• tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    258
    arrow-down
    23
    ·
    4 months ago

    Agreed. The Green Party sits on their ass until presidential election. They haven’t moved the needle. Best case scenario, they’ve convinced a few non-voters to participate. Worst case, they’re dishonest opportunists.

    • gravitas_deficiency
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      132
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      4 months ago

      This angle also needs to be considered). She’s not running in good faith. She’s essentially functioning as a 5th column to pull away voters who would otherwise vote for Harris.

      I’m not saying Harris shouldn’t be pushed on environmental issues. I am saying that trying to do that by voting for Stein is actively harmful to the goal of not letting the fascists win this election.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        81
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        4 months ago

        More importantly, if you are voting for her because of the environment, voting for stein is actually harmful to that goal because it helps trump win, which means instead of making baby steps in the right direction, we’ll run full steam in the wrong direction.

      • rayyy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        Fascists and Putin are sure to support her however they can. Cue the trolls.

      • makyo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I would absolutely vote Green but to do so would be unthinkable until we have ranked choice voting. We should band all the leftists together for one big push to get that enacted everywhere. Once we do that we can go back to our divisive bickering.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        The trouble with supporting a third party – and I say this as someone inclined to support a third party – is that anybody who actually does it is either (a) an idiot who doesn’t understand the game theory of first-past-the-post voting, or (b) an incredibly fringe nutjob. The result is that all third parties absolutely destroy all their credibility and ruin any chance of getting more mainstream.

        If you’re a third-party-inclined person who isn’t an idiot or a nutjob, your only real option is to vote for Democrats in general, and ones who support ranked choice voting in particular (because you sure as Hell aren’t gonna get it from the Republicans), and then switch to your third party of choice only after ranked-choice voting is passed.

        • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          My state is nowhere near anywhere close to being a swing-state. My vote for president carries very little weight. For this reason, I vote for whichever party actually aligns with my ideology.

          An acquaintance once tried to scapegoat me and my vote for Jill Stein as the reason that Donald Trump won in 2016.

          That’s not how the electoral college works.

          • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            If you live in a deep Red or deep Blue state, you definitely aren’t responsible for Donald Trump’s win in 2016, BUT we need to defeat Trump, and we need every vote we can get, everywhere we can get it, so Trump finds it hard to steal the election, because we know he will.

            At least, if you live in California or Oklahoma, your nonsense vote won’t give us Trump, but unless you are CERTAIN you can throw your vote away, I’d ask you to look at your wife, sister, and/or mother and ask yourself if you want them subjected to Project 2025. If you don’t, and I hope you don’t, save the protest votes for your city/county/state governments where they might actually accomplish something.

          • Soggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            4 months ago

            Virtue signalling into the void. Don’t get me wrong, I did it too in 2012 because I was disillusioned with Obama and I live in a deeply blue state. But that’s all it is. You’re better off writing an encouraging letter to your candidate of choice, or talking to your neighbors about the city council, or any number of other things that might actually make a material impact on someone’s life.

            • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              It doesn’t do anything, but neither does voting for a Democratic president in a non-swing state. They could just leave the box blank too. They’re not choosing “should I check the president box or talk to my neighbors”, they’re at the voting booth, presumably because other races matter, and filling in the box because it’s there. None of the options in that race matter and the comment you’re replying to is explicitly about how it doesn’t matter, so why are you even complaining?

            • blandfordforever@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              4 months ago

              Your point is that doing something is more effective than doing nothing? You sure got me there. I have to say that I agree.

        • azuth
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          4 months ago

          If you’re a third-party-inclined person who isn’t an idiot or a nutjob, your only real option is to vote for Democrats in general, and ones who support ranked choice voting in particular (because you sure as Hell aren’t gonna get it from the Republicans), and then switch to your third party of choice only after ranked-choice voting is passed.

          The Democrats are going to give you ranked-choice voting so they can potentially lose your vote… Thank god you are not an idiot.

          • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            San Francisco has ranked choice voting because there’s no way in hell a Republican could win here. That’s what we should be aiming for.

          • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The Democrats give us nothing. We voters take.

            Maine and Alaska use RCV now, and while Alaskan politicians are trying to ratfuck the votes (because Sarah Palin lost to a Democrat under FPTP), both states have seen people not get a Republican thanks to their vote for Third Parties on the Left, as long as they at least grudgingly mark the Dem ahead of the Rep on the RCV ballot.

            Colorado’s going to vote on this this November, too, which means I can actually vote Third Party without being ratfucked by that choice. Then I’ll happily say 'Vote Green to hold Blue accountable, but make sure Blue shows up before Red so Red doesn’t ratfuck all of us on the Left."

            If you wonder about the constant use of ratfucking in my post, have a read and see what it means…

          • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The Democrats are going to give you ranked-choice voting so they can potentially lose your vote…

            Yes. That’s because the Democratic Party isn’t some monolithic machiavellian organization.

    • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      27
      ·
      4 months ago

      The Green Party sits on their ass until presidential election.

      They hold over 140 offices across 20 states. Seems a little disingenuous to claim that.

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Across an entire nation, they have 140 whole offices. They have more people on their party organizing committee than people in office. None of those 140 are even at the level of state legislature, despite there being many races with unopposed Democrats that only have a few thousand total votes cast in them.

        The last election for my state rep had 4,000 votes cast. He had a single opponent from a party I’ve never heard of who got 1,000 of them. There were more candidates running under that low name ID and sparesly funded local party than there were Green candidates. If they were a real party trying to advance progressive causes, this would be an ideal place to build local representation. Single-party state, tons of DINOs to challenge from the left, and low turnout that could make successful challenges possible.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          That’s uhhh. A very interesting data point. Really kind of hangs the light on the problem…

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Wow, 143 elected offices is massive. Such prestigious positions as “Neighborhood Council”, “Conservation District”, “Town Commission”, “Planning Group”, “Park Commission” (Pawnee reference??), “Select Board”, “Zoning Board of Appeals Alternate”, “Water District Board of Commissioners”, “School Committee”, “Advisory Neighborhood Commission”, and gasp what’s this? The mayor of a California town of 22,000 people? Why if all of them banded together and moved to Connecticut (and somehow became popular with the residents there), they could collectively make almost 77% of an entire Connecticut General Assembly and literally no other offices including mayorships, governorships, all of the other state legislatures and the federal legislature, and all the god-knows-how-many positions in local governments.

        • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          4 months ago

          So now the goalposts are moved from they don’t do anything but presidential candidates to they don’t do enough? Maybe if they had better funding they could run more candidates. Saying they do nothing but presidential candidates is still disingenuous no matter how much you want to belittle their othet work.

  • PLAVAT🧿S
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    171
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t think it bodes well she sat with Putin at a conference, whether there was “language barriers” or not.

    • psycho_driver@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      108
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      Oh come on, she had another American there to make sure nothing fishy was going on. The always beyond reproach Michael Flynn.

      • Monument@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        I honestly can’t recall if it was some sort of geopolitical analysis in the comments or actual news anymore, but years ago I read that climate change and the collapse of the North Atlantic Current would eventually open up vast areas of Siberia to mining/drilling, improve farming conditions in Russia, harm farming, solar, and wind in Western Europe, while dropping the temps in Western Europe. It would also raise temps in the eastern/southern U.S. and make hurricanes more dangerous and economically damaging along the entire Atlantic and Gulf coasts.
        What I read concluded that climate change would be a major boon to Russia and any sensible leader there would want to facilitate it.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          True. Unfortunately, there will be no way to hit the brakes on climate change once it has progressed to the point of a green Siberia.

    • BetaBlake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Flynn pisses me off so much, it amazes me you can spend your entire career serving your country in mostly a leadership role and still end up a traitor.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        Wasn’t there a cushy job at a military contractor he could have filled? Or was he so bad that nobody would offer him one?

    • darharrison@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      The fact that the only responses to this picture have always been whataboutisms is very telling. When ranked-choice voting comes, and I think it will, my first choice vote is gonna go to a leftist party with real principles.

    • Fuzzy_Red_Panda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      So what if they we were at the same dinner? I’ve had dinner with my enemies too. It seems like a lot of you are imagining much greater nefarious activity than you have any real evidence for, or I am missing something?

      • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        122
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        4 months ago

        >Third-party fringe candidate who gets less than 1% of the vote having dinner with Putin, Trump’s national security advisor who was later arrested for lying to the FBI about his ties to Russia, and several major Russian political figures before an election in which Russian interference provably helped Trump win.

        >The US president acting in an official capacity and meeting with the leader of a major world power.

        “They’re the same picture.”

        Boy, Russian bots Jill Stein stans are really tripping over each other to see who’s the biggest, dumbest idiot, aren’t they?

        • vxx@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Willie Wimmer is spouting some pro invasionist nationalistic bs on all the fringe media since he left Bundestag.

          So we have a fine assortment of people here.

          • friendlymessage@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Yeah, interesting that the supposedly left-leaning Stein sits next to an openly right-wing nationalist conspiracy nutjob whose last book title was:

            Der Putsch des Establishments gegen Donald Trump

            The establishment coup against Donald Trump

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          109
          ·
          4 months ago
          • Third-party fringe candidate who gets less than 1% of the vote

          • President of the United States, who got over 51% of the vote

          God damn, who is going to have more influence over national policy I wonder?

          Jill Stein stans are really tripping over each other

          The SCOTUS recently decided a president can’t be held liable for acts committed in official capacity as a means of shielding the Cheeto-in-Chief from any and all criminal liabilities. It appears some folks on Lemmy are piling on board with this reasoning, so long as they can use it to shield Genocide Joe. A democrat could shoot a man on fifth avenue in broad daylight, and you’d see people on here defend it.

          • vxx@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Funny that you took that 5th avenue example right from your dear leader talking about his followers, you.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              22
              ·
              4 months ago

              you took that 5th avenue example right from your dear leader

              Why do you people assume history started in 2016? That saying is over a century old.

              • vxx@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                I would need a source on that, my search shows blank.

                It doesn’t matter though, since it’s still ironic that you say it now as an argument when your dear leader has said it about you, and your comments just prove that he was right and that you don’t care about facts, but are deep into the cult and would do everything for him.

                Classic projection, but quite the dumb approach.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  16
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  It doesn’t matter though, since it’s still ironic

                  Going with the “I’m rubber and you’re glue” defense.

  • Carrolade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    132
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    It is admittedly a little ironic that the Greens’ existence has likely resulted in the rollback of environmental regulations. It’s almost like their top leadership post-Nader is just accelerationist in philosophy.

    • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      122
      ·
      4 months ago

      I trust Greens to protect environmental policies much more than the DNC, they would follow through with their promises and not just spout populous bullshit while doing nothing.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        130
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s great that they can pretend that’d be the case while standing literally no possible risk of being elected. It’s easy to stand by your morals when there is no risk at all of having to defend or enact them.

        • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          64
          ·
          4 months ago

          I would rather vote for what I want in government and not get it than to vote against something and get it anyway. Democrats voted against Trump and his policies in 2020 and got someone keeping his worst policies, and now want someone even further to the right than Biden was.

          • otter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            47
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            This is a completely infantile concept. You wanna throw a tantrum for something you want, regardless of how asinine or unlikely it is, and despite all facts pointing to its irrationality? smdh. 🖕🏽

            • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              52
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              Look at their comment history. Joined almost exactly a year ago, had maybe 5-ish comments. Then a month ago, Harris replaces Biden giving Democrats a solid chance at the presidency, and suddenly they now have around 200 comments, every single one of them being in /c/politics and promoting Jill Stein and conflating Kamala Harris with Republicans (e.g. calling her voters “BlueMAGA”).

              I don’t care if it’s their intended goal or not; the actual effect of their rhetoric is “I want enough leftists to throw their vote away to a Russian plant so the US elects a fascist into office.”

            • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              41
              ·
              4 months ago

              Voting for the same people and policies and expecting a different result is the infantile concept

              • bobburger@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                27
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                4 months ago

                So voting for a random third party and changing absolutely nothing is an infantile concept?

              • dezmd@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                17
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                4 months ago

                That’s the exact argument against voting for Green party candidates.

                • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Just to be clear how has voting for the same people expecting different results changed literally anything? We are having the exact same conversations about wages, housing, employment, healthcare education, etc. that they were having during the civil rights movements, that they were having during the Great depression. If we’re continuing to have the exact same conversations, things are not getting any better

      • OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        64
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        Then they should join the DNC and reform it from the inside. Join the progressive movement. Shift the Dems back to the center-left. All they’re doing as a separate party is siphon votes away from DNC, which gives an advantage to the RNC, which erodes their own efforts to push green policies.

        • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          50
          ·
          4 months ago

          Reforming from the inside is liberal fantasy. The party is operating as designed and they will not allow anyone to vote away their power.

          The solution is to abandon the DNC and support an actual party representing the working class. 3rd party’s do not siphon away votes because we wouldn’t vote for your party if there were no 3rd option on the ballot. We are not democrats so we would not vote for a democrat

          • draneceusrex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            I voted 3rd party as a protest vote in a few elections up to 2012, but I recognized that it was exactly that. I also have lived through a term with Trump as president. Because of Trump, women in this country have lost their reproductive rights. That is just the most obvious example of how he has hurt this country. The fact you are still not recognizing that Trump regaining the presidency is an existential threat to democracy is exasperating, especially when the majority of Democrats are allies to a good portion of the Green Party’s so-called platform. Ultimately, you need to face facts: Stein is clearly a shill for Putin and a spoiler for the election.

            • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              32
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              The protest vote is a vote of capitulation for the duopoly. A 3rd party vote cast out of conviction is a vote for democracy. Yours is based on fear and irrationality.

              Dems are only mouth pieces for progress, all talk, zero action. Rince and repeat every election cycle.

              • draneceusrex@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                17
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                4 months ago

                I am sure your moral high ground will comfort you when Trump opens concentration camps in our own country for the undocumented (among others), and we literally live in A Handmaiden’s Tale. When the “dictator on day one” throws away our constitution and strips our lives away, remember how stoic you are! It could be the last election your vote is even counted for the Green Party, so I hope you are proud of your convictions!

                The Dems aren’t perfect, but they aren’t comprised by Russia like both The Green Party and the GOP. Yes, I’m scared. I saw what happened last time. Why the hell aren’t you?

          • BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            In a first past the post democracy there is no 3rd party. There is only the thing that is slightly better. Who is better in everything you want? Trump or Harris? If you say something else. But Harris is Closer to what you want and you choose the 3rd option you are choosing to help Trump win in your state. You choosing 3rd party is one less vote Trump has to win. If you want the green parties policies Trump is the furthest away from it. The time to move the party was during the primary. Now we have to vote for the furthest left thing that has the strongest chance of winning OR we get the right wing thing. Potentially never getting a chance to vote again if you listen to Trump.

            The most minuscule way protest votes are possible is if you live in an overwhelmingly Blue state and you know Harris will win sure vote 3rd party but in Georgia when 11,000 people decided the outcome we can’t risk a movement of voting 3rd party. Title 9 , abortion, climate change belief in government, federal agencies, EPA, postal service, FTC, SEC, redistricting to make fair election maps for the senate and congress, manufacturing, and so much more is on the chopping block for Trump and Republicans let alone more supreme court and federal judges

            • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              4 months ago

              That sounds like a bunch of lesser evil bullshit, lesser evil doesnt exist. That’s bullshit liberals tell themselves to make them feel better for not having the proverbial balls to vote their conscience and do what’s right. It prolongs the suffering of marginalized because they prefer a slow agonizing death over a quick one. There is also the choice of no death. 50.yesrs of liberal ‘lesser evil’ has grown into an enormous one that they can’t control. This is the bed they made and want non Democrats to help them out of the mess they created. Good luck

      • Aphelion@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        With what power? If the Green party continues doing nothing, gaining no local seats, no congressional seats, then how are they protecting environmental policy?

          • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            24
            ·
            4 months ago

            Spoiler doesn’t exist, we would never vote for your politicians even if they were the only ones on the ballot. If it wasnt for Hillary and Co Trump would have never won. The person YOU supported gave us trump.

      • gravitas_deficiency
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        I don’t. They’re not a serious party, and due to how shitty our electoral process is, all they do at the end of the day is strip votes from the Democratic candidates.

        I wish that wasn’t how our elections worked, but it is. Pretending that’s not the case is a self-defeating strategy.

        • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          31
          ·
          4 months ago

          They’re not stripping away votes that they are not entitled to, that’s not how things work. We wouldn’t vote for your shitty candidates if they were the only one on the ballot.

          • gravitas_deficiency
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            4 months ago

            Tell me you don’t understand the tactical implications of FPTP without telling me you don’t understand the tactical implications of FPTP

            This isn’t about “my shitty candidates”. Stop being obtuse. You are intentionally confusing the issue and misleading people.

            • K1nsey6@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              19
              ·
              4 months ago

              There is no confusion, if liberals were so concerned about my vote and getting FPTP then they should abandon their party and support 3rd options.

              Yes, they are shitty candidates. When their only policy is ‘joy’ and people are falling for it, they are shitty

              • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                14
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                4 months ago

                Good luck convincing 70+ million people to vote for your shitty Russian stooge.

                their only policy is ‘joy’

                Nice talking point, but it’s a little out of date at this point. You should ask for the updated list.

          • dezmd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Nobody is entitled to any votes.

            We wouldn’t vote for either of your shitty Putin compromised candidates even if they were they were the only ones on the ballot.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        43
        ·
        4 months ago

        I trust Greens to protect environmental policies much more than the DNC

        Idk if I “trust” them to do anything, per say. I’ve never seen a Green candidate assume office.

        But the argument I see from Democrats is that you have to vote for the liberal guy accepting kickbacks and sinecures from the O&G industry or you’ll get the conservative guy accepting kickbacks and sinecures from the O&G industry, instead. My current crop of Dem-aligned city and state officials are hugely in the tank for the petroleum industry, they’ve done little more than greenwashing when it comes to waste management and sustainable development in their districts, and they are openly hostile to environmental groups in town.

        If the Green Party becomes the refuge for people disillusioned with the O&G aligned local democrats, who is to blame for that? Insidious Machiavellian Jill Stein? Nefarious GOP ratfvckers? The shadowy hand of Vladimir Putin? Or the Democrats who consistently fail to deliver mass transit, waste recycling, and environmental regulation, even within their base strongholds?

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            They do have a handful of municipal offices scattered nationwide. Do they have any state legislative offices?

            I’m not entirely clear on the policy consequences of these wins, though. Are they just rebranded Dems, or do they have a real Sanders/Ventura-esque impact on how these governments operate?

          • TheFonz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            In a country of 300 million people. You calling this some kind of achievement?

