“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.”

  • skozzii@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Jill Stein needs to go, condemning Putin should be the easiest thing in the world to do for any non-Russian.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Jill Stein wouldn’t say that Putin is a war criminal. You should really listen to how she dances stupid the interview with Medhi Hassan.

    https://boingboing.net/2024/09/16/kremlins-favorite-candidate-jill-stein-refuses-to-call-putin-a-war-criminal-during-interview.html

    The fallout/optics from that blatant fear to speak clearly about Putin was bad enough it seems that she’s now made a follow-up statement to lightly say the phrase, with qualification (after checking with daddy) and associating it only with Syria and refusing to mention Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

  • GHiLA@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    a vote for Stein is a vote for Trump

    It’s also… not a vote for Trump.

    If Stein has 50% of Trump’s votes, Harris still wins, by a knockout.

    • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Again. This is not how this works.

      Stein isn’t taking Trump voters. She’s a Left-Wing distraction candidate. In some systems, like RCV or Proportional Representation, her candidacy wouldn’t hurt the Dem as long as voters were thoughtful with their votes. But in FPTP, which we have here, she’s definitely a threat. We’re bitterly divided here, to the tune of close to 51% wanting lefties and 49% wanting righties. All she needs to do to throw this election to the Right is poach 3% plus whatever Right-Wing third party candidates there are. Since the Right is unifying behind the Shitgibbon, it’s real easy for her to spoil the election and get all 51% who want progressive and/or liberal policies to get conservative policies instead. This is even worse when you realise Conservatives have gone Fascist.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Oh, it can be done, but that means amending the Constitution.

      To do that you need 290 votes in the House, the people who needed 15 tries to get a simple 218 vote majority to pick their own leader.

      Then you need 67 votes in the Senate, a body that’s incapactitated by needing 60 votes to overcome a filibuster.

      Then you need ratification from 38 states, when 25 went to Biden in 2020 and 25 went to Trump.

      There may be a way around it, but that doesn’t kick in until enough states with 270 Electoral College votes agree to it, and that hasn’t happened yet either:

      https://www.nationalpopularvote.com/written-explanation

  • Vivendi@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    The propaganda has been on rapid fire lately, let me guess, they’re actually becoming a threat to the American establishment?

    • prole
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 hours ago

      The propaganda has been on rapid fire lately,

      My thoughts exactly… Though I suspect we are not referring to the same people.

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      14 hours ago

      No, not a threat, the winner will be either Harris or Trump, but they could keep Harris from winning in key swing states.

      • EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Not our problem, we are not democrats. If Democrats lose it’s their own doing for continuing to shift their party to the right.

      • EmpireInDecay@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Not our problem, we are not democrats. If Democrats lose it’s their own doing for continuing to shift their party to the right.

      • Saleh@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        13 hours ago

        With that the winner will be AIPAC and Netanyahu. People voting third party does not threaten the outcome of one of the established party as a whole, but it threatens the idea that doing what AIPAC wants is always good for a politician and going against it is always bad.

        If too many voters decide to go against Democrats now because they are disgusted by the Democrats support for the many heinous atrocities committed by the Netanyahu government, it would force the Democrats to reevaluate that position and force AIPAC influence out, to regain credibility with the people.

        • prole
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          If too many voters decide to go against Democrats now because they are disgusted by the Democrats support for the many heinous atrocities committed by the Netanyahu government, it would force the Democrats to reevaluate that position and force AIPAC influence out, to regain credibility with the people.

          And what do you think happens to Palestine in the meantime for (at least) four years of Donald Trump?

          None of that shit will matter by the time Democrats would even have another opportunity to possibly change course.

        • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          If too many voters decide to go against Democrats now because they are disgusted by the Democrats support for the many heinous atrocities committed by the Netanyahu government, it would force the Democrats to reevaluate that position and force AIPAC influence out, to regain credibility with the people.

          I wish that would happen, but if Democrats lost this cycle, do you believe they would immediately link back to this particular issue?

