• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1323 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        813 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          93 months ago

          The Dems aren’t making baby steps in the right direction, though, look up the progression of natural gas exports under Joe Biden. They’re actively making big steps in the wrong direction.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            123 months ago

            One metric is the only thing you go by? Do you really think that climate change is driven solely by how much natural gas we export?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              43 months ago

              Ok, can you please give me other metrics? How many nuclear plants have been built? How much has been invested into new rail infrastructure, whether for freight or for passengers? Have there been any new tariffs on the import of electric vehicles? Any regulation against single family housing, against car dependency, or against meat consumption?

              Please, what metrics have improved, other than renewables being installed (at a much lower rate than in many countries)?

    • TheLowestStone
      link
      fedilink
      613 months ago

      Most of the greens here on Lemmy convinced me to never consider a green canidate.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        393 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        20
        edit-2
        3 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          10
          edit-2
          3 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            93 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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              63 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?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              23 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.

          • TheHiddenCatboy
            link
            fedilink
            English
            83 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.

        • azuth
          link
          fedilink
          English
          73 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            83 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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            63 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…

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            13 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      133 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        313 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.

      • TheTechnician27
        link
        fedilink
        English
        20
        edit-2
        3 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          53 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
    1713 months ago

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1083 months ago

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        103 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          33 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      223 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        73 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?

      • TheTechnician27
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1223 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?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          123 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            13
            edit-2
            3 months ago

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

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              33 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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                12
                edit-2
                3 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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  33 months ago

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

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

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11
          edit-2
          3 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            14
            edit-2
            3 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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      43 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?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      43 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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1203 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          23 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            13 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).

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              13 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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                13 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      35
      edit-2
      3 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          173 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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              173 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?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                43 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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  133 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.

                • TheHiddenCatboy
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  103 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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  8
                  edit-2
                  3 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?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            43 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?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      343 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        233 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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          143 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            63 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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              133 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?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                43 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.

          • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod
            link
            fedilink
            English
            33 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          13 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        203 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.

    • archomrade [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      303 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        193 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          83 months ago

          It’s not “single issue voting”, it’s having a moral baseline.

          Sounds like both could be true at the same time.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            3 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      243 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          163 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            33 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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              5
              edit-2
              3 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        83 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!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          243 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            73 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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              133 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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                53 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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  12
                  edit-2
                  3 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        43 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          63 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?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              33 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.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                13 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.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  4
                  edit-2
                  3 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            33 months ago

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      73 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      63 months ago

      Brilliant, thanks for outlining this. So tired of the Russian / Putins Puppet line from idiot Democrats

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      243 months ago

      That’s not how it works. Hillary wanted someone to blame. Can’t blame herself for having weak stances, god no, never that. Better to blame people who represented what she lacked.

      If you want the left to vote for you, start acting like you’ll push their interests. Or don’t, and blame them when you lose.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        383 months ago

        Just look at Jill Steins Twitter. She is basically Gaza and attacks on the Democrats. She exclusivly attacks the Democrats. No attacks at all on Trump or the Republicans in general. She also has no problem with climate change or enviromental problems. That is very intressting for a supposed Green Party.

        Other countries with similar electoral systems have Green parties with seats in national parliaments. Compare that with the UK Green Party. They are perfectly able to not just talk about Gaza, but also about UBI, more renewables, public transit, 4 day workweek and so many more left issues.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          63 months ago

          Democrats deserve to get attacked from the left. Nobody in their right mind is going to vote GOP if they’re voting green, get a fucking clue

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            103 months ago

            Are you seriously suggesting that Gaza is the only problem the Democrats have?

            This is what you do, when you want to take votes from the Democrats. If you wanted to built up real power, to challenge the Democrats from the left, you have to win local smaller elections first. That means city council, house of representatives, state level politicians, school boards and so forth. You focus on the most left leaning regions, so you can actually go first past the post. The Greens do not do that. They run in FOUR elections in California this year. That is the largest blue state, with some very left leaning areas.