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    117
    arrow-down
    43
    ·
    4 months ago

    Look, whatever you think of Jill Stein, she can only be a threat to democrats because they are vulnerable to arguments from the left. If you don’t want to be vulnerable from the left, adopt some of their popular ideas. Putin isn’t tricking Americans into being anti genocide, or into wanting universal health care.

    • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      75
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      She isn’t so much making arguments from the left, but arguments from fantasy land. She thinks wifi is bad for kids brains and that we can stop using fossil fuels AND nuclear by 2030. Most of what she says simply had no basis in reality.

        • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          25
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Lots of people live in fantasy lands, not just the diehard Trumpers

        • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          The no fossil fuels by 2030 one definitely is. Mostly she is drawing both-siders who think (incorrectly) that both sides are just as bad as each other.

        • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          No, but why would you trust the word of someone who makes those arguments?

          If she thinks wifi may cause cancer, that we can totally phase out fossil fuels with no loss in quality of life by 2030, that we should phase out nuclear energy, and that we should entertain vaccine skepticism… Why should I even bother to listen to an anti science quack like her?

          I want the genocide to end. I want someone in power who wants it to end and has a plan to make it end. Everything Jill Stein has said suggests to me she has no idea how reality actually works, nor that she has any ideas on how to achieve her stated goals. She’s just virtue signaling.

          Now, a good leader can’t do or plan everything. They aren’t going to come up with every solution. That’s what they have advisors and like-minded allies in Congress for. If Stein was elected, she would have no fellow Greens in Congress, and we have no guarantee that she’d actually pick experts as her advisors – I’d actually expect the contrary from someone who thinks Wi-Fi causes cancer. But we don’t really know because the Green Party is utterly ineffectual and just cosplays every 4 years.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            You’re missing the point. Nobody has to trust her word. She doesn’t have to be right about everything, she just has to be correct on this particularly important issue. Nobody thinks Jill Stein is going to win. Nobody. So they don’t have to imagine how she would implement her platform. It is irrelevant.

            The problem for the democrats is that they are so WRONG on this one thing (genocide), that a certain subset of their potential voters can’t bring themselves to vote dem. Some of those voters may be bluffing and some may not be. Dems will roll the dice and hope for the best, rather than come out against genocide (my prediction).

            • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              So how do you know that she’s actually against genocide and not just saying it to get some support? If nobody has to trust her word, then why believe her there?

              What has she done? Is she organizing demonstrations to protest against Israel and in favor of a cease fire? Is she using her party apparatus to fundraise and donate 100% of proceeds to Gaza aid? Is she trying to speak with Biden, Blinken, or even Democrat congressional members who agree with her?

              Or is she just lazing on Twitter and saying how awful it is while also excusing Russia’s casus belli into Ukraine?

              This whole thing is symbolic of her failure, lack of seriousness, and grifting. She isn’t actually doing anything for the causes she claims are super important and her top priority. She’s just being a Twitter activist and saying she’s very concerned. Stein doesn’t do things. She says things. Her actions don’t reflect any convictions.

              • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                How many times can I tell you that you’re missing the point. None of what you said matters! When Biden or Harris can barely even pretend to be against genocide, and continue to be responsible (via their current positions of power) for arming the Israelis, that is an acute emergency. The only reason that a potential dem voter is considering voting for Stein instead, is that, #1: she’s on the ballot, and #2: she’s against the genocide.

                Any of your attacks or criticisms of her are irrelevant as long as those two things are true, or until Harris makes a drastic change to her policy.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      She can only be a threat to democrats in a first past the post voting system.

      The Green party doesn’t run on its policies. They’ve opposed nuclear for decades, and we’d be having a very different conversation about global warming if they hadn’t basically won there. They have opposed WiFi and cell phone radiation as “cancer causing”, and have supported homeopathy. If they ran on their policies, they would find a dwindling number of people on the left who actually support them, because they’re vestigial loons concocted in a 1960s hippie lab.

      The Green party runs on being the only party on the left that’s bigger than almost nothing. That’s it, that’s all they do.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yes. And also, a loon who does not want to run on the policies her party supports, because she would lose even in a better voting system.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            22
            ·
            4 months ago

            And what do you call a “serious” party that manages to lose to people like Donald Trump?

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              17
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              A party blind to the problems with American society.

              Now that we have that out of the way, is the Green Party able to defend their policies on their merits?

              • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                21
                ·
                4 months ago

                I can imagine that they at least attempt to. I don’t really understand what you’re getting at though. Given their place in the American political landscape, they don’t really have to. Democrats on the other hand, given their position, have to be able to defend all of their policies on the merits. That’s what this whole conversation is about-- democrats mad at the left for making them defend the indefensible.

                • frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  13
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Maybe if you read my comments, you wouldn’t be confused.

                  They’ve opposed nuclear for decades, and we’d be having a very different conversation about global warming if they hadn’t basically won there. They have opposed WiFi and cell phone radiation as “cancer causing”, and have supported homeopathy. If they ran on their policies, they would find a dwindling number of people on the left who actually support them, because they’re vestigial loons concocted in a 1960s hippie lab.

                • aesthelete@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  I can imagine that they at least attempt to.

                  If I ever start my argumentation like this, can someone remind me that I obviously lost the argument?

                  Edit: or should i just imagine someone will at least attempt to remind me?

                • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  10
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  So, this old, tired shit again.

                  Democrats do not support Genocide, and the war in Gaza is not clear cut. First, who started it? Hamas started it. They and Netanyahu want this war. They want to grind each other down so the loser is dust and the winner is weakened so whoever else is out there (Iran for Israel, the USA for Hamas and their supporters) can come in and mop up and finish the job.

                  Suppose Harris announces tomorrow that she’s going to leave Israel out to dry. What happens? Russia promptly moves in and offers Israel guns, missiles, bombs, and fuel, and promptly accuses the USA of supporting Genocide. They and their Green Party USA useful idiots (complete with Stein sharing a table with Putin) are already claiming that the USA is supporting Genocide, but they’d just shift it over to the Israelis, which would be a correct statement in that situation. We’d come out looking bad.

                  And if you think the Green’s ratfucking America is bad, imagine how people of Jewish decent, especially moderates and nationalists, might respond to it. Considering they represent up to 5% of the voting populations, and have lots of friends, leaving Israel to hang out to dry would likely lose far more voters than cowtowing to the anti-“Genocide” faction would gain the Dems.

