted his speech in congress. She is treading a really thin line, and the only winning gambit seems to be keeping her messaging neutral until after the election. Rocking that boat right now gives the Republicans further ammunition to use against her, and will embolden Netanyahu to militarily escalate.
At the moment she can hide behind the veil of the current policy being driven exclusively by Biden rather than inserting herself in the middle of things, and therefore presenting additional leverage to her enemies. I don’t like the situation, but I don’t see how it was possible to play things any differently while still preserving a serious chance to win the election.
We normally see eye to eye on a lot of things, but in this case I think it is disengenuous to conflate the motivations of Jill Stein & Kamala Harris.
In addition, people act like she isn’t also the acting VP during this campaign. It would be extraordinarily problematic for the VP to actively undermine the policy of the president with whom they are serving even if their own presidential policy would be significantly different.
I don’t think it would help Harris to call Netanyahu a war criminal. I understand the reasoning. But, to attack Stein for inconsistencies in an interview, which she has since corrected by releasing a statement, is hypocritical. If Harris isn’t willing to call Netanyahu a war criminal, because of the election, then how can it be possible to hold Stein to a different standard?
Because Stein has notthing to lose. She could easily take a stand on something like Netanyahu but it was pulling teeth to condemn Putin. When the stakes are so low she can make any statement she wants.
Well, I think for one thing because Jill Stein seemingly had nothing to lose in that interview with Mehdi. The whole thing just came off as weird to me, and clearly that sentiment was pretty widely shared. I just don’t understand it I guess. If she had provided more context around her initial hesitancy perhaps I would feel differently.
I am also totally willing to admit that it is an intellectual double standard, but it isn’t a strategic one because the outcome of Kamala Harris’ speech has the ability to affect the outcome of this election in a huge way. I guess you could argue that Jill Stein’s does too since she is potentially peeling votes from the Democrats, but if she was actually serious about affecting change she could be lobbying Kamala Harris for policy concessions behind the scenes instead of just virtue signaling.
Jill Stein in that Mehdi interview really gave off the same energy as Kim Iversen in her debate with Destiny yesterday. Neither one of them did much to counter the narrative that they were at best highly sympathetic to Russia, or at worst closeted Russian assets. It was all just really bizarre and extremely suspect…
Whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout though?
Accusing an interlocutor of whataboutism can also in itself be manipulative and serve the motive of discrediting, as critical talking points can be used selectively and purposefully even as the starting point of the conversation.
Just pointing out the double standard being used.
You forgot this part from the beginning
"Mehdi Hasan: Vladimir Putin is a war criminal?
Jill Stein: Yes, we did condemn —"
She called him a war criminal several times in the interview
Not directly though, that’s why she got roasted. It was a lot of dissembly.
Yes, directly and specifically about Putin. The quote is right there.
“Yes we did condemn…” is not the same as “Yes, Putin is a war criminal.”
The passive accusations run all through it.
“So, what we said about Putin was that his invasion of Ukraine is criminal. It’s a criminal and murderous war,”
“Well, by implication, by implication,” Stein said.
“In so many words, yes he is,” Stein said. “If you want to pull him back, if you are a world leader, you don’t begin your conversation by calling someone a war criminal.”
It…is when the question is literally “is putin a war criminal?”
No, it’s not. “In so many words” does not have a direct meaning.
Ahahaha oh no the “office workers” are still all over here, their content usually just gets downvoted into being permanently hidden and they’ve stopped picking fights outside of their own posts.
Don’t forget there was also a bunch of government-backed troll farms shut down recently
And yet I’m still here. Weird
Someone can be carrying water for Putin while not actually being on the payroll, because they’re dumb enough to fall for all the propaganda.
Only the United States of America is allowed to spread propaganda. Good luck with your epiphany.
Are you really trying to act like this is some big reveal? Dude, we know. We’re the #1 target of the pro-US propaganda. We see it all the time. It’s why we’re pretty good at spotting other country’s propaganda when we see it.
Knowing that propaganda exists, and being able to interpret through media literacy, are two different things.
their content usually just gets downvoted into being permanently hidden
At first I read this as something that existed at the post level, too. Man, I sometimes wish something like that existed - posts below a certain rating could just be hidden (like Slashdot, for instance).
Well, on lemmy you can probably brigade quite easily so that would give the propagandists a weapon too.
