this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024

472 points (94.4% liked)

politics

18883 readers

3506 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

472

Jill Stein Is Killing the Green Party (newrepublic.com)

submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

178 comments fedilink hide all child comments

“With membership at new lows and no electoral wins to their name, it’s time for the Greens to ditch the malignant narcissist who’s presided over its decline.”

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Is she really responsible for the problems of the US Green party?

As near as I can tell the EU Green parties had a different trajectory. They initially started winning seats in parliaments on purely environmental platforms. Those MPs actually started pushing green agendas in various parliaments. That, in turn led to more people voting for them. Eventually that had to adopt policy positions beyond the environment and they tended to be pretty left.

The US never had Green party members in a position where they could actually do anything useful about the environment. That means they could never fulfill their primary goal in the US. So when they tried to branch out the same way the EU Green parties did, they just turned into a vague hodgepodge of leftists ideas.

Is there any suggestion that Jill Stein's replacement would have any chance of saving the US Green party?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 hour ago

The Green party is doing exactly what it was designed to do. It's siphoning off eco-conscious Democratic voters just significantly enough to affect voting margins but not enough to win. To be clear I'm not saying that Even a significant number of people in the green party have that as a goal, but top down, that's all it's about.

We are a two-party system and they are allowing the green party to exist to use it as a wedge.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The issue is she sucks all the oxygen out of the room with her pointless presidential runs and does nothing for the four years in between. There’s an inconsequential number of Greens who run and win elections in small cities and towns or less consequential elections, and none of them have won any federal elections. A real party leader would recruit and foster candidates in large cities and state legislatures— and then get folks to run for the US House, the Senate, state governorships, and then the presidency.

Stein is less a party leader and more a figurehead who basically seems to be in it for the grift. And so US Greens (especially in comparison to those in the EU) are less a party and more just a convenient label for those of a certain bent that want to run as something other than as a Democrat.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

My question was more along the lines of the "(not so) the great (wo)man" hypothesis.

Let's imagine that Jill Stein was permanently abducted by aliens. What do we think would happen?

Would the Green Party just collapse?
Would the former member just join the Democrats?
Would they start a new party?
Or maybe someone new would take over who could do a better job?
I think we'd likely just get someone who's functionally equivalent.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Maybe vote count is instructive:

Nader 2000: 2,882,955

Nader 2004: 465,650

McKinney 2008: 161,797

Stein 2012: 469,501

Stein 2016: 1,457,216

Hawkins 2020: 407,068

I don't think the party would collapse without Stein. They have been around for decades and they have a cadre of oranizers who will continue to show up regardless of results. Stein is just the most famous person they can use for a presidential election, and you can see from the above results what happens when they run someone nobody has heard of.

I think they genuinely believe in their core values, and it's unfortunate that Stein is their only viable candidate. They won't ever be a real political party until they start winning local/state elections, but they're looking to secure more federal funding by getting enough votes. If Stein disappeared then they would keep doing this but they'd never breach half a million votes. Maybe a progressive democrat in the House would smell an opportunity and break ranks to run for president with the Greens. That could maybe get them a million or two votes again.

Or maybe it absolutely does not matter who they run and they just get a lot of votes when the Democrats run particularly shitty candidates for president.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago

Ah, I get your question now. Unfortunately I think it’s impossible to say, but I do know it’s impossible to find out while she’s still there.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

And then the Green Party was a zombie.

Just kidding it always was.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 hours ago

I am by inclination Green, but I live in Europe where the Greens have been through their scandals and emerged somewhat presentable. I don't believe that is the case in the US, where the Greens and particularly Jill Stein are basically just useful idiots. They disrupt the candidates most aligned to their own cause. And in Stein's case, she's disrupts her own damned country.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 hours ago (7 children)

And Stein's answer every single time this comes up?

"What about Gaza?"

She is literally an operative for Russia and the Republicans. This isn't even a meme or conspiracy theory, it's simply a plain truth.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 58 minutes ago (1 children)

I don't understand how a genocide can be taken so lightly. Some people have trouble casting a vote for any political party that sponsors one.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 42 minutes ago (1 children)

I support the college protestors even when people say they're hurting the cause, but I would say Jill Stein definitely hurts the cause.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 minutes ago

I think you're suggesting Trump would be worse than Harris for the cause. But my point is that a lot of people feel that voting for either is sanctioning genocide, and Stein fills that niche by condemning it. It's pretty low-hanging fruit for a politician.

I'm legitimately curious as to how college protestors could be hurting the cause.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 hours ago (4 children)

Even if you assume she isn't a bad faith actor, she's still objectively failed to pass the one thing the world needs, the Green New Deal, and environmentalism is in the worst shape it's been in decades.

That's not all her fault, but her protest candidacy weirdness put Trump in office the first time instead of spending that time and effort on actual policy so...

Fuck off already?

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] [email protected] 29 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Jill Stein is both a terrible candidate and possibly a Russian agent. Even if I do align with much of the green parties stances and I live in a solidly blue state, I would never vote for her out of principle

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 hours ago

Indeed. I might vote for some Greens down-ballot, but Stein is a stain on the party and its cause

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

I’m voting for the party for socialism and liberation and you can too.

You don’t need to vote green to cast a third party ballot.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

So basically what you're saying is you're not voting this year.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 hour ago

No, I didn’t say that.

My ballot will be counted for PSL.

That’s the opposite of not voting.

You know… voting.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

will be voting for the PSL if they're on the ballot in my state, Claudia De la Cruz is great. if they don't make it on the ballot then it'll probably go to Stein as I believe she's confirmed on the ballot in my state, but the PSL is my first choice!

edit: just checked, the PSL is indeed on the ballot in my state, so they've got my vote :3

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Cool. Not sure I’ve seen anyone arguing against that point.

And of course you’ve been working all the time for the past four years in support of socialism and liberation? Because of course, you wouldn’t be one of the people who only jump in every four years with a third party vote because they think it makes them edgy and cool? That would just be sad.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

A lot of the tone of these anti green posts seems pointed at pushing people to vote for the democrats instead. I’m as anti Green Party as they come, but I want to make sure people know there are still good third parties to support.

As a member of the lemmy instance for privacy and open source, I’m not gonna dox myself, but yeah, I’m absolutely politically active in the off years lol.

You wouldn’t happen to be trying to badjacket people or gatekeep support for PSL, would you? Because first timers and those newly disillusioned with the democrats are welcome to vote for PSL. No experience required.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 48 minutes ago

I have a question about PSL. My organizational background is in labor mostly, though I have done some door knocking for critical elections.

How is your candidate getting however many votes (feel free to estimate) going to help the working class? Or alternatively, how does your electoral campaign help PSL? Is this ultimately a recruitment drive?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Jill Stein doesn’t know how many members of the House there are in Congress. 600?!?!

There is a 100% chance that Trump couldn't name how many members there are in the house. I'd be shocked if he could list the branches of government without help.

note I'm not saying that's acceptable. But if that's your test for "is this a serious candidate" I hate to be the bearer of bad news...

load more comments