          I fear that the United States would find itself consumed in pressing domestic issues if Harris were to lose. Over the past several years we’ve already been witnessing the rapid spread of disinformation, a poorly-handled pandemic, increasing racism, xenophobia, and violence, as well as women suffering from lack of reproductive care. As much as I’d hope that a democratic loss led to a disconnect from AIPAC, I imagine a presidential loss at this time wouldn’t change that. Rather, it could force relevant local issues to overshadow issues of foreign influence (which, if history tells us anything, certainly wouldn’t decrease if Trump returned to power.)

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    1 day ago

    Stein’s campaign manager, Jason Call, said via email that “the Democratic Party has no respect for actual democracy or the voting public,” calling the attack a “tired and sad commentary on a party that refuses to serve the American people with good public policy.”

    Yes, this is true.

    “We’re seeing a desperate empire now. We are seeing a desperate colonialist settler empire whose ways of the world and whose control over the world has been lost,” Stein said as she inveighed against U.S. healthcare, housing, and military policy.

    This is also true. But she has no shot at winning and is literally only capable of helping the orange bad. We need rank-choice voting. Until we get that, she should shut up and drop out. Especially with the threat of the orange bad.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Here you go again. Not you personally, but everyone who says that you’re either with us or against us. That didn’t make sense, it doesn’t make sense now, it never will, and it won’t get Harris any more votes. If you don’t believe me, ask Hillary Clinton. Her supporters said the same thing, and then she lost. At some point you have to face the reality that people can and do vote for third-party candidates, and then you need to decide how you’re going to convince them that they ought to vote for your candidate, and usually that’s effective if your candidate has some policies that the voters appreciate. Or don’t try to get their votes and move on with life, that’s okay too.

      But maybe you’re looking for someone to blame, in case Harris loses. You want to be able to blame those third-party voters. I’m not going to let you off the hook. If she throws away third party votes, she knew exactly what she was doing, she took the risk and it paid off or it didn’t.

      But even if we ignore that, you’ve also forgotten that many people don’t live in swing states, and because of the electoral college, their vote probably is not going to impact the outcome. In that case, shouldn’t they feel free to vote how their conscience dictates? But of course you didn’t take this into account, because you didn’t think about their situation.

      But let’s ignore the electoral college. Let’s assume that everyone is equal on Election Day, that all of our votes count for something. It’s well known that no one is asking for our vote the day after election day. As voters, we have power in the lead up to the election and in the election itself, if we have any power at all. But you want us to throw that away. Not only that, you keep repeating the same script every 4 years, which means we never have any power, and we never will, if we listen to you.

      Obviously you personally did not write all of the arguments that I’m referring to above, but it’s important for people to deal with all of the above arguments if they’re arguing that third parties ought not exist or that nobody should even consider supporting them.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      17 hours ago

      literally only capable of helping the orange bad

      The folks voting Green have already folded on the other options. If you’re picking a fight with Jill, you’re only driving her base farther from your candidate.

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The point is she doesn’t have a base. She’s never actually worked to get one. She comes out of the woodwork every 4 years to poke holes in the liberal candidate talking points and cause these rifts in the left. The people who vote for her are almost all independent voters who are “sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils”. Yet not one of those people will get up off their asses to push their local legislatures to enact ranked choice voting in order to provide an actual avenue for a third party candidate to get elected.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          The point is she doesn’t have a base.

          I’ve got perennial Green voters on my street. They’re in their 70s. The entire reason the Green Party exists stems from liberals who were burned out of the Carter/Clinton neoliberal turn during the Reagan Era.

