“Jill Stein is a useful idiot for Russia. After parroting Kremlin talking points and being propped up by bad actors in 2016 she’s at it again,” DNC spokesman Matt Corridoni said in a statement to The Bulwark. “Jill Stein won’t become president, but her spoiler candidacy—that both the GOP and Putin have previously shown interest in—can help decide who wins. A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump.”

  • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    39 minutes ago

    It’s funny because if Democrats just did what people wanted in the first place people would vote for them

  • Marleyinoc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I doubt anyone dumb enough to vote for Stein are Harris voters anyway. So now than likely a vote for Stein will be one taken for Trump. So Trump and Putin can waste all the money they want on her campaign.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      You don’t have to be “smart” to vote for a good candidate.

      Stein is the nominally “more liberal than the Democrats are willing to be” candidate. So most likely if they were forced to vote and could only vote for Trump or Harris, then I’d wager they’d mostly go Harris.

      A relative weakness is that on the left there are currently more people ready to discard strategic thinking and stand on what they consider their absolute principles. The right is currently a bit more unified, as they are more willing to yield on their differences to vote closest to their overall goal with a decent chance to win.

      Or the left is fairly unified in practice but Internet manipulations present the illusion otherwise, I have no idea

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      They’re probably trying to scoop up the Republican voters that are disillusioned with Trump and prevent them from going to Harris. It’s actually a decent strategy in that light.

      • Veneroso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        You know, positioning the DNC “against” her might draw some of the people who won’t vote for Harris but really don’t want to vote for Trump away from voting GOP…

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      That’s because third parties only show up every 4 years to play useful idiot.

      We’d hear about them more if they’d run in smaller elections - elections they might actually have a fighting chance at winning. Having some political foothold might be helpful if they’re going to participate in larger elections where the two-party dichotomy is hardest to overcome.

      But that’s not how it works. They exist, fundamentally, to be a threat to one party or the other. That’s what their donors pay them to do. Nobody is paying them to be a threat to both parties, because nobody legitimately believes that the American Green Party actually has a platform. People usually vote for them out of spite because they think the Democratic nominee is too weak. Likewise the Libertarian Party caters to right-wingers who think the Republican nominee is too government-y for them.

  • sumguyonline@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    56
    ·
    3 hours ago

    The DNC screwed themselves forcing a drug Baron on their public. Jill Stein isn’t a traitor to the Republic like The Entire Democrat Party is, so she has a very cromulent chance, and a valid campaign unlike the Traitors to the Republic Democrats. Their scared ff Jill Stein because they made a shitty decision and it’s haunting them that they forced it on us. Eat a bag of cheetos dicks, Traitors to the Republic garbage. I look forward to your trial.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 hours ago

        They want the “Democrat Party” to go to trial for (not sure for what exactly), so this could also be some MAGA idiot trying to sound smart, while telling us not to vote for Kamala.

        I don’t hear Tankies say “Democrat Party” all that much, that’s a pretty solid right-wing-ism.

        Could be “Horseshoe Theory”, I guess, but lately I feel like we need to cut through the bullshit and recognize that every single person telling us not to vote for Kamala is perfectly fine with another Trump term, and that’s enough for me to call someone a fascist.

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    186
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    i’m glad the “you’re pro-genocide if you vote anything but 3rd party” morons finally shut the fuck up around here

    edit: LOL

    have you had ANYONE turn around and say " you know what, you’re right!" on lemmy? or ANYWHERE?

    gtfo russian cumfarts

    • ArxCyberwolf@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Of course it’s exactly who I expected to show up and say that lmao. They’re so fucking predictable. It’s hilarious.

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Those MAGAs cosplaying as lefties will have an even harder time now that the Uncommitted group have said they cannot support Harris but Donald will be worse. The same as we have all be saying.