It does kinda, if you browse using the Hot sorting stuff with 0 or less net score typically won’t show up unless you go quite a few pages back.
Those MAGAs cosplaying as lefties will have an even harder time now that the Uncommitted group have said they cannot support Harris but Donald will be worse. The same as we have all be saying.
Not just Trump will be worse as some sort of abstract moral statement. Their statement is that Uncommitted voters should actively vote against Donald Trump no matter how inadequate Harris’s statements and commitments have been.
Of course it’s exactly who I expected to show up and say that lmao. They’re so fucking predictable. It’s hilarious.
They haven’t, they just get downvoted pretty quickly.
Removed by mod
lol, where’s dufusbaan?
hilarious that i know exactly who you’re talking about
Removed by mod
There are other third parties you can vote for
thanks, i’ll not be throwing my vote away this time. or any time
How does it feel when you rationalize ethnic cleansing? Did you ever imagine you’d be this person?
You’re pro genocide if you vote for anyone that has explicitly voted to arm and fund the genocide
Are you saying “the US is a fully functioning democracy whose actions represent the will of the people”?
I just want to make sure I’m hearing you right, that America is a functioning democracy…
Where are you getting that from?
You are pro genocide if you are supporting those funding and providing weapons for genocide
LOL it took a whole hour
you kids are slacking
and no. voting for harris does NOT make me “pro-genocide,” no matter how much you wish it did.
have fun watching jill stein get a single digit percentage of the vote. if that. but don’t feel like you accomplished something by throwing your vote away, because you didn’t
and no. voting for harris does NOT make me “pro-genocide,” no matter how much you wish it did.
Of course not. You being pro-genocide means that you have two candidates to choose from.
Yes it does, but you have to weigh the pros and cons of your vote just like e everyone else.
Its not crazy to acknowledge that the current choices are genocide or genocide light. You can even still vote for Kamala and feel slightly bad about her stance on Israel. Wheres the problem with allowing some nuance here? Turning this into all or nothing, live or die, good or evil, is not very convincing in my opinion.
Yea well buddy, I’m sorry but I’m not going to just sit here and allow genocide or genocide light without calling you a jackass on the internet.
But I will walk up to the store right now and get another beer.
Brb
I actually don’t know if you are with me or against me, but I really like the energy of your post, made me feel like I was walking to the corner store with you.
If Harris promised to stop sending weapons to Netanyahu, how many centrists do you think would become trumpers?
Far less than all of those who would just opt to stay home and not vote.
You mean to tell me that centrists would rather throw a tantrum and withhold their votes just because they didn’t get 100% of everything they wanted, even when that would mean guaranteeing a Trump victory?
The exact same shit they’ve been accusing progressives of doing? The same rationale they use to blame progressives for Clinton’s loss in 2016?
Why does Vote Blue No Matter Who only ever work one way?
Zero intelligent ones, because everyone knows we just need someone to say it at this point.
But you know what?
Harris can’t even say out loud that she will stop the genocide.
Liberals love infantilizing everyone they disagree with. And is a sign of narcissistic personality disorder
infantilizing everyone they disagree with
I love the smell of projection in the morning.
Conservatives love showing everyone their persecution complex.
Quite binary to assume that a critique of a liberal implies that I am a conservative. Socialists. Can’t stand either one of you
And yet the hatred you constantly exude evokes conservatism and the voting you push helps conservatives. Putin would salivate at your post history.
Such an odd thing about these “i’m so communist bro!” people.
I don’t exude hatred, I point out Nazis when I see them
They don’t infantilize the right. Then again, you did say everyone they disagree with.
From the looks of it lately the line between red and blue are becoming very blurry. Harris uses right wing dog whistles with every statement.
Not even gonna try to rationalize it huh.
Tell us which non-genocide candidate has any sort of chance to win the election.
Man, things have gotten that bad huh. What a sentence.
The problem is that “support genocide” is being used overly broadly.
The stated policy of the Biden/Harris administration is that Israel has a right to defend itself.
Surprise! They do. Every sovereign nation has that right.
As a result of that stated policy, Biden and Harris both support providing weapons and funding for the continual defense of Israel.
https://www.npr.org/2024/08/23/g-s1-19232/kamala-harris-israel-gaza-dnc
So follow me here:
- Israel has a right to defend itself.
- The US will support that defense.