          She comes out of the woodwork every 4 years to poke holes in the liberal candidate talking points

          We’ve had Democrats promising universal health care, public higher education, environmental protections, and global demilitarization for the last 50 years. She doesn’t have to poke holes, she simply sticks her fingers through the Swiss Cheese track record that half a century of corporate liberalism has created.

          not one of those people will get up off their asses to push their local legislatures to enact ranked choice voting

          That’s a flat out lie. The Greens and Libertarians are the only two significant activist forces for RCV, and state legislative races are some of the few spots where they can consistently win races. What’s more, these parties very often emerge from activist movements that are rejected by the ostensibly-friendly Big Two parties. Sierra Club produces Green voters in droves, not because they wouldn’t happily caucus with Democrats but because Democrats despise any kind of activist Green movement. Gun clubs and tax abolitionist groups churn out Libertarians for the same reason - mushy pro-cop/pro-war Republicans and Tax-and-Spend governors like Abbott and DeSantis drive libertarians nuts.

          The singular reason why Democrats are terrified of the Green Party in this election is that it offers an outlet for all those disaffected Arab-American voters no longer welcome in the party. Its the same reason Republicans shat the bed over Ron Paul and Gary Johnson. They know they can’t deliver on their promises and keep their mega-donor funders happy, so they need to be the only voice in the room making these campaign pledges. Otherwise, people start testing the water with alternatives.

      • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I’m tired of people being stupid. I’ve been tired of it for 20 God damn years. I’m folding on stupid people. I don’t care if I drive them away anymore.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          I hear this from Trump voters all the fucking time. Are we really are just getting a choice between Red MAGA and Blue MAGA?

              • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                4 hours ago

                I don’t give a single shit about Harris trying to appeal to the right wing. Good. She should be trying to appeal to the right wing because abstentionism on the left is evidently rampant. And I think that, because compromising is far better than allowing Trump to win.

                You are actively creating the conditions for her to pursue this strategy, and criticizing her for pursuing it. Fuck you and everyone like you.

                Want to change it? Set an outline of manageable policy points that you’d like to see her compromise on if she wants you to vote for her, and then make that popular. Abstentionism doesn’t work, idiot.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 hours ago

                  I don’t give a single shit about Harris trying to appeal to the right wing. Good. She should be trying to appeal to the right wing

                  The liberal two button problem

                  • Harris is only electable if she parrots fascist talking points.

                  • Harris is only electable if her progressive opponents are purged from the ticket

                  Damn. Sounding more and more like Trump’s attitude towards libertarians.

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      24 hours ago

      This just isn’t true. Third party candidates put pressure on the duopoly candidates to adopt a diversity of policies that better represent the interests of the country.

      If the democrats wanted to make the Green and PSL parties irrelevant this election, all they have to do is drop their unconditional support for Israel’s genocide.

      Democrats desperately want to be able to run with status quo positions without risking a loss, and stein makes that just barely difficult enough as to go after her candidacy, because that’s easier than attacking her policy positions.

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        all they have to do is drop their unconditional support for Israel’s genocide.

        First off they are not unconditionally supporting the genocide. Both Biden and Harris are working for a ceasefire. The fact that Israel is not complying or even giving it any serious thought is because we have a plurality of people in this country who do unconditionally support Israel and will not vote for a party that does not actively show support for Israel. So if Biden or Harris actually came out and said they would stop providing weapons and money to Israel they would lose 10 times more votes than the number of people who are voting for Jill Stein because she’s being critical of them for “unconditional support of Israel’s genocide”.

        If you are voting for Jill Stein because of the whole Israel issue. Then you deserve to lose all of the rights that get taken away if and when Trump wins. For reference see Roe versus Wade.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          They have not conditioned their lethal aid on anything, despite the fact that US law prohibits the sale or transfer of weapons to states engaged in war crimes. Even though it’s literally illegal for them to be sending them weapons still, they refuse to even suggest that stopping arms transfers is on the table. That’s a far cry from ‘working for a ceasefire’.

          they would lose 10 times more votes than the number of people who are voting for Jill Stein because she’s being critical of them for “unconditional support of Israel’s genocide”.