            Also once you sit in congress, councils or whatever, you need allies, unless they win a majority. So in most cases that would mean winning the furthest left seats and having to work with a more centrist party, to change things. In the US that would be the Democrats. In some countries there are deals made to not run candidates in certain districts, to make sure left parties win. That just happened in France for example. No reason those deals could not be made between the Democrats and the Greens.

            Also Gaza can only be solved by becoming president. Jill Stein is not going to win the election and everybody with half a brain should no that. So the goal of running, should be to show what the Green Party stands for in local elections. Nobody can solve Gaza when sitting on a city council in the US, however they can built bikelanes, promote renewables, improve public transit, cheap dense green housing and so forth. Jill Stein does not mention those at all. She should, to help out the local candidates, which they are not running. It also means less issues the Democrats might copy. After all who cares, if the Greens or the Democrats pass good laws, as long as they are passed.

            Attacking the Democrats from the left is just going to hurt the Democrats, which helps the Republicans. Instead the Green Party should either try to built an alternative or push them towards the left. Right now it is obvious that they just want to help the Republicans.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        223 months ago

        Jill Stein is the quintessential politician who will say anything to get elected. She will traffic in 9/11 truthing if asked or antivax nonsense in spite of being a pediatrician.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        2
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        its gonna blow your mind but H. Clinton is not running in the current US presidential election and hasnt been a political operative for 8 years. Tough to digest, I know.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13 months ago

        The spoiler effect is a geometric problem within FPTP voting systems, it has nothing to do with weak stances/lack of common interests of a given candidate.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    293 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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        43 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.

    • archomrade [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      63 months ago

      They both have shit in them, there’s just more of it or maybe a different consistency to the shit in the other.

      • TeoTwawki
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12
        edit-2
        3 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]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            63 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.”

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                5
                edit-2
                3 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!”

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                13 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]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  13 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      53 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?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        13 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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3
      edit-2
      3 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        13 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        73 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

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    27
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    AOC states that Jill Stein somehow leads the most decentralized political party in the US, does so from a position that holds nearly zero organizational authority, and that their primary electoral goals are anything other than Secretary of State to ensure fair treatment in ballot access. Stein wasn’t even the nominee last cycle.

    AOC is not ignorant. She’s sold her principles to neoliberals.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21
    edit-2
    3 months ago

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      193 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.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        off the top of my head, she’s the only one calling for a full arms embargo of Israel, and also the only one pushing for medicare for all. she has also consistently criticized trump and biden’s immigration policies. all of this aligns with my interests, and so she is who I will most likely vote for.

        The green party has never held a local office

        this is wrong. As of the November 7, 2023 elections, at least 142 Greens hold elected office. I found this with 2 seconds of googling.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          63 months ago

          As of 2023, no nominee of the Green Party has been elected to office in the federal government.

          Yeah, they’re real committed. 23 years and they haven’t even gotten a single congressman elected.

          142 local elected officials out of literally tens of thousands across the country. But Jill Stein manages to pop up every 4 years to run for president. She becomes especially loud in the years when the elections look relatively close. And, like her predecessor Ralph Nader, she’s got environmental ideas (most of which have been adopted by the Democratic party) but the only other thoughts on policy are criticism of the Democrats with no actual agendas or ideas for fixing things as president. She says “stop selling arms to Israel!”. Ok, sure. How does the democratic presidential candidate say they are gonna do that without pissing of AIPAC and having them throw every dime at their disposal to get Trump elected instead? Hell, she doesn’t even engage with Republicans. Just democrats for some reason. I wonder why that is… Oh, yeah. Cause she’s there to spoil the election. That is her only purpose. Saying anything else is disingenuous.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            33 months ago

            That’s correct. Intent is the only thing that matters, not results. Fun fact: your fictional candidate will get the same number of EC votes as Stein.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              23 months ago

              I’m just shocked at the vanity of people aggressively voting third party. They value the purity of their voting record more than other people’s lives. They think they’re the first generation to figure out morality or the secret cheat code to change the system.

    • SkeezixOP
      link
      fedilink
      153 months ago

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

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        63 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!