Where it breaks down is Bibi and Likud taking that defensive support and directing it into the Genocide.
That’s on THEM. The United States is making a good faith effort to provide support for the defense of Israel. Israel is intentionally misapplying that support.
Trump’s stated policy is that Israel needs to kill everyone quicker.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-israel-pr-hugh-hewitt-21faee332d95fec99652c112fbdcd35d
“They’re losing the PR war. They’re losing it big. But they’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life.”
Only one of these two policies is pro-genocide, Trumps.
Biden/Harris is pro-defense which is illegitimately being used for genocide, not at all the same as being pro-genocide.
That’s on THEM. The United States is making a good faith effort to provide support for the defense of Israel. Israel is intentionally misapplying that support.
This is not a good argument. They’re not infants, they have agency and the ability to perceive the impacts of their actions.
Biden/Harris is pro-defense which is illegitimately being used for genocide, not at all the same as being pro-genocide.
Eh, it certainly means they’re not proactively anti-genocide.
But more importantly it’s not going to move someone uncomfortable with the Democratic material support for the genocide a single iota closer to accepting that there is still a better candidate both for Palestine and for all the aspects where they’re actually good, not just not as a bad.
So is your argument that the Biden/Harris administration is blind, or stupid?
If I give my kid an AR-15 and they shoot up a school, I may or may not be culpable.
But if I hand them another AR after the first shooting, they kill again, and then I give them another, and another, and keep handing them weapons for months, and theres a pile of 15,000 dead children, then I am definitely culpable.
It doesn’t matter how many times I tell the kid “this AR is for defense only”.
Every sovereign nation has that right.
Per the UN and international law and occupying country can NOT claim self defense
Biden/Harris providing unlimited weapons and money is allowing Israel to finish the job before January 2025.
Turning a blind eye and genocide denial because it’s team blue committing it is weird and inhumane
This shit is so disjointed. Its not a genocide, its only a genocide because the countrys leaders want it to be, Biden is only arming a genocide because those leaders want to use the weapons for genocide. You’re stuck, man, you cant get past any of the uncomfortable truths. You cant make an argument that its not a genocide. You cant make an argument that our government is not arming and funding that genocide. You cant make an argument that youre not supporting a candidate that is likely to continue to arm and fund that genocide.
Yeah they have gotten that bad. I’m glad that you’ve finally decided to accept that. That’s the first step.
Nah im not gonna accept genocide as a given
🌍🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀
I dont recall any other election where people are saying ‘look, you cant expect to have candidates that dont support genocide’
LOL ok, you’re cool with throwing your vote away
that doesn’t mean anyone else is obliged to waste time “rationalizing” NOT throwing their vote away to you
do what you want. just know that your third party vote did NOTHING for palestine. and NOTHING for anyone else either.
I wish it meant we did nothing for palestine. Instead of it meaning bombs and funding continues to pour into the arms of the country thats killing them.
so throw your fucking vote away
Nah im voting for a candidate that has not voted to arm and fund an ongoing genocide.
Telling someone they are throwing away their vote because they won’t support your team is right wing authoritarian voter suppression.
“Teams” don’t enter into it.
One candidate poses an existential threat to our country and way of life.
One other candidate can defeat them.
Taking a vote away from the 2nd candidate has the same net effect as voting for the first one.
You either help beat Trump or you help elect him. A 3rd party will not win, so voting 3rd party doesn’t help beat Trump.
Both pose a threat to the country, but right now one dragged themselves out of the sewer like they do every four years to talk progressive and proactive, then proceed to legislate like their Republican counterparts after the election.
My goal is to defeat both threats to the country and our quality of life, not slowly extend everyone’s pain.
Nice straw man. You’re throwing your vote away because you are voting for a candidate that has zero chance of winning, while one of the two actual options is a literal fascist who will give Netanyahu carte blanche in Palestine and the other realizes she has to walk a narrow tightrope before November if she wants to get elected and have any influence over Israel whatsoever.
But I know you know this already.
If the Green Party was a serious political party, then why do they never care about down ballot elections? Why don’t they ever care about local elections? Why do they disappear, only to crawl out from their hole every four years to sow division among American voters?
Netanyahu has Carte Blanche right now. The US has completed over 500 weapons deliveries to Israel. And Harris has already said she’s continuing the shit we have going on right now.