          A majority of Americans Say Biden Should Halt Weapons Shipments to Israel

          Regardless, if a majority, or even an electorally-important minority of Americans wanted to nuke Iran, it would still be morally abhorrent to defend doing so simply because “if we don’t, the other guy will do it himself”. Americans love to pretend like they would have been anti-fascist rebels if they had lived in Nazi germany, but this is exactly how the Nazis were able to take power in the first place. Liberal moderates, desperate to hold on to power - or, more charitably, limit the power of fascists - will concede all but the most immediately tangible of human atrocities to fascists. They will happily hide behind their privilege and sacrifice the subjects of the fascists’ violence just so that they can remain at the table now completely taken over by fascists and fascist enablers.

          Democrats don’t have to simply fall in line with what “”“”“the majority”“”“” of voters want; in fact, they themselves have been actively messaging and defending the very support you’re arguing they are powerless to resist. They were the ones making the case for continued support for Israel. They could be making the case that Israel must be brought to bear for their crimes, or at least sanctioned/embargoed until their hostilities and escalations stop. But they don’t - because they know that the US’s interests lie in ignoring the war crimes that Israel is committing. Without Israel, the US would lose influence in the ME, and by extension risk being cut off from the abundant resources that exist there to the waxing multi-polar influences that are building in the east.

          Leftists don’t simply oppose the sale of arms to Israel simply because they’re committing genocide with them; we oppose the strategic imperialist asset Israel itself represents.

          Then you deserve to lose all of the rights that get taken away if and when Trump wins.

          Oops, your mask slipped a little there, friend.

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I agree, but that doesn’t mean Jill Stein has a chance of winning or that she doesn’t help the orange bad.

        • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Nobody said she has a chance of winning. She only helps “the orange bad” if you blame voters when a candidate loses rather than that candidate fucking around and finding out with their policy positions. We learned this with Hilary. You can’t just coerce people into voting for you by threatening them with the other guy.

      • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        18 hours ago

        The Green party is already irrelevant. Their only power is siphoning away votes every 4 years. If they actually wanted to affect political change, they would establish a broad presence in local politics, establish a voting and policy record, and build a third party that’s actually viable as their local candidates advance to the national stage.

        That takes a lot of time and a tonne of effort, though. Apparently it’s just easier taking money from Putin to gum up a presidential election.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          18 hours ago

          What constitutes power to you, exactly?

          A voting block big enough to spoil a victory is power: that’s what makes organizing of all types valuable to begin with.

          Nobody, not even Jill Stein, believes she has a chance of winning against Harris and Trump. The reason why it’s still important for her to run is because she represents a dissenting group of voters who find something unacceptable about Harris and Trump, and if that group is enough of a threat then Harris will be forced to address it else risk loosing her campaign.

          Liberals are mad because that threat is potentially big enough to spoil their victory, and that’s reason enough to be happy she’s around. Harris needs to cut her support of Israel, otherwise Green and PSL voters (and uncommitted voters) will remain a threat to her campaign. That’s reason enough for me to cheer them on.

          • TheHiddenCatboy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 hours ago

            The only reason Jill Stein has a chance to spoil this election is because we’ve got a large and rabid minority of voters who actually like what Trump is serving. If Trump were down 10 points in the Swing State polls, Jill Stein’s 1% wouldn’t matter. If Harris had 270 EVs worth of locked in states, Stein could take double digit vote counts in places like Oklahoma and California and still be a non-factor. But in this closely divided of an election, with the political system the USA has, your purity crusade will result in possibly the last election you ever get to vote in, and at minimum, 4 years of policy that will utterly destroy every priority you have.

            And do you really think cutting support for Israel will gain more votes for Harris than it loses from people who happen to think Israel has a right to exist and a right to defend itself? Here’s a hint. It won’t. First, we are certain you’ll just find some other reason not to vote for Harris, and second, it’ll piss off moderate and conservative Jews and run them straight into the Republican’s arms. According to this article, there are somewhere around 3.6 million Jews nation-wide who vote for Democrats. In 2016, only 1.4 million people nation-wide voted for Jill Stein. If you only turned off half the Jewish vote while capturing every Stein voter there is, you’d still have a net negative, and I’m absolutely sure AIPAC would go apeshit over this (and they support Republicans too), and Stein voters would just find another reason they couldn’t possibly vote for the Democrats.