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Not just Trump will be worse as some sort of abstract moral statement. Their statement is that Uncommitted voters should actively vote against Donald Trump no matter how inadequate Harris’s statements and commitments have been.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      100
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Probably doesn’t help that Stein refuses to call Putin a war criminal.

      https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-vladimir-putin-war-criminal-1954965

      "Hasan later asked Stein why she had labeled Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal, but not Putin.

      “Well, as John F. Kennedy said, we must not negotiate out of fear and we must not fear to negotiate,” she replied. “So, if you want to be an effective world leader, you don’t start by name-calling and hurling epithets.”

      “So, how will President Stein negotiate with Israel then if you’ve called Netanyahu a war criminal?” Hasan asked in response.

      “Well, because he very clearly is a war criminal,” Stein said, prompting Hasan to ask: “So Putin clearly isn’t a war criminal?”

      “Well, we don’t have a decision—put it this way—by the International Criminal Court,” Stein said.

      The ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Putin, alleging that he is responsible for war crimes. No such warrant has been issued for Netanyahu, whose war on Gaza has killed more than 40,000 Palestinians. However, the chief prosecutor of the ICC has applied for an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister.

      “There’s an arrest warrant for Putin and there isn’t an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, so why is Putin not a war criminal, but Netanyahu is?” Hasan asked.

      “Yeah. Well, let me say this. We are sponsoring that war. We are sponsoring Netanyahu,” Stein responded. “He is our dog in this fight. That is why we have a responsibility to pull him back.”"

      • neatchee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Fwiw after that whole thing made news she released a press statement that did call him a war criminal

        • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          32
          ·
          11 hours ago

          And anyone paying attention realizes she only put out the statement after she got called on it and had time to think about what it meant that she was actively avoiding doing so. This is 100% optics and nothing more.

          Her statement is about as believable as a kid with crumbs on their face saying they didn’t eat all the cookies…

          • Tyfud@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Unfortunately, third party candidates are made exactly for people not paying attention

        • sarcasticsunrise@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          Way too little, way too late. Medhi cut her up so surgically I don’t even know if she’s gonna have the stones to resurface four years from now. Hopefully being a Russian asset pays well, Shill is done

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          54
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          16 hours ago

          “Hey, Vladimir? I need to actually call you a war criminal now, yeah, I almost got found out. Thanks! I knew you’d understand!”

      • blazera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        37
        ·
        15 hours ago

        You forgot this part from the beginning

        "Mehdi Hasan: Vladimir Putin is a war criminal?

        Jill Stein: Yes, we did condemn —"

        She called him a war criminal several times in the interview

          • blazera@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            36
            ·
            15 hours ago

            Yes, directly and specifically about Putin. The quote is right there.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              33
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              15 hours ago

              “Yes we did condemn…” is not the same as “Yes, Putin is a war criminal.”

              The passive accusations run all through it.

              “So, what we said about Putin was that his invasion of Ukraine is criminal. It’s a criminal and murderous war,”

              “Well, by implication, by implication,” Stein said.

              “In so many words, yes he is,” Stein said. “If you want to pull him back, if you are a world leader, you don’t begin your conversation by calling someone a war criminal.”

              • blazera@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                27
                ·
                15 hours ago

                It…is when the question is literally “is putin a war criminal?”

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          41
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          14 hours ago

          LOL, that just proves his point. I read the transcript, and Stein had every opportunity to clearly and definitively repudiate Putin. Not only did she refuse to do so, she continues to refuse, dishonestly misrepresents being called out on her bad faith as a “misunderstanding,” and doubles down with bullshit "both sides"ism.

          In fact, that press release has sealed the deal on convincing me that she’s a deeply unserious piece of shit and a Russian asset.

          So congratulations troll farm vatniks, you’ve played yourselves.

            • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              19
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 hours ago

              Just out of curiosity, do you think it would help her win the election if she did? She boycotted his speech in congress. She is treading a really thin line, and the only winning gambit seems to be keeping her messaging neutral until after the election. Rocking that boat right now gives the Republicans further ammunition to use against her, and will embolden Netanyahu to militarily escalate.