There are plenty of greens holding local offices right now, but you would know that if you looked instead of relying on someone to feed you propaganda that’s designed for their purposes.
Why is it every 4 years Democrats rise from the sewers and talk progressive and populous then go right back to legislating like their Republican counterparts after the election?
Telling someone their vote is wasted or meaningless is right-wing authoritarian voter suppression.
Why do you love Trump so much you’re trying so hard to get him into power?
Democrats supporting a genocide is whats gonna do it.
Are you saying “the US is a fully functioning democracy whose actions represent the will of the people”?
I just want to make sure I’m hearing you right, that America is a functioning democracy…
No, it’s not a fully functioning democracy that does not represent the will of the people. The will of the people are saying they want a ceasefire, they want an end to war. Which falls on deaf ears to politicians. The only thing Democrats or Republicans ever respond to is the threat of money stopping, which was the only thing that kept Biden from running.
Jill is here to collect some donations then disappear for 4 years. Again.
As someone in a state where my presidential vote is very much decided… I voted Gary Johnson in 2016. I know there are a lot of very real critiques of the libertarian party and/or platform, but it’s really sad the green party puts it to shame… it’s not a high bar.
My point being… wtf is she still doing doing this stuff? Libertarians push local candidates all the damn time, and make a push for the presidential seat when they can, but soundly rejected Trump, and hell, even in 2016 you had the VP libertarian cantidate saying “vote Hillary”. Like I am upset as anyone else, but if you’re still in the green party you’re just kidding yourself… and thats from a freaking libertarian that hates his party a good 50% of the time.
I absolutely despise libertarians. But I approve this message.
Lol. I get it. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it a million more times I’m sure: it’s got a lot of problems, but I like the framework the NAP provides. It’s explicit and provides a place to work from.
They’re not all crazy “public roads are theft” folks. And again, remember the party soundly rejected trump. IME a lot of libertarians are generally supportive of social programs, so long as they’re egalitarian.
But what really rustles jimmies is the cut and dry stuff. I will never be able to get over democrats being on the wrong side of gay marriage, even in the name of pragmatism. I’ll support them out of pragmatism, but I’m bitter about it.
But to the point of this thread: very little of that matters if there’s not a next election. I’ll take the party that fumbled gay marriage in the late 2000s VS. The one that wants to kill my friends 1000/10 times.
And again to the point of this thread: it’s telling, and gives me faith in my party, there is no “Garry Johnson” this year.
There’s photos of Shill Stein dining with Putin. How much more evidence do you need?
She wasn’t even the worst at the table, that “honor” goes to convicted felon Mike Flynn:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Flynn
More on Flynn and his connecting Trump to Russia here:
p.s. Trump’s “National Security Advisor”.
Oh oh but if I mention it to certain folk, that’s “old news” and “why do you only ever bring that image up” and “lol libs sure are grasping at straws”
Fascism and political interference does not have an expiration date.
Worth bringing the image up because it’s from 2015… 6 months after she announced she was running.
political interference does not have an expiration date.
Sure as fuck doesn’t, as we are still being impacted by the Clinton administration interfering in 1996 Russian elections that ended up resulting in Putin as President.
You know what, you convinced me. I’ve decided not to vote for Clinton.
His bad decisions still haunt our society.
I heard Clinton even helped Hitler bein elected so … shuffles papers … I am NOT going to vote for … shuffling papers more … Biden but for Trump!
-“Hey boss, you sure it’s still Biden?”
-“Da da.”
We are still plagued with horrible decisions made by previous Democrats. Clinton giving us Putin is one of them, Biden and his crime bill is another one
Lest anyone try to claim Stein isn’t running purely as a spoiler candidate.
Still can’t believe Flynn was the fucking head of the DIA
Provide links from the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation showing there was wrong doing with the event. They’ve investigated and found nothing. Implying guilt by association is dishonest and should be labeled misinformation.
Here’s the problem, legally, private citizens can’t engage in diplomatic actions like this:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953
“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
You would think anyone who just announced their candidacy 6 months before this dinner would know that…
But then you’d also think anyone running for President would also know how many Congressmen there are…
https://www.salon.com/2024/09/12/jill-stein-schooled-on-in-brutal-breakfast-club-interview/
And yet the Senate intelligence committee found nothing wrong or nefarious.
you’d also think anyone running for President would also know how many Congressmen there are
One would think the former 2 term VP under the first black President would remember his name
Great point. I definitely won’t vote for Biden this year.