            So, if you are really dumb enough to think a protest vote is a good idea, know that your meaningless protest will cost LGBTQ and minorities and non-Christians and women HERE in this country dearly, while doing absolutely nothing to help the Palestinians. It’ll also fuck the Ukrainians over, and maybe even the Taiwanese, as I can see the Shitgibbon leaving them to China’s tender mercies. Muslim voters who back Stein over Harris will own-goal themselves as they’ll be the first to be attacked by Project 2025 and Trumps Mass Deportation/“Remigration” plans. LGBTQ, Minority, and women Third Party voters will also bring their doom, while White, Male, and passable-as-Christian Third Party voters will benefit from their privilege but best get down to being Good Americans because the Trump Goon Squads will be set loose looking for Leftist rabble to round up.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              The only reason Jill Stein has a chance to spoil this election is because we’ve got a large and rabid minority of voters who actually like what Trump is serving. If Trump were down 10 points in the Swing State polls, Jill Stein’s 1% wouldn’t matter. If Harris had 270 EVs worth of locked in states, Stein could take double digit vote counts in places like Oklahoma and California and still be a non-factor. But in this closely divided of an election, with the political system the USA has, your purity crusade will result in possibly the last election you ever get to vote in, and at minimum, 4 years of policy that will utterly destroy every priority you have.

              And that means Harris must campaign to those voters and affirm their most wildly fascist opinions about minorities and immigrants?

              What kills me is that I would be happy to discuss the ways in which MAGA actually does pose a danger to the republic, if not for the fact that Liberals will use it as a point of comparison for just how fascist of a candidate they themselves would still be willing to vote for, as if the act of voting is some twisted real-life game of “would you rather”.

              According to this article, there are somewhere around 3.6 million Jews nation-wide who vote for Democrats. In 2016, only 1.4 million people nation-wide voted for Jill Stein. If you only turned off half the Jewish vote while capturing every Stein voter there is, you’d still have a net negative, and I’m absolutely sure AIPAC would go apeshit over this (and they support Republicans too), and Stein voters would just find another reason they couldn’t possibly vote for the Democrats.

              A majority of americans support halting arms shipments to Israel. Harris would lose a lot fewer votes than you’re suggesting (especially while Trump is currently torpedoing his own campaign with antisemetic ramblings and accosiating himself with known neo-nazis), and would gain more than the Green votes you’re suggesting (because a lot of people will simply stay home rather than vote green because they feel completely disenfranchised by both parties). But setting the electoral math aside for a second: eligibility odds aren’t a valid defense of being complicit in the most public international genocide in recent memory.

              So, if you are really dumb enough to think a protest vote is a good idea, know that your meaningless protest will cost LGBTQ and minorities and non-Christians and women HERE in this country dearly, while doing absolutely nothing to help the Palestinians

              The democrats are already ceding ground to anti-LGBTQ and minority movements. Harris is already running on anti-immigrant and anti-asylum policy, she is already turning away from protecting LGBTQ rights in red states across the country, she is already fanning the flames of anti-Muslim sentiment. In pursuit of defeating a loud and obnoxious fascist, Liberals are actively affirming those fascist fears while abandoning minority and working class protections. They are proudly advertising themselves as the more pleasant fascists, the steady hand that will provide order to those who are afraid that immigrants are bringing drugs and weapons across the boarder to kill their children.

              No, I do not believe that any of the groups you mentioned would be ‘safe’ with Harris in the white house, and I don’t think those fascist fears and violence will suddenly go away if we lightly affirm their legitimacy.

          • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Nope. Stein voters are lost voters. The Harris campaign will ignore them and move on. There is no message being broadcast or received during this election. Voting for a party that can only help install the worse of two evils is 100% a move of immense privilege, not a moral high ground.

            They have the power to put a dictator in place by leveraging people who don’t understand the primaries are for your ideals and the main election is for strategy. Until we get ranked-choice voting (and we won’t) your moral posturing does the opposite of what you think. In reality anyway.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              17 hours ago

              Stein voters are lost voters.