              At the moment she can hide behind the veil of the current policy being driven exclusively by Biden rather than inserting herself in the middle of things, and therefore presenting additional leverage to her enemies. I don’t like the situation, but I don’t see how it was possible to play things any differently while still preserving a serious chance to win the election.

              We normally see eye to eye on a lot of things, but in this case I think it is disengenuous to conflate the motivations of Jill Stein & Kamala Harris.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                11 hours ago

                I don’t think it would help Harris to call Netanyahu a war criminal. I understand the reasoning. But, to attack Stein for inconsistencies in an interview, which she has since corrected by releasing a statement, is hypocritical. If Harris isn’t willing to call Netanyahu a war criminal, because of the election, then how can it be possible to hold Stein to a different standard?

                • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  11
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  Because Stein has notthing to lose. She could easily take a stand on something like Netanyahu but it was pulling teeth to condemn Putin. When the stakes are so low she can make any statement she wants.

                • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 hours ago

                  Well, I think for one thing because Jill Stein seemingly had nothing to lose in that interview with Mehdi. The whole thing just came off as weird to me, and clearly that sentiment was pretty widely shared. I just don’t understand it I guess. If she had provided more context around her initial hesitancy perhaps I would feel differently.

                  I am also totally willing to admit that it is an intellectual double standard, but it isn’t a strategic one because the outcome of Kamala Harris’ speech has the ability to affect the outcome of this election in a huge way. I guess you could argue that Jill Stein’s does too since she is potentially peeling votes from the Democrats, but if she was actually serious about affecting change she could be lobbying Kamala Harris for policy concessions behind the scenes instead of just virtue signaling.

                  Jill Stein in that Mehdi interview really gave off the same energy as Kim Iversen in her debate with Destiny yesterday. Neither one of them did much to counter the narrative that they were at best highly sympathetic to Russia, or at worst closeted Russian assets. It was all just really bizarre and extremely suspect…

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Ahahaha oh no the “office workers” are still all over here, their content usually just gets downvoted into being permanently hidden and they’ve stopped picking fights outside of their own posts.

      • neatchee@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Don’t forget there was also a bunch of government-backed troll farms shut down recently

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        12 hours ago

        their content usually just gets downvoted into being permanently hidden

        At first I read this as something that existed at the post level, too. Man, I sometimes wish something like that existed - posts below a certain rating could just be hidden (like Slashdot, for instance).

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Well, on lemmy you can probably brigade quite easily so that would give the propagandists a weapon too.

    • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      14 hours ago

      How does it feel when you rationalize ethnic cleansing? Did you ever imagine you’d be this person?

    • blazera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      54
      ·
      15 hours ago

      You’re pro genocide if you vote for anyone that has explicitly voted to arm and fund the genocide

      • YeetPics
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Are you saying “the US is a fully functioning democracy whose actions represent the will of the people”?

        I just want to make sure I’m hearing you right, that America is a functioning democracy…

      • YeetPics
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Are you saying “the US is a fully functioning democracy whose actions represent the will of the people”?

        I just want to make sure I’m hearing you right, that America is a functioning democracy…

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        55
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        15 hours ago

        LOL it took a whole hour

        you kids are slacking

        and no. voting for harris does NOT make me “pro-genocide,” no matter how much you wish it did.

        have fun watching jill stein get a single digit percentage of the vote. if that. but don’t feel like you accomplished something by throwing your vote away, because you didn’t

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          24
          ·
          13 hours ago

          and no. voting for harris does NOT make me “pro-genocide,” no matter how much you wish it did.

          Of course not. You being pro-genocide means that you have two candidates to choose from.

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 hours ago

              If Harris promised to stop sending weapons to Netanyahu, how many centrists do you think would become trumpers?

              • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Yeah they have gotten that bad. I’m glad that you’ve finally decided to accept that. That’s the first step.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                21
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                15 hours ago

                The problem is that “support genocide” is being used overly broadly.

                The stated policy of the Biden/Harris administration is that Israel has a right to defend itself.

                Surprise! They do. Every sovereign nation has that right.

                As a result of that stated policy, Biden and Harris both support providing weapons and funding for the continual defense of Israel.

                https://www.npr.org/2024/08/23/g-s1-19232/kamala-harris-israel-gaza-dnc

                So follow me here:

                1. Israel has a right to defend itself.
                2. The US will support that defense.

                Where it breaks down is Bibi and Likud taking that defensive support and directing it into the Genocide.

                That’s on THEM. The United States is making a good faith effort to provide support for the defense of Israel. Israel is intentionally misapplying that support.

                Trump’s stated policy is that Israel needs to kill everyone quicker.

                https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-israel-pr-hugh-hewitt-21faee332d95fec99652c112fbdcd35d

                “They’re losing the PR war. They’re losing it big. But they’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life.”

                Only one of these two policies is pro-genocide, Trumps.

                Biden/Harris is pro-defense which is illegitimately being used for genocide, not at all the same as being pro-genocide.

                • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  10 hours ago

                  That’s on THEM. The United States is making a good faith effort to provide support for the defense of Israel. Israel is intentionally misapplying that support.

                  This is not a good argument. They’re not infants, they have agency and the ability to perceive the impacts of their actions.

                  Biden/Harris is pro-defense which is illegitimately being used for genocide, not at all the same as being pro-genocide.

                  Eh, it certainly means they’re not proactively anti-genocide.

                  But more importantly it’s not going to move someone uncomfortable with the Democratic material support for the genocide a single iota closer to accepting that there is still a better candidate both for Palestine and for all the aspects where they’re actually good, not just not as a bad.

                • blazera@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  12
                  ·
                  11 hours ago

                  This shit is so disjointed. Its not a genocide, its only a genocide because the countrys leaders want it to be, Biden is only arming a genocide because those leaders want to use the weapons for genocide. You’re stuck, man, you cant get past any of the uncomfortable truths. You cant make an argument that its not a genocide. You cant make an argument that our government is not arming and funding that genocide. You cant make an argument that youre not supporting a candidate that is likely to continue to arm and fund that genocide.

                • Krono@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  14 hours ago

                  So is your argument that the Biden/Harris administration is blind, or stupid?

                  If I give my kid an AR-15 and they shoot up a school, I may or may not be culpable.

                  But if I hand them another AR after the first shooting, they kill again, and then I give them another, and another, and keep handing them weapons for months, and theres a pile of 15,000 dead children, then I am definitely culpable.

                  It doesn’t matter how many times I tell the kid “this AR is for defense only”.

                • blazera@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  21 minutes ago

                  I dont recall any other election where people are saying ‘look, you cant expect to have candidates that dont support genocide’

          • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            15 hours ago

            LOL ok, you’re cool with throwing your vote away

            that doesn’t mean anyone else is obliged to waste time “rationalizing” NOT throwing their vote away to you

            do what you want. just know that your third party vote did NOTHING for palestine. and NOTHING for anyone else either.

            • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              22
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Telling someone they are throwing away their vote because they won’t support your team is right wing authoritarian voter suppression.

              • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                3 hours ago

                Nice straw man. You’re throwing your vote away because you are voting for a candidate that has zero chance of winning, while one of the two actual options is a literal fascist who will give Netanyahu carte blanche in Palestine and the other realizes she has to walk a narrow tightrope before November if she wants to get elected and have any influence over Israel whatsoever.

                But I know you know this already.

                If the Green Party was a serious political party, then why do they never care about down ballot elections? Why don’t they ever care about local elections? Why do they disappear, only to crawl out from their hole every four years to sow division among American voters?

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                10 hours ago

                “Teams” don’t enter into it.