It was ok when your team was doing it but one error from someone else and it’s the end of the world and completely makes them ineligible.
Lol imagine getting mad because someone called Jill Stein a useful idiot for Russia (that’s all she’s ever been lmao)
Clearly you’re her moral-kin and that’s why you hurt so.
It was OK when my team was doing what? Which “team” do I play for? You seem confused.
No, you see they just happened to put her at the same table as Putin and the other scumbags. She had no say in it! And she couldn’t do anything about it! She’s the victim here, don’t ya know!
…This is the common response you see from the Stein cultists when this photo is brought up. And it’s pure horseshit. If she had anywhere near the principles and ethics she claims to have she would have got up and left from that table immediately. But she didn’t. Because she’s a hypocritical con-artist, a charlatan.
Stein plays the morally-upright crusader, waltzing around casting sanctimonious judgements on others. But at the end of the day she’s a far right stooge who is only interested in stroking her own ego and discretely ingratiating herself to tyrants. She can say what she want and has no accountability held against her.
She had done so much damage to the Green movement over the past decade+. She only pops up at election time to try to make life easier for far right movements whose policies are often the antithesis of what she pretend to support.
The Democrats should be doing more on environmental issues and holding Israel accountable for what’s going on in Palestine. But at least they aren’t hiding behind their own self-righteousness to anywhere near the degree that Stein is.
The system is rigged and you are being play around, how much more evidence do you need?
Presidents are supposed to meet with other global leaders you Muppet
That’s Index’s “gotcha” every time someone brings up the dinner photo. He posts these every time as if it’s not normal for world leaders to meet… and Stein is not a world leader.
It’s not normal to shake hands and laugh with dictators. Would you personally act so friendly with putin, bil salman, or netanyahu? The average person would probably slap them in the face.
World leaders throughout history do that with dictators. Your solution would be to start wars over public insults? Dictators aren’t going to take public insults lightly, particularly those with nuclear capability.
World leaders throughout history are dictators or act like one
If so then wouldn’t Green Party leaders be included?
Clearly you don’t have a clue how international politics work. It’s not unusual for world leaders to meet, even when some are dictators. Part of preventing war between hostile countries is diplomacy. I am not a world leader, so no, I would not be meeting with any of those individuals and neither should Stein. Do you seriously think it would be at all beneficial for world leaders to be assaulting each other?
“international politics” is not shaking hands, hugging, and laughing with dictators. What were jill stein doing at the table with putin? discussing diplomacy? They were enjoying their champagne and talking about how they are going to be richer while peasants like you do all the work for them.
The choice to meet with a war criminal, shake hands and laugh is their own.
World leaders do meet one another, and often shake one another’s hands. Jill Stein is not a world leader.
Stein’s campaign manager, Jason Call, said via email that “the Democratic Party has no respect for actual democracy or the voting public,” calling the attack a “tired and sad commentary on a party that refuses to serve the American people with good public policy.”
Yes, this is true.
“We’re seeing a desperate empire now. We are seeing a desperate colonialist settler empire whose ways of the world and whose control over the world has been lost,” Stein said as she inveighed against U.S. healthcare, housing, and military policy.
This is also true. But she has no shot at winning and is literally only capable of helping the orange bad. We need rank-choice voting. Until we get that, she should shut up and drop out. Especially with the threat of the orange bad.
Yup! This exactly.
literally only capable of helping the orange bad
The folks voting Green have already folded on the other options. If you’re picking a fight with Jill, you’re only driving her base farther from your candidate.
I’m tired of people being stupid. I’ve been tired of it for 20 God damn years. I’m folding on stupid people. I don’t care if I drive them away anymore.
I hear this from Trump voters all the fucking time. Are we really are just getting a choice between Red MAGA and Blue MAGA?
Blue MAGA is a lie created by tankies because they want Trump to win so Russia can better genocide Ukraine.
Blue MAGA is a lie
Harris’ conservative culture play
From camo hats to libertarian rhetoric, the Kamala Harris campaign is staking its claim to symbols of conservative identity.
I don’t give a single shit about Harris trying to appeal to the right wing. Good. She should be trying to appeal to the right wing because abstentionism on the left is evidently rampant. And I think that, because compromising is far better than allowing Trump to win.