              Then how is she stealing votes?

              They have the power to put a dictator in place by leveraging people who don’t understand the primaries are for your ideals

              Tell that to Cori Bush and Jamal Bowman. AIPAC money bombed them out of their seats by way of primary.

              Who are their voters supposed to endorse in the general, now that they’ve been replaced by genocidal apartheidists?

              • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                16 hours ago

                If Stein was not in the running, some of her voters may have settled for Harris. As it is, she’s muddying the water. It’s not Harris’s fault a bunch of people are going to ignore the money trail and vote Stein. Harris is going to focus on the people who might be swayed.

                As for Bush and Bowman, no argument. That was rotten & PACs need to die. Those two were doing something right for AIPAC to go after them.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  If Stein was not in the running, some of her voters may have settled for Harris.

                  If Stein is forced off the ballot by partisan officials and heckled in the media as an antisemite, you’re going to scare away far more Harris-curious progressives than you attract hard-Green Jill fans.

                  As for Bush and Bowman, no argument. That was rotten & PACs need to die. Those two were doing something right for AIPAC to go after them.

                  All true, but now who do their base voters turn out for in the General? They same AIPAC swine that ousted them? Just because they have Ds after their names?

                  Or do they protest vote third party, to prove they still exist and don’t approve of either mainstream candidate?

                • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  If they’re “lost voters” as you say, then how is she muddying the water? You said it yourself that they weren’t going to be convinced to vote harris anyways.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              17 hours ago

              They have the power to put a dictator in place

              That’s power, bud, but it’s misplaced. It’s Harris that has the power to respond to those voters, or to ignore them. As you mentioned, the cost of ignoring them could put a dictator in place.

                • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  6 hours ago

                  Giving voters what they want and winning them over is “stroking their egos” now? That’s such a cynical way to look at your fellow voting Americans. They are not your enemy.

                  Come on man… they got us pumping anti-democratic sentiment like it’s the divine right of kings… no fucking wonder the democrats don’t ever feel the need to run on actually popular policies and at least keep things centered. We’re more than happy to deep throat the boot either way.

                • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  16 hours ago

                  Candidates get themselves elected by pledging to address voters’ concerns - if anyone has an ego here it’s Harris and liberals like yourself who think they are owed votes they haven’t made any effort to get.

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Well said.

        Sort of shocking how the common opinion here is, “vote how I tell you or you are a Hitler enabler”.

        And then they wonder why they aren’t changing peoples minds.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        17 hours ago

        If the democrats wanted to make the Green and PSL parties irrelevant this election, all they have to do is drop their unconditional support for Israel’s genocide.

        There’s a lot more in the table than that. But it would be a good start.

        Kamala doubling back on Fracking is driving off as many environmental voters as her endorsement of the Israeli genocide is scaring away Arab-Americans.

        But that’s the joke. People think if Greens just vanished, all their voters would be forced into the Dem block. Instead, repeatedly calling them Trumpies means they’ll be that less likely to vote for you.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          16 hours ago

          People get upset when you point to multiple things you’re looking to concessions on, otherwise yea, I’m 100% in agreement.

          In an effort to meet those people halfway: Harris only needs enough of green/psl protest voters (or at least needs to not loose too-many democratic votes, depending on your philosophical bent) to win. How many voters that is, and which issues are the ones to win them to her ticket, are questions very much up for debate. Even if she can even win them back is questionable at this point.

          But the one thing that is certain is that if she were to somehow loose despite everything that’s going right for her, it’ll be because she abandoned those issues in favor or courting anti-immigrant and status-quo republicans. Her loss will be 100% attributable to the fucks not given for the issues driving voters to third parties, and that’s nobodies fault but her own.

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    20 hours ago

    All these articles attacking Stein my make people not vote for her, but they aren’t going to convince anyone to vote for Harris.

        • prole
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Are you people allergic to good faith arguments?

        • Rakonat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          18 hours ago

          In what world has Trump done anything to suggest he’d support or push a ceasefire?

