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.

"How has Stein fared as a leader? By AOC’s perfectly reasonable standard, she’s done abysmally. As of July 2024, a mere 143 officeholders in the United States are affiliated with the Green Party. None of them are in statewide or federal offices. In fact, no Green Party candidate has ever won federal office. And Stein’s reign has been a period of indisputable decline, during which time the party’s membership—which peaked in 2004 at 319,000 registered members—has fallen to 234,000 today.

This meager coalition can’t possibly kick-start a legitimate political movement, capable of organizing voters and advancing ideas outside of perennial electoral events. It’s just large enough, however, to spoil the work of those who put in this kind of work."

  • themeatbridge
    54•16 hours ago

    Jill Stein is a lot of things, but “progressive” ain’t one of 'em. I’d love for Harris and the Dems to be more progressive, but they’re going to need a better example than Stein.

      • @[email protected]English
        6•12 hours ago

        Ah yes, the platform of a candidate that does not have a chance at win ing, even by mistake, and can say whatever the fuck they want because of it.

      • @[email protected]English
        3•14 hours ago

        No one is going to read that, let alone answer you. See, this is a Stein hate thread, you’ve already lost the game.

        (I know nothing about her.)

        • the post of tom joad
          8•13 hours ago

          And while your first point is sound, the buried lede, (the part in parenthesis) is the real point, isn’t it?

          dems itt maybe knew her name before the party started smearing her. wonder how many will ever bother to look her up?