You are actively creating the conditions for her to pursue this strategy, and criticizing her for pursuing it. Fuck you and everyone like you.
Want to change it? Set an outline of manageable policy points that you’d like to see her compromise on if she wants you to vote for her, and then make that popular. Abstentionism doesn’t work, idiot.
I don’t give a single shit about Harris trying to appeal to the right wing. Good. She should be trying to appeal to the right wing
The liberal two button problem
-
Harris is only electable if she parrots fascist talking points.
-
Harris is only electable if her progressive opponents are purged from the ticket
Damn. Sounding more and more like Trump’s attitude towards libertarians.
-
The point is she doesn’t have a base. She’s never actually worked to get one. She comes out of the woodwork every 4 years to poke holes in the liberal candidate talking points and cause these rifts in the left. The people who vote for her are almost all independent voters who are “sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils”. Yet not one of those people will get up off their asses to push their local legislatures to enact ranked choice voting in order to provide an actual avenue for a third party candidate to get elected.
The point is she doesn’t have a base.
I’ve got perennial Green voters on my street. They’re in their 70s. The entire reason the Green Party exists stems from liberals who were burned out of the Carter/Clinton neoliberal turn during the Reagan Era.
She comes out of the woodwork every 4 years to poke holes in the liberal candidate talking points
We’ve had Democrats promising universal health care, public higher education, environmental protections, and global demilitarization for the last 50 years. She doesn’t have to poke holes, she simply sticks her fingers through the Swiss Cheese track record that half a century of corporate liberalism has created.
not one of those people will get up off their asses to push their local legislatures to enact ranked choice voting
That’s a flat out lie. The Greens and Libertarians are the only two significant activist forces for RCV, and state legislative races are some of the few spots where they can consistently win races. What’s more, these parties very often emerge from activist movements that are rejected by the ostensibly-friendly Big Two parties. Sierra Club produces Green voters in droves, not because they wouldn’t happily caucus with Democrats but because Democrats despise any kind of activist Green movement. Gun clubs and tax abolitionist groups churn out Libertarians for the same reason - mushy pro-cop/pro-war Republicans and Tax-and-Spend governors like Abbott and DeSantis drive libertarians nuts.
The singular reason why Democrats are terrified of the Green Party in this election is that it offers an outlet for all those disaffected Arab-American voters no longer welcome in the party. Its the same reason Republicans shat the bed over Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. They know they can’t deliver on their promises and keep their mega-donor funders happy, so they need to be the only voice in the room making these campaign pledges. Otherwise, people start testing the water with alternatives.
Here you go again. Not you personally, but everyone who says that you’re either with us or against us. That didn’t make sense, it doesn’t make sense now, it never will, and it won’t get Harris any more votes. If you don’t believe me, ask Hillary Clinton. Her supporters said the same thing, and then she lost. At some point you have to face the reality that people can and do vote for third-party candidates, and then you need to decide how you’re going to convince them that they ought to vote for your candidate, and usually that’s effective if your candidate has some policies that the voters appreciate. Or don’t try to get their votes and move on with life, that’s okay too.
But maybe you’re looking for someone to blame, in case Harris loses. You want to be able to blame those third-party voters. I’m not going to let you off the hook. If she throws away third party votes, she knew exactly what she was doing, she took the risk and it paid off or it didn’t.
But even if we ignore that, you’ve also forgotten that many people don’t live in swing states, and because of the electoral college, their vote probably is not going to impact the outcome. In that case, shouldn’t they feel free to vote how their conscience dictates? But of course you didn’t take this into account, because you didn’t think about their situation.
But let’s ignore the electoral college. Let’s assume that everyone is equal on Election Day, that all of our votes count for something. It’s well known that no one is asking for our vote the day after election day. As voters, we have power in the lead up to the election and in the election itself, if we have any power at all. But you want us to throw that away. Not only that, you keep repeating the same script every 4 years, which means we never have any power, and we never will, if we listen to you.
Obviously you personally did not write all of the arguments that I’m referring to above, but it’s important for people to deal with all of the above arguments if they’re arguing that third parties ought not exist or that nobody should even consider supporting them.
Narrator: the DNC is correct.
The people who vote for her seem like the useful idiots to me, she herself more seems like a traitor to the old values of her country and the purported causes of her party. She loves foreign autocrat dictatorships and there’s nothing green about helping republicans win elections.