                  But calling Democrats mass-murderers is easy to do because people are dumb. All we can do is remind everyone that if you vote Green instead of Blue on Election Day, you’re going to get Red on Inauguration Day, and Project 2025 up the Back Entrance.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            4 months ago

            I don’t even understand what you are trying to say. Is this a subtle insinuation that I’m not a US citizen or something?

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      If the democrats weren’t insisting on holding water for Israel’s genocide, the green party wouldn’t even be a nuisance to them.

      Say whatever you want about how crazy they are, but the one issue the democrats are actually hurting from is their genocide support. If for no other reason than to push the dems to change that policy I think the greens are a huge benefit.

      • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        4 months ago

        Absolutely right. All the people in my mentions are mad at this fact. I keep trying to tell them that it doesn’t matter what Stein’s whole platform is, as long as she has a saner opinion than the dems on genocide, she will be an alternative for a lot of people. Her voters know she won’t win, but they will not vote in support of a genocide! It’s not “single issue voting”, it’s having a moral baseline.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          If someone is going to vote for Stein because of genocide they’re definitely not going to vote for Harris even if Stein wasn’t running.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Some would, some wouldn’t.

            Edit: This is especially true right now, since there is a huge group of (otherwise dem) voters for whom the genocide is a dealbreaker. See the ‘Undecided’ movement for a clear example.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      I know there are plenty of arguments to hit the dems on from the left. However, most of the attacks I’m privy to seem to be more about establishing leftist cred than actually doing something productive, and Jill Stein is one of the best examples of this.

        • cogman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yes, but then being unwilling to take any concession is not. The green party could, for example, pull itself off of ballots in key states or elections when the Democrats agree to their policies.

          Running a doomed to fail candidate that only weakens the likelihood of the most left candidates and pulling progressives out of the Democrat party is a bad move.

          Say what your will about RFK, he’s getting political power from Trump by dropping (if Trump wins). What will the green party get? Nothing.

          Dropping and endorsing after concessions is the real way for a minority party to weld power. Running no matter what is just delusion that works counter to any goal you might have.

          • Fuzzy_Red_Panda@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            4 months ago

            I just want you to understand how this sounds when it’s flipped:

            Yes, but then being unwilling to take any concession is not. The democrat party could, for example, pull itself off of ballots in key states or elections when the Greens agree to their policies.

            It may be easier to identify this way that this is not a reasonable position, no matter which party it is about.

            • cogman@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              If the Democrats were the minority party to the green party then yes, this is still sound. This is how politics works in FPTP election systems. You may not like it, but it’s not unreasonable. If the purpose of the green party is to get its policies enacted then the best way for that is pushing and endorsing when concessions are made.

              Heck, for a lot of its positions the best thing the green party could do is run for local and state level positions. But they don’t do that, they only run for presidential positions. They waste a ton of time and money getting nothing done. You only hear about the green party once every 4 years which is why they are unserious.

              And I’m not even saying they can’t keep doing their dumb campaigns. However, they work directly against their goals by running in contested states. The green party pulls votes from Democrats which are the most in line party with the green party goals. By running in contested states they help Republicans get elected. Of the green party was more than just a joke or a rat fuck, they’d mainly be running in states like Idaho or California.

      • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s not clear to me what you mean here. Are you saying that AOC is attacking Jill Stein in order to bolster her own “leftist cred”, or that Jill Stein is chasing “leftist cred” by attacking democrats?

        If it’s the second one, then I would just refer you back to my previous comment. Any attacks from Jill Stein could be easily defused by adopting a few popular planks. If you actually meant it the first way, then yeah I kind of agree!

        • makyo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          Jill Stein attacking others on the left to establish leftist cred, just like so many other leftists we see on the net.

          We have so much more in common than we have differences, and we could get a lot done if we were to band together - but instead we do the right’s job for them by dividing ourselves.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            16
            ·
            4 months ago

            I don’t think that’s a very charitable interpretation of what is easily explained by honest political differences. People can and do work together when possible, but there are also issues too important to compromise on.

            • makyo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              She wants to play them off as honest political differences anyway.

              When her actions match her supposed intentions then I’d be more willing to give her charity.

              • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                14
                ·
                4 months ago

                You’re painting “so many leftists we see on the net” with that same brush though. Is it so hard to believe that there are people genuinely to the left of you politically? What “actions” do you need to see from Jill Stein? She’s been running for office, giving interviews and speeches that platform issues that the dems are weak on. If nothing else she’s forcing democrats like AOC (and you, presumably) to engage with these ideas or risk political consequences. If we didn’t have 3rd party candidates to the left, there would be even less pressure on the dems to adopt leftist policies.

                • makyo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  She could start by dropping out of the race, endorsing Kamala, and then putting every dollar she has into organizing for national ranked choice voting so that hopefully once in my life I can vote my conscience at the same time I vote pragmatically.

                  I sincerely doubt there is much room between where Stein is at on the issues and where AOC is at on the issues - the main difference is that AOC is not running for president and making it easier for despicable people who don’t care about anything to win.

    • splonglo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      4 months ago

      Kamala and Walz are more left-leaning than any dem ticket in ages. If the purpose of the Green party is to move the democrats left, then they should drop out to reward them for moving left.

      • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        4 months ago

        Pro-fracking, pro having a fascist in their Cabinet, pro-war profiteering even during a genocide, and you call it the most left-leaning ticket in ages? I hate that I have to agree, but I don’t think it’s as strong of a point as you’d like it to be.

      • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why would they stop now in that case? “More left-leaning than any dem ticket in ages” is not a very high bar. Shit, it’s so low, you can’t even slip “opposes genocide” under it!

        • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          In France, Left-leaning parties got together and decided which ones had the best chance in each ‘district’ of winning, and the other parties would drop out. They did this to ensure that the Le Pen led Fascist party didn’t have a chance of winning. Sure, the aftermath hasn’t been pretty, but no neo-Nazis running the country.

          Here in the USA, we should be doing the same thing, except the Green Party isn’t in this to win it. They’re in it to throw bombs. They’re in it to disrupt the ‘evil Democrats’. And they have help. Jill Stein was photographed sitting down with Putin, who really benefits if we’re ruled by Fascist Republicans. Republicans have been caught propping up the campaigns of alternative Leftist parties. And even Netanyahu is hoping Jill Stein pulls enough votes from Kamala Harris so that Donald Trump wins.

