Shouldn’t Jill Stein be busy giving HJs to her GOP masters by now? She did her job. Everyone has dropped the act. Don’t know why she’s still out here pretending to be a candidate.
Apparently the Democrats still see her as a threat, since they are posting ads about her now.
She’s not a threat, she’s running a spoiler campaign to siphon votes. She’s deliberately exploiting a system to affect an outcome.
That’s like me showing up outside your house and job and plastering “UniversalMonk wants to diddle your kids” posters everywhere. Whether it’s true or not is irrelevant if someone believes the bullshit and subscribes to the idea.
Being a threat would actually take effort to run a real campaign with real ideas.
She’s deliberately exploiting a system to affect an outcome.
Then that sounds like Democrats think she’s a threat. If she wasn’t a threat, all of that would be a non-issue. I mean, they have spent money on new ads against her. If they didn’t think she was a thread, they wouldn’t have done that.
And to your point, if you did that to me with your signs, I would definitely view you as a threat. Regardless of your motivation or the falsehood.
A piece of shit can’t be a threat, from my understanding.
Well, the Democratic party seems to disagree with you, hence the recent ads. Thanks!
They’re calling her out for what she is, which is not a legit candidate.
But legit or not, if she wasn’t a threat, they’d ignore her. And they are not ignoring her, they just released new ads against her yesterday. So obviously they see her as threat.
Wanna keep pretending this doesn’t matter?
Doesn’t matter. And I don’t care, because I’m not voting for Harris or Trump. If the Democrat Party is that scared of some “spoiler effect,” then they shouldn’t be such jerks to people who don’t believe in all the same things they do. Thank you! :)
She’s fucking siphoning votes away from the candidate closest to her supposed views, in a close election where the concept of democracy is at stake. Beyond-obviously. You think you just can just handwave facts away but you never will succeed at that with your campaign of bullshit. You want to imply the threat is that she can win which is laughable. Pretty much all of us see who Shill Stein is.
She’s fucking siphoning votes away from the candidate closest to her supposed views
“Closest” is doing a lot of work there.
Sounds like you think she’s pretty aligned with trump then
She’s kind of ideologically incoherent and I’m certainly no supporter of hers, but she is far to the left of both of them.
Hitler-lite is closer to her position than Hitler-delux, but “closer” is doing a lot of work there.
I don’t understand what point you’re making. My point was clear-- if you actually wanted a small fraction of Stein’s ideas to have a chance, you’d vote for Harris. Lemmy users can pretend all day that spoilers candidates aren’t real but that’s ridiculous, of course they are.
Harris is running to the right of Biden in 2020. The point is to emphasize how far she actually is from Stein and that you’re using “closer” in a really loose way to hand-wave the gulf between them. Vote for Harris if you want, but I want you to know you are voting for Hitler-lite to stop Hitler-delux.
I don’t actually understand her ideology, but the other candidates are literally Hitler
The Lemmy Lefty archetype in full form.
Her ideology is just a mishmash of moral positions, I understand that just fine. I just don’t respect it.
The other candidates want to do genocide and start a world war, though, which makes them comparable to Hitler.
Fun fact: When Harris and Sanders were both Senators, she voted closer to him than any other senator. That includes support for universal healthcare and climate action (and pretty much everything else the Greens claim to stand for).
Now that she’s the nominee she publicly distanced herself from Medicare for All and now supports fossil fuel extraction.
She’s an opportunistic worm.
deleted by creator
Right?! lol
Agreed - Dems see her as a threat because she’s a spoiler candidate.
From the other related article, https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4928622-democrats-swing-state-voters-jill-stein-trump-harris/
The campaign argued that Harris could restore her base if she agreed to an arms embargo on Israel, but “apparently she prefers killing Palestinian children to winning the election.”
I can’t and won’t given Stein full credit here - as she’s refused to state that she’d withdraw from the race and endorse Harris if Harris adopts this position (which would be tough for Dems to do even if Stein and the Green Party went this car). But she’s essentially and somewhat effectively remade her campaign into this single issue piece, and in a way that allows her to claim the moral high ground no matter how things shake out.
More like pre-emptive blame shifting. Jill Stein voters aren’t going to win or lose this election.
People who vote for her would just stay home and not vote if she wasn’t on the ballot.
The issue is Palestine. It’s one of the things young voters mostly care about. And the administrations position on it isn’t going to draw out voters.
Many Nader voters would disagree.
Nader was more popular than Stein. Stein votes this cycle will be protest votes.
If Stein wasn’t on the ticket or other third party candidates, the protest voters wouldn’t vote for Harris.
They’d simply stay home.
It’s Palestine that will lose the Dems this election if it’s lost. Or fuckery by Trump in Georgia.
Either way the biggest danger to the Dems is poor voter turnout. And it’s funding a genocide that’s going to cause that, not the green party.
Who is more popular doesn’t matter. The whole point of Stein’s candidacy is not to be popular. Stine knows that she pulls votes away on the left. And she knows she cannot win. Which was never her goal. Her goal because she knows she pulls away votes on the left is to make it easier for Donald Trump to win. No more no less.
Protest voting in national elections is not a thing. People keep talking about protest voting against Harris or Biden. If you’re going to make the claim. You also need to show evidence of how it will work. I have 250 plus years of evidence that protest voting in national elections doesn’t work. Do you have evidence of a single instance of it working?
No the Democrats stance on Palestine will not lose them the election. If the Democrats lose the election someone with a worse stance on Palestine will win. So tell me how when they look at that they’re supposed to understand that their stance was bad therefore they lost when someone with a worse stance won. If you want someone to learn to be better. Someone better than them needs to win. If someone worse than them wins. That means they need to adjust their tac to better match the views of the ones who won.
This bullshit myth of protest voting in a national election is exactly why things have gotten worse. Ignorant uninformed people flailing politically only succeeding and injuring themselves.
I have a bridge to sell you
If you think poor voter turnout due to funding a genocide the last year and breaking up college protests isn’t the issue, but the green party is, you may want to reread your comment because it’s pretty fucking ironic
Sounds like you’re looking to buy it
Truth!
More like pre-emptive blame shifting. Jill Stein voters aren’t going to win or lose this election.
Actually, that’s a great fucking point. And very accurate. Thank you!
Al Jazeera - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Al Jazeera:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - Qatar
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