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          53 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            13 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)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        43 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.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          3 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.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            43 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.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              3 months ago

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

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                33 months ago

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

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  13 months ago

                  Your deliberately ignoring the amount of impact your single vote has. Again, please get an education.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      FPTP systems can hardly be called democracy. Like it or not, the spoiler effect is the problem here.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    213 months ago

    This is 100% about them feeling entitled to the Muslim vote and Jill being tied with Harris in polling. The fraud AOC is lashing out because someone is legitimately a threat to them staying in power.

    This is the bed Harris decided to make for herself, and if she loses it will be her fault.

    • theprogressivist
      link
      fedilink
      41
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I’d like to see your source on that polling data, champ. Also, it’s so funny you fucks turned against AOC.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        373 months ago

        Yeah, right? AOC is a bad ass until her party is suddenly unfavorable because some of them but not her aren’t supporting Gaza hard enough. But unsurprisingly, none of these people ever complain about Uyghur genocide—the other Muslims.

        It’s easy for Jill to be hard on this topic because she knows the presidency is out of her reach. But AOC is still in play, and sadly—in the actual world we live in—she has to play the game to win.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          173 months ago

          Obviously they meant “tied for the Muslim vote”

          It wasn’t obvious, it was a line constructed in fantasy and intended confusion. IAnd the way they argue and respond gives me hardcore troll vibes. These people are here to sow distrust, confusion and despair. In line with a country known for doing this kind of thing, russia.

          Tankies = Green Party

          It really is as simple as that.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              173 months ago

              No, ‘we’ are not. If you take a step back and think about it, it makes perfect sense.
              Lots of noise and confusion, distrust, ‘both siding’, etc. And all of that happens magically around…presidential election time.

              I will maintain my position, tankies/greenparty are propped up to sow distrust and it is a well known mechanism from russia. Do I think all these poor lost souls are on a payroll? Of course not, if only they were. You can fix income, mentalissues are much tougher to solve. You can indoctrinate swarms of people to do your bidding if you take the time and effort. Again, exactly what russia decades ago started doing to the west. They are ‘activated’ (throw the right amount of messaging on several social media channels to do so) always, and I mean always, around presidential election time.

              A good question to ask would be why it is that Stein person is only in the picture around presidential election times. I never hear about the groundwork of a true party to gain ground on the more ‘boring’ levels that gain no notoriety or attention, like local boards, mayors, etc. Always they spring to life around presidential election times where they stand absolutely no chance. Why is that?

              And for greenparty/tankies to start calling other people delusional is just sad. Lost souls is what they are and I fear we will have to say goodbye to them as I see no real way to mend their minds, they are that lost.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                7
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                A good question to ask would be why it is that Stein person is only in the picture around presidential election times. I never hear about the groundwork of a true party to gain ground on the more ‘boring’ levels that gain no notoriety or attention, like local boards, mayors, etc. Always they spring to life around presidential election times where they stand absolutely no chance. Why is that?

                Or maybe it’s because you don’t pay attention (and the media wilgully ignores more radical opinions). I know crazy.

                So tell me, which of Stein’s or the Green Party’s policies makes them “tankies” exactly?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          113 months ago

          That doesn’t fit the narrative in this echo chamber even a little bit. <strawman> <gaslight> <ad hominem> <logical fallacy of your choice> <accusation of bad faith>

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            7
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            This is 100% about them feeling entitled to the Muslim vote and Jill being tied with Harris in polling.

            I’m not saying this is the best structured sentence ever, but you need to work on your reading comprehension (though I have a feeling you are being intentionally obtuse).

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                4
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Yeah that’s just plain fucking false equivalence. But I suppose libs aren’t one logical fallacy short of enlightenment, so that tracks.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  93 months ago

                  My favorite type of person is one who thinks anyone who disagrees with their wrong opinions is a lIbErAl, whatever the fuck that even means.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      23
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      She’s also tied with Hugh Janus in polls. It was a real official poll. My source is Trust Me. I am not a troll.

      Adding /s

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      83 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.