          As always. This is a School SGA election, we’re the 51 Nerds arguing amongst ourselves, and the 49 Jocks, including the Book Girl who is pretending to be one of us, are watching as we argue our way into handing the SGA to the Jocks, so they can cancel Book Club, Chess Club, D&D Night, and everything else we support, because we’re too busy arguing with each other to realise that the only way we beat them is by delivering at least 49 votes to Nerd Boy on Election Day.

          ==================== Reposted as this shit keeps being relevant ====================================

          This poster would have you believe that your vote cannot result in you getting the worst possible outcome. Allow me to make it clear that yes, you can screw yourself and those you care about if you make the wrong choice on your vote.

          Let’s take a class of High School students. The class is pretty evenly divided between Jocks (49) and Nerds (51), and there’s an election for the SGA coming up. Looking at the numbers, it looks like the Nerds have a good chance of winning, by two votes, but let’s say that this isn’t as clear as the numbers show.

          The candidates are pretty distasteful for a lot of students at the school. On the Nerds’ side is a geeky boy, with square glasses, buck teeth, and a taste for pocket protectors. This kid is stereotypical Nerd, with the personality to match. He’s vaguely unpalatable, being too much into D&D and video games, but he’s also really damn smart, and his platform are things the Nerds would really like – pushing the school to fund after-school activities like Book Swap, the D&D Club, Debate Team, Chess Club, and so on.

          On the Jock’s side is a pretty blonde cheerleader, the Homecoming Queen and heart-throb for many a boy in that school. But she’s a massive jerk, with an entitlement streak a mile wide, known for throwing temper tantrum(p)s when she doesn’t get her way, and a platform that includes taking all the money that would have gone to the nerdy after-school activities and putting it into prom and sports.

          Of course, this stereotypical school of the 1980s will use the voting system used by the USA back in the 1980s, the classic voting system of First Past the Post, where all the votes are counted, and at the end, the one with the most votes wins.

          In a 49 to 51 election, it’s clear that the Nerds win by a squeaker, but that’s not how elections work in the USA, and Cheerleader has a secret weapon. Most of her friends are of course fellow cheerleaders, dance team members, and athletes. But counted among her number is a bookish girl who is good with her studies, someone that were you to glance at her, you’d assume she’s with the Nerds. But she and Cheerleader have known each other since they were toddlers, and while Bookish Girl is smart, she’s also desperate for attention and acceptance. Bookish Girl is Cheerleader’s key to victory.

          Cheerleader and Bookish Girl sit down after school and go over strategy. It’s clear that the numbers don’t support Cheerleader. All 51 Nerds are pretty sweet on that whole “Nerd After School Activities” thing. But they aren’t all as firmly dedicated to voting. For one thing, Nerd Boy is not well liked, with no social skills what-so-ever. He’s the kind of guy that doesn’t get a girl easily, and is awkward around girls and does things that can easily be styled as being demeaning and degrading to girls. Nerds are also notoriously flakey when it comes to making appointments when those appointments collide with what they would rather be doing.

          Bookish Girl suggests three strategies to Cheerleader. They are:

          • Have one of Cheerleader’s groupies make an accusation against Nerd Boy that he inappropriately touched her. This should peel off two girls, who are known feminists.
          • Set up a nerdy game on the day of the vote, drawing out a handful of gamers.
          • Run Bookish Girl as a third party spoiler, who will say she stands for even more nerdy things so that she can peel off people who think Nerdy Boy can’t or won’t do the job.

          Let’s say Election Day, 3 gamers skip out on the vote, one of the feminists stay home on the accusations, and the other, plus two more Nerds, vote for Bookish Girl. The tally of votes comes out to:

          • 49 people vote for Cheerleader.
          • 44 people vote for the Nerd Boy.
          • 4 people do not vote.
          • 3 people vote for the Bookish Girl.

          Remember what the rules were? The one with the most votes wins. Those 7 kids ended up denying themselves and the 44 other kids the Nerd Boy’s platform. Hopefully they’ll enjoy the prom they’ll be excluded from and the constant bullying and teasing by the Jocks, because there will be no book club to go to, or D&D night to play in, or so on.

          Really, all Cheerleader needed was for Bookish Girl to run, with a side dose of that other cheerleader’s accusation (let’s just call her Tara Reade…), and it’s 49 to 48 to 3, which is STILL a win for Team Jock. And that’s how narrow our elections are today.

          You may think that Harris is a lockin to win, and you’re convinced by someone like this poster that you can vote third party. The problem is you can’t know how many Jocks and Nerds are in this school. Are there 55 Nerds and only 45 Jocks? Can you vote for the Bookish Girl over the Nerd Boy because Nerd Boy did something you don’t agree with in Junior High, or because he dissed your favourite pop culture icon, or he’s a GURPS player rather than a D&D player, or so on, and Bookish Girl is idealic? How will you feel when you wake up the next morning and come to school and see that Jocks won 45 to 44 to 11, and you and 10 other people are absolute dufuses who let the nerd activities go by the wayside?

          And to make this REAL…how will you feel come the next morning if you wake up, see your State went to Trump, and thus gave Trump the 270 EVs he needed to win. Remember, Trump’s Jock-favoured activities can be read about in Project 2025…

          In conclusion, you shouldn’t listen to dufuses like this poster. We saw what happened last time we let them poison our minds. Your vote CAN get you the absolute worst outcome, and the only people who want that to happen are accelerationists and Trump Plants. I’ll leave it to you to determine what THIS poster is.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            4 months ago

            Politics works very differently in France. There, in a multiparty parliamentary system parties often make temporary alliances together in order to form a functioning legislature. This is great for the smaller parties because they get a chance at real political leverage for their constituents. “You want to block the Nazis’ legislative agenda? Fine, but you must agree to stop selling weapons to Israel.”

            The closest thing we have to such leverage in the US, is the ‘threat’ of 3rd (or “spoiler” if you prefer) parties. Imagine the whole US electorate as a kind of “parliament”. You are the democrat party, and you’re worried you won’t have enough votes to win a majority outright over the republicans. Why not build support among smaller electoral groups by making some concessions to them?

            In regards to your long copypasta: I do not give a shit who you or anyone else does or doesn’t vote for. That is, as ever, for the individual to decide. Read every comment I’ve ever made, and I promise you won’t find me telling anyone who to vote for or even who not to vote for.

