Her policies say she will remove most US bases, not all. We still need some imperialism after all.
Her platform mentioned ending forced prison labor but not revoking the 13th.
She says she will support land back initiatives, but does that mean returning Manhattan? Absolutely not.
Stein’s policies are very progressive, but she still exists within America and it’s inherent imperialist and colonialist nature.
She also has zero chance of winning. Do you see a path to victory for Stein? Can you outline it?
Let’s imagine for a moment that there is no Jill Stein. Do you think there is a materialistic difference between a Harris and Trump presidency? Do you think one is preferable to the other?
Do you see a path to victory for Stein? Can you outline it? Consider first past the post and polling numbers.
Let’s imagine for a moment that there is no Jill Stein. Do you think there is a materialistic difference between a Harris and Trump presidency? Do you think one is preferable to the other?
Harris flops so hard in the debate that everyone realizes she cannot beat Trump and then everyone unites behind Jil Stein to not support Genocode. The end.
Explain to me how big donors pressuring the Democratic campaign to move the established Vice Presidential candidate to the top of the ticket is in any way logistically similar to the entire Democratic voting base spontaneously deciding to vote third party?
This nonsense support behind third party candidates in the Presidential elections is plain ridiculous. With the exception of Trump, every single US President has been a member of Congress, state governor, high ranking military officer, or high ranking federal employee in a leadership position. They have proven themselves in positions of political leadership.
What is Jill Stein’s highest office? Why should half of America trust that she is capable of the job?
No one is “capable for” the job, it’s not a realistic responsibility. But at least the other two have approximated suitability. Trump, as poorly as he did and terrible as he is, at least has experience now. In terms of tangible evidence, they both have considerably more experience in high ranking leadership roles than Stein.
Trump got in without experience because he had a huge cult of personality and Russian help. Kamala has held numerous high offices. What has Jill Stein done? Policy positions are nice and all, but without any record of implementation that’s useless. Why do all of these this party candidates shoot straight for President? It almost seems like they’re intentionally spoiling the vote to help Trump.
Her policies say she will remove most US bases, not all. We still need some imperialism after all.
Her platform mentioned ending forced prison labor but not revoking the 13th.
She says she will support land back initiatives, but does that mean returning Manhattan? Absolutely not.
Stein’s policies are very progressive, but she still exists within America and it’s inherent imperialist and colonialist nature.
She also has zero chance of winning. Do you see a path to victory for Stein? Can you outline it?
Let’s imagine for a moment that there is no Jill Stein. Do you think there is a materialistic difference between a Harris and Trump presidency? Do you think one is preferable to the other?
Imperialism is when base on place people want you out.
Stein wins when people stop supporting Genocide. Let’s have faith in humanity.
I literally don’t consider people supporting Genocide as candidates.
Do you see a path to victory for Stein? Can you outline it? Consider first past the post and polling numbers.
Let’s imagine for a moment that there is no Jill Stein. Do you think there is a materialistic difference between a Harris and Trump presidency? Do you think one is preferable to the other?
Harris flops so hard in the debate that everyone realizes she cannot beat Trump and then everyone unites behind Jil Stein to not support Genocode. The end.
And other outrageously remote fantasies you can tell yourself in staunch disregard of all evidence
Say the people fully convinced that Biden was the best candidate to run against Trump because of his “incumbency advantage”
Explain to me how big donors pressuring the Democratic campaign to move the established Vice Presidential candidate to the top of the ticket is in any way logistically similar to the entire Democratic voting base spontaneously deciding to vote third party?
This nonsense support behind third party candidates in the Presidential elections is plain ridiculous. With the exception of Trump, every single US President has been a member of Congress, state governor, high ranking military officer, or high ranking federal employee in a leadership position. They have proven themselves in positions of political leadership.
What is Jill Stein’s highest office? Why should half of America trust that she is capable of the job?
The other two have proven not to be capable for the job.
No one is “capable for” the job, it’s not a realistic responsibility. But at least the other two have approximated suitability. Trump, as poorly as he did and terrible as he is, at least has experience now. In terms of tangible evidence, they both have considerably more experience in high ranking leadership roles than Stein.
Trump got in without experience because he had a huge cult of personality and Russian help. Kamala has held numerous high offices. What has Jill Stein done? Policy positions are nice and all, but without any record of implementation that’s useless. Why do all of these this party candidates shoot straight for President? It almost seems like they’re intentionally spoiling the vote to help Trump.
Removed by mod