                One candidate poses an existential threat to our country and way of life.

                One other candidate can defeat them.

                Taking a vote away from the 2nd candidate has the same net effect as voting for the first one.

                You either help beat Trump or you help elect him. A 3rd party will not win, so voting 3rd party doesn’t help beat Trump.

            • blazera@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              25
              ·
              15 hours ago

              I wish it meant we did nothing for palestine. Instead of it meaning bombs and funding continues to pour into the arms of the country thats killing them.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            14 hours ago

            Why do you love Trump so much you’re trying so hard to get him into power?

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The system is rigged and you are being play around, how much more evidence do you need?

      • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Oh oh but if I mention it to certain folk, that’s “old news” and “why do you only ever bring that image up” and “lol libs sure are grasping at straws”

        Fascism and political interference does not have an expiration date.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Worth bringing the image up because it’s from 2015… 6 months after she announced she was running.

        • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          26
          ·
          16 hours ago

          political interference does not have an expiration date.

          Sure as fuck doesn’t, as we are still being impacted by the Clinton administration interfering in 1996 Russian elections that ended up resulting in Putin as President.

          • Valmond@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I heard Clinton even helped Hitler bein elected so … shuffles papers … I am NOT going to vote for … shuffling papers more … Biden but for Trump!

            -“Hey boss, you sure it’s still Biden?”

            -“Da da.”

      • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        28
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Provide links from the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation showing there was wrong doing with the event. They’ve investigated and found nothing. Implying guilt by association is dishonest and should be labeled misinformation.

    • ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      No, you see they just happened to put her at the same table as Putin and the other scumbags. She had no say in it! And she couldn’t do anything about it! She’s the victim here, don’t ya know!

      …This is the common response you see from the Stein cultists when this photo is brought up. And it’s pure horseshit. If she had anywhere near the principles and ethics she claims to have she would have got up and left from that table immediately. But she didn’t. Because she’s a hypocritical con-artist, a charlatan.

      Stein plays the morally-upright crusader, waltzing around casting sanctimonious judgements on others. But at the end of the day she’s a far right stooge who is only interested in stroking her own ego and discretely ingratiating herself to tyrants. She can say what she want and has no accountability held against her.

      She had done so much damage to the Green movement over the past decade+. She only pops up at election time to try to make life easier for far right movements whose policies are often the antithesis of what she pretend to support.

      The Democrats should be doing more on environmental issues and holding Israel accountable for what’s going on in Palestine. But at least they aren’t hiding behind their own self-righteousness to anywhere near the degree that Stein is.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    16 hours ago

    They’re not wrong, but they could stand to recognize that some of their own policy shortcomings opened the door to her challenge.

    • evenglow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The whole point is that there is no challenge. It is sabotage funded by Republicans and Putin.

      What challenges has she done when not running for POTUS?

    • can_you_change_your_username@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      15 hours ago

      That’s always going to be the case with a first past the post election system. There can only be 2 parties with a chance to win at any one time and both are forced to be big tents. Because they have no chance at winning third parties get more choice on the issues they focus on and more freedom in how they talk about those issues.

      We need election reform. We need a voting system that gives more power to minority voices and we need an election system that makes Congress better reflect the actual vote. I like STAR voting and want to move the house to proportional representation. We would most likely still have 2 big tent more or less center parties that will trade the plurality but the big tents would have to work with the minority party representatives to get enough votes to pass legislation. It’s possible that more minority party visibility and them being taken more seriously would lead to a more ideologically diverse Senate and it would almost certainly boost minority party power in state and local elections.

  • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Russia is bad and all, but she’s much more directly a useful idiot for Republicans who are not only more directly focused on directly harming the people Stein’s campaign is targeting, but have a significantly greater ability to actually accomplish it. No one needs to trust the US establishment that Russia is bad, they know Republicans and how they’re bad.

    Also, DNC, why are you making this news on The Bulwark? Way to undercut your message.