Yeah useful idiots are volunteers, she’s a paid collaborator.
deleted by creator
Forget debates. I would pay good money to see an episode of Jeopardy with Harris, Stein, and Trump.
The categories could be content from a high school civics class.
“This person won the popular vote for President in 2016.”
Prepare for rant about the show being BIASED AGAINST ME and spreading FAKE NEWS by not accepting alternative FACTS.
How is this the first time me hearing this wonderful idea?
“I’ll take Jap Anus Relations for $200 Alex”
I’d much rather see them in a game show than a debate. Debates are pretty much boring game shows these days anyways.
@LorneMichaels We need this stat!
Jill has ruined a lot of credibility.
Universalmonk bouta flip a table.
I doubt anyone dumb enough to vote for Stein are Harris voters anyway. So now than likely a vote for Stein will be one taken for Trump. So Trump and Putin can waste all the money they want on her campaign.
They’re probably trying to scoop up the Republican voters that are disillusioned with Trump and prevent them from going to Harris. It’s actually a decent strategy in that light.
♥️ by author (@drjillstein)
You know, positioning the DNC “against” her might draw some of the people who won’t vote for Harris but really don’t want to vote for Trump away from voting GOP…
You don’t have to be “smart” to vote for a good candidate.
Stein is the nominally “more liberal than the Democrats are willing to be” candidate. So most likely if they were forced to vote and could only vote for Trump or Harris, then I’d wager they’d mostly go Harris.
A relative weakness is that on the left there are currently more people ready to discard strategic thinking and stand on what they consider their absolute principles. The right is currently a bit more unified, as they are more willing to yield on their differences to vote closest to their overall goal with a decent chance to win.
Or the left is fairly unified in practice but Internet manipulations present the illusion otherwise, I have no idea
Or you could just reserve your opinion for who you are going to vote for, and respect the fact everyone is free to come to their own conclusion.
I’m voting for Harris, but it wouldnt offend me If someone said they were voting third party. The same as I wouldnt expect it to offend them I’m voting for Harris.
Y’all need to get off this good and evil Netflix drama.
What they ultimately do with their vote is their business, but I’m just responding to the premise that would-be Stein voters would not vote for Harris anyway, because they are “too dumb” to vote for Harris, which is incorrect.
As to discussing the strategic situation, I think that is important to reiterate the consequence of their vote. Stein will not win, it’s very obvious, so a vote thrown that way is merely a message to try to break the self fulfilling prophecy of third parties being hopeless. If you truly feel either candidate is roughly equal, this is a fine and strategic move. I could understand that perspective in most presidential races I have seen. Given the happenings associated with Trump’s first term, I personally can not understand that perspective, but ultimately it is their business.
To be quiet on this would be to let what seems to be forces looking to weaken the Harris prospect prevail in swaying people to vote for Stein, despite those forces not actually wanting Stein, but just wanting a spoiler candidate to take some votes the way they want.
First of all, blown way out of proportion. People voting for the green party are a very small number. What the democrat party doesnt want is any valid criticism of their party. That is detrimental because it could cause people to pull away from the democrats.
So instead of just acknowledging any good points the green party has, or at least arguing them in good faith, they throw mud on the party calling them a Russian controlled political party, which is hypocritical at best when AIPAC runs the democratic party.
Personally, I think the democrats would be better off acting in good faith rather than avoiding the topic and slandering the speakers.
If out of proportion in scale, back in 2000, Nader voters going for Gore would have decided the nation for everyone. Ultimately the choices of a few hundred people overcame over half a million votes going the other way. The very small number of Stein voters in a certain place can decide the output. I don’t fault them for 2000, even if I disagree with them, because I don’t think folks could have reasonably foreseen the warmongering that was to come.
If out of proportion in severity, between November 2020 and January 2021, you had several attempts to undermine the election, and that was with very little planning/prep work. You had trying to get the states to “find enough votes”, you had fake electors, trying to get the VP to unilaterally refuse the election, inciting a crowd to storm the proceedings. In the aftermath you have certain people planning their whole political careers on promising to guarantee the elections for GOP, speculation that Vance was picked carefully as someone willing to do what Pence wouldn’t, and a whole carefully constructed plan to start getting things ready for 2028 election the moment 2025 starts, if they can. You have a supreme court that ruled that a president may be considered immune for crimes, unless of course the supreme court decides it’s not an “official act”, reserving the ability to selectively enforce law on the president themselves.