            What I cannot stand is when people pretend like there isn’t a choice, telling people how they “have to” vote, telling people that a vote for x is really a vote for y, or pretending that the only people who disagree must be shills/bots/Russians/tankys/etc. I’m just out here trying to explain how some of us genuinely see things.

            • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              13
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              4 months ago

              If you actually read my ‘long copypasta’, you’d actually understand why you shouldn’t vote for x, and why a vote for x is really a vote for y. It’s really clearly laid out and easy to digest, and makes it clear how your withholding your vote because we didn’t give you the concession of running D&D instead of GURPSabandoning Israel to the tender mercies of Iran and HAMAS with Russia waiting in the wings to show how America is anti-Semitic and filled with ‘fascist Leftists’ just ends up getting the CheerleaderRepublican elected and getting D&D night completely cancelledRepublicans into office and Israel given more guns to spark the End Times fight the Christofascists want to see happen.

              This shit is important to a whole bunch of us. In particular, I’m worried about it because Christofascists particularly hate my Black Bisexual Goth Pagan wife. That’s why I am calling this nonsense out. Maybe that’ll help get you to see it from our side, now that you explained it from your side?

              • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                14
                ·
                4 months ago

                None of what you are writing is particularly “clearly laid out and easy to digest… etc etc”. Doesn’t mean I don’t understand it, but hey, the author and the audience don’t always agree. For example, we would both likely say similarly about my writing and your reading.

                Don’t think I’m not sympathetic to your fears and concerns. I am. I do worry about the future quite a bit. I worry for my own family, friends, community, country, planet… I also have a Palestinian friend. She has lost many friends and relatives to the bombs that we send to Israel. Every day she worries for the ones who yet remain alive. Knowing her, and hearing her stories helps me to empathize with Palestinian suffering, but even if I didn’t know her, I still would.

                So yes, I do empathize with you and your fears, but I cannot trade what might happen to your family (or mine) for what is happening right now in Palestine.

                • PugJesus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  So yes, I do empathize with you and your fears, but I cannot trade what might happen to your family (or mine) for what is happening right now in Palestine.

                  Hey, guess what, you’re not! Nothing here is being traded! Rather, you’re voting for genocide in the US and genocide in Palestine! How brave of you!

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Why would they stop now in that case?

          Dems: “Wow, we moved drastically to the left and it’s still not enough to satisfy these Very Important Leftists. I guess they’re a lost cause as a voting bloc, considering that we’re already running a platform trying to get the widest possible spread between left and right voters that will only win on a handful of percentage points. Time to see if we can peel off any right-wing voters again.”

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            I will never be satisfied with our government even if Democrats control the whole thing. But I recognize that there’s nothing I can do to change that because this country is full of people almost entirely unlike me and I should vote for the Democrats because they’re the least worst party that can win.

        • splonglo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I mean I have to agree that it’s disgusting and pathetic that almost every western mainstream political party is complicit and the rest are silent at best.

          But, if you can stand me saying it, I think we actually have a chance to change the party. A Dem ticket like this is a once in lifetime event. If they lose I would be surprised if I ever see one this good again in my lifetime. If they get in, and if they get in with a strong majority, I can see it fundamentally changing the party. Every dem who blames the left for losing elections will turn to dust instantaneously ( don’t fact check me on this ).

          I don’t really know what effect it’ll have because I’m just some guy. But I think this is a once in a lifetime opportunity. I think it could fundamentally change the DNC. It could disempower the right of the party and bring leftist ideas into the political mainstream. It won’t be perfect, but it could be something. It could be huge.

      • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        I do think RCV would be a better system than what we have now, but I have very little confidence that it could ever be implemented without some loopholes that would essentially undermine it.

        • explodicle
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          Do you think Australia/Ireland have those loopholes too, or is there something else we need to fix first before it’ll work here?

            • explodicle
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              And Schulze is even better than that, but we’re never going to get anything better than FPTP if we can’t coordinate on a first step.

              Heck, I feel a little dirty inside calling IRV by “RCV” to appeal to the general public.

              • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I do have that concern but based on how RCV has worked in some real elections my concerns with it a major enough that it might be worth it to advocate for a different system. I don’t want electoral reforms as a whole to go down because of imperfections with RCV.

                • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  I mean gotta coalesce around something cause right now debating before the door is even opened is seriously killing momentum.

                  Edit: Think back to occupy. People defeating each other before the real battle even starts is a guaranteed way to lose.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m not familiar with how elections work in those countries, but from what I do hear, Aussie politics is pretty rightwing.

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      The spoiler effect is a geometric problem, a problem of the relative positions of candidates. It has nothing to do with how strong or good of a candidate someone is.

  • graeghos_714@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    4 months ago

    If we had a normal election I’d be voting 3rd party because of the Dem’s unwavering support for Israel with a genocide happening there. Unfortunately our choice is like choosing between a shit sandwich or pureed cauliflower for dinner. Pureed cauliflower sounds disgusting but when so many people are going to choose the shit sandwich I better vote for Cauliflower so I don’t eat shit

      • graeghos_714@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        My son is a pretty good cook and has done this. Unlike a shit sandwich people actually finds ways to make food that’s good for you taste decent. The only people a shit sandwich is good for are those selling the shit. A fitting analogy for our election.

    • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      What a great idea. Since this country began, a 3rd party candidate has never won the Presidency. And that’s because everyone but you understands that in a First Past the Post system, voting for a third party candidate will ONLY ever benefit the party you least want to see elected, whether you are in a “normal” election or not.

      Unwavering support < are you a liar or just ignorant? The Dems are the only party with members that DON’T support Israel. The Republicans are the party with unwavering support, and they fucking LOVE it when a liberal throws away their vote.

      I wonder how many Republicans read comments like yours and just start belly laughing?

      • graeghos_714@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        A 3rd party vote is a vote for neither but with a nod toward where we’d like to head. I loath the DNC just slightly more than the old RNC. With the RNC becoming a MAGA party, I could never vote for one of their candidates. When our vote is fascism or a DNC status quo I’ll plug my nose like I did for Hillary and vote for whoever the DNC puts up. I’d really like to see the non DNC preferred candidate win the primary in 2028 and have the progressive arm of the party have significant clout.
        And yes, the DNC has unwavering support for Israel. What more proof do you need than Biden still sending weapons to them while a genocide is taking place? The Prog wing in the party is a great voice, but they have little clout and AIPAC has been effective at getting them out.