With respect to Russian influence, this is specifically a Stein situation and plenty of evidence to support that Stein is being supported by and manipulated by Russia. It makes sense too, as Trump has shown himself to be awfully susceptible to Putin’s manipulation, so taking advantage of a naive Stein to foil the votes of naive voters in favor of Trump is a plain strategic path for them.
Yes, we can talk about her platform, particularly about her wish to dissolve NATO and stop support of Ukraine, but other parts of her platform are difficult to explain the nuance of the problems. Like “dump money on third world nations”, which sounds the decent thing to do, but historically trashes any semblance of local economy and frequently reinforces warlords instead of the people.
If your logic is that the green party is big enough to cover the difference between candidates votes, then I have bad news for you because so is my neighborhood, and yours, and the group of people at your local church, and the next one over, and so on. Thats the reason why I say its impact is overblown. If the democrats lose by a hundred thousand votes, its not the green parties fault even if they get a million votes.
The democrats need to appeal to voters, not throw shit. Apparently the democrat base right now likes when the campaign dives into the mud though, saying things like “its refreshing to hear” despite that being the exact same reason people were drawn to trump.
Any of the Stein shills want to explain to everyone why Trump (among many other awful people/companies/etc) attorney Jay Sekulow was representing The Green Party in their case against the State of Nevada?
Anyone?
Trump and his team believe the same thing Democrats do: so-called third parties “steal” votes from the dominant parties. just because they believe it doesn’t make it true
Oh ok… So everyone who literally does this for a living and has done it for decades believes this. All evidence from previous elections indicates this. Evidence we have about this current candidate in this sham “party” clearly supports this…
You’re really not helping yourself here.
All evidence from previous elections indicates this.
that’s not true
They’re not wrong, but they could stand to recognize that some of their own policy shortcomings opened the door to her challenge.
That’s always going to be the case with a first past the post election system. There can only be 2 parties with a chance to win at any one time and both are forced to be big tents. Because they have no chance at winning third parties get more choice on the issues they focus on and more freedom in how they talk about those issues.
We need election reform. We need a voting system that gives more power to minority voices and we need an election system that makes Congress better reflect the actual vote. I like STAR voting and want to move the house to proportional representation. We would most likely still have 2 big tent more or less center parties that will trade the plurality but the big tents would have to work with the minority party representatives to get enough votes to pass legislation. It’s possible that more minority party visibility and them being taken more seriously would lead to a more ideologically diverse Senate and it would almost certainly boost minority party power in state and local elections.
The whole point is that there is no challenge. It is sabotage funded by Republicans and Putin.
What challenges has she done when not running for POTUS?
Well, that’s a good point, but Stein and the Green party are going about it the wrong way. Even Stein’s predecessor, Ralph Nader, has stated that they need to spend more time at the grassroots and building up local support, including getting folks elected to local school boards, state legislatures, and the like.
Jill Stein wouldn’t say that Putin is a war criminal. You should really listen to how she dances stupid the interview with Medhi Hassan.
The fallout/optics from that blatant fear to speak clearly about Putin was bad enough it seems that she’s now made a follow-up statement to lightly say the phrase, with qualification (after checking with daddy) and associating it only with Syria and refusing to mention Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
in that interview she immediately says “yes”. framing it as though she isn’t saying it is just lying.
“Say it” means a specific thing. She’s given multiple opportunities to do so directly in that interview and she’s terrified of a sound bite of her acknowledging it directly. She readily says it (appropriately) about Netanyahu, she will not say or about Putin. You’re either an apologist yourself or you’re undereducated on the subject matter - either way, do better.
making a woman perform like that is one of the most misogynist things I think anybody’s ever proposed me.
We’re not discussing a woman, we’re discussing a person and one that wants to be president. It’s far past time you stop reducing the candidate to sex and engage on the level they are asking to be engaged with. Words matter. Unequivocal statements that can’t be re-justified after the fact, matter.
A presidential election is a 24/7 performance as rehearsal for a 24/7 performance job. Your words literally immediately become historical record in this position.
You don’t seem like a serious person.
she was unequivocal
She is their stooge.
Jill Stein needs to go, condemning Putin should be the easiest thing in the world to do for any non-Russian.
Or anyone not in Putin’s pocket. Yes.
she has done that