    • noevidenz@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I totally appreciate your sentiment and generally agree, but with the caveat that the problem you’re facing is not just a problem with this current election, but an inherent issue with your electoral system.

      • graeghos_714@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I always thought a parliamentary system made more sense so we could vote for parties that aligned more closely with our ideals and our ideals for our nation. France is currently showing how the divide between right wing nationalism, the leave it as it is people, and those who want more social and economic equity can still lead to deadlock as much as a 2 party system can. The powerful are so powerful now and our information is controlled by so few, with so little social responsibility or regard for the media as a watchdog over the powerful. They are the powerful trying to keep us in the dark.

      • graeghos_714@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Not imo. One side wants to kill me with no regulations on air, water, and food so a shit sandwich would be acceptable to them if it lines their benefactors pockets. The other side may want to get me to eat cauliflower because not only is it good for me but it lines their benefactors pockets

      • TeoTwawki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        We may be doing a lot of choosing the lesser evil but gd there is such a huge margin between them right now. I am not willing to give a rapist traitor a 2nd chance to damage the country more than he already did. Hell I expect him to try and pull off something right on election day and if not that a Jan 6th 2.0 right after it. Putting the country into a civil war would not bother the diaper wearing orange shit sandwich in the slightest.

        I will not at all be shocked if republicans under trumps command try to push election certification to the house while complaining of fraud that didn’t happen.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          I can already feel libs re-calibrating their ‘electability’ meters to accommodate Harris’s reactionary immigration policies and ‘law and order’ posturing.

          This is a huge step to the right but libs couldn’t give any fewer fucks about it.

          • barsquid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            4 months ago

            “Oh, these policies are a step back. Welp, let’s let Mr. Dictator Day One do some more insurrection from the Oval Office, that’ll fix the country.”

              • LengAwaits@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                “Okay kids, today we’re going to take a vote! Raise your left hand if you want everyone to be kicked in the genitals. Raise your right hand if you’d like everyone to be irreversibly sterilized! You can also choose to abstain from voting by not raising either hand.”

                Two out of the five kids present raise their right hand. One out of the five kids present raises their left hand. Two of the kids abstain.

                As the children are being taken to the sterilization room the kid who raised their left hand turns to the two kids who abstained and asks “Why didn’t you vote!? Now we’re all going to be sterilized!”

                One of the two replies, “Well neither of us wanted to be kicked in the genitals!”

              • graeghos_714@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                If you don’t vote Dem you’re willing to let him win and don’t see any difference between how the 2 candidates who can actually win differ enough to choose one over the other when one is a fascist

                • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I’m not saying I won’t vote dem, I’m simply expressing dissent against some of their policies.

                  People here act as if observations about a candidate are themselves votes, and if you make enough negative observations about the democrats it will directly cause their loss, but if you balance them with negative statements about the republicans, they will somehow cancel each other out. Worse, people here seem to give more weight to statements or observations about a candidate than the actual candidate themselves, as if nobody saying anything about the democrats doing something bad will prevent it from manifesting into reality.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    4 months ago

    And here comes the parade of Very Interested People to defend their favorite fascist’s catspaw and cheerlead for genocide under the guise of “BOTH SIDES ARE BAD”

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    That’s a cool Ocasio-Cortez pose. It sort of reminds me of some Jesus poses from all the biblical drawings (which all come from not the Bible since it didn’t come with pictures in it, so they are made up, but I digress)

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    4 months ago

    She wrote in a second post, “Democrats sue to kick us off ballots, hire operatives to infiltrate and sabotage us, lock us out of debates, fight ranked-choice voting, then act concerned that Greens have only won 1400 elections. So which party is authentic, and which is predatory?”

    Not wrong. But I still think you’re dishonest for continuing to court peoples’ votes when you aren’t on the ballot in enough states to win.

    In her 2017 book, What Happened, Clinton wrote: “So in each state, there were more than enough Stein voters to swing the result.”

    No. You’re just unlikable.

    • BakerBagel@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      And how many millions of “centrist” suburbanites that voted for Obama but not Clinton get balmed for her loss? Why are those to the left of the Democratic Party line always blamed while those to the right are coveted? Republicans are always turning extreme rightwing positions into mainstream issues, so why cant the left do the same? Either Leftists are an insignificant voting block, or their support for leftist candidates is as sabotaging the Democrats. You have to pick one.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      But they are on enough ballots to get 507 electoral votes (out of 538). They don’t have a chance of actually winning those, but that’s a stupid argument.

      Besides, even if they didn’t, and by some miracle actually got a few delegates to hold the balance of power, they could instruct their delegates for the party that will enact some of their policies, you don’t need to win the whole thing to be effective.

  • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    democracy enjoyers when people vote for parties that best represent their interests: 😡😡😡😡😡😡

    • Skeezix@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      4 months ago

      One might argue that a two-party system (with the electoral college the way it is) is not a democracy

      • barsquid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I would argue that. FPTP, you either vote tactically or the vote doesn’t count towards the final results. That’s not real democracy to me.

        • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          your not voting tactically because your vote counts equally as much either way. There’s nothing “tactical” about voting for people who push policies one doesn’t support.

          • barsquid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yes, there is, the other option will advance the nation faster into full theocratic fascism. If you cannot tell one of the two viable options is less awful you need to get a clue.

            • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              No there isn’t. An advocacy for a lesser evil still implies evil. You need to get an education.

              • barsquid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                You’re deliberately ignoring the reality of FPTP voting and saying other people are uneducated. Again, please get a clue.

      • Fidel_Cashflow@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        the system devised by wealthy landowners to keep power out of the hands of common people isn’t actually a democracy? I’m shocked. Shocked, I say!

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          So you admit the average voter needs to accept they aren’t in a functional democracy and do damage control until the revolution, cool.

          • Donebrach@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            And the best way to affect change is to throw a vote at a losing candidate and not, say, elect local candidates who can actually affect political and legal change in the nation. No, just gotta add to the literal hundreds of Stein supporters in making it heard that they vaguely dislike american democracy but are totally fine with the entire system collapsing into fascism because, uh… dont sell gun abroad (or something)

    • Cyteseer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      What interests does Jill Stein actually represent for the people? The green party has never held a local office and she only ever pops up during the election for fundraising. If the green party actually did anything aside from campaigning for the presidency, no one would have this criticism.

  • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    4 months ago

    Well, AOC should probably then run for President and promote the policies that Jill Stein would have otherwise promoted.