          Harris has both said and done more to push for a ceasefire than literally every other candidate on the ballot.

          There is no third party candidate that has a hope of winning right now, thus every vote for third party is the same as not voting.

          And not voting is effectively the same as voting Republican, so you’re either voting for Harris, or you’re supporting Trump.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            18 hours ago

            Where the hell did you see me say I would ever vote for Trump? Harris has not done a fucking thing to “push for a ceasefire”. The strongest thing she has said, as far as I know, is that she " wouldn’t be silent about what is going on in Gaza". The very next day, she published a letter condemning the people who protested Netanyahu’s visit. The dem party is full of outright and de facto Zionists, who preferred to have conservatives speak at their convention rather than Palestinian Americans. I’m not voting for, or supporting either Trump or Harris. Harris does still have time to win the votes of people like me. I hope you’re calling your dem reps and demanding it.

            • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              edit-2
              16 hours ago

              If you don’t think Trump would be even worse for than Harris in regards to Palestine, you’re delusional. Contrary to popular edgelord opinion the lesser evil is still better than the greater evil.

            • laverabe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              17 hours ago

              I agree that she should be more clear on demanding a ceasefire (although she did actually partly demand just that in March, at least for 6 weeks - and again during the debate), and that this war could probably be stopped if she made such demands. The current US administration is working to end the fighting, so not voting for the party that is actually working to end the war is at the detriment to the people of Gaza.

              US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said two weeks ago that 90 percent of a ceasefire deal had been agreed upon.

              Washington has been working for months with mediators Qatar and Egypt to try and bring Israel and Hamas to a final agreement.

              Biden laid out a three-phase ceasefire proposal on May 31 saying that Israel had agreed to it.

              20 Sep 2024, Al Jazeera

              Now compare that to Trump:

              “From the start, Harris has worked to tie Israel’s hand behind its back, demanding an immediate ceasefire, always demanding ceasefire,” Trump said, adding it “would only give Hamas time to regroup and launch a new October 7 style attack.” Trump added: “I will give Israel the support that it needs to win but I do want them to win fast.”

              So he would basically allow a full scale genocide, no holds barred.

              That being said though, this is likely not going to end anytime soon due to the massive pager/radio attack on Hezbollah that’s likely going to make this whole quagmire even worse. And I 100% agree with you that the US/Kamala/Biden should put Israel in it’s place before this whole powder keg turns into WWIII, which is not outside the realm of possibilities to anyone who has studied history and the role multiple global conflicts played in the past to lead to world war.

      • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        20 hours ago

        My point, comrade, is that all this desperate energy spent tearing down Jill Stein would be better spent changing the policies that are turning off potential dem voters.

        • jaemo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          20 hours ago

          Methinks perhaps you overstate the intensity and desperation of the energy, but your point is absolutely valid, and they should do that outside of election season too!

          • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            19 hours ago

            Going to add as well that the only party that might actually change those policies will be the dems, since the GOP SUPER won’t, and the green party has zero chance of gaining any power.

            • LustyArgonianMana@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              18 hours ago

              Well since you’ve said it - yeah the Dems have more political power. Which is why it would show leadership and political finesse for Dems to focus their messaging around policy changes that would enable a fairer and safer voting system that eliminates spoiler candidates, like approval choice voting. THAT would attract 3rd party voters. Because it includes them. Instead the messaging above alienates and divides people. It’s bad.

              I actually don’t understand how we all collectively watched Whose Line? in the 90s and somehow still don’t understand the concept of “yes, and,” and including people’s concerns. If Dems want 3rd party voters, they will have to respect their concerns and not try to verbally abuse them, or use fear, obligation, guilt, or shame to emotionally abuse them.

              And btw yes I’m voting for Kamala. But man watching Dems fumble EVERY ELECTION because they can’t let go of emotional manipulation and abuse rhetoric is so cringy.

              • Jackie's Fridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                17 hours ago

                Yeah watching the Dems is painful AF. They get real close to GETTING it and then fall back into their political safe zone. The 3rd party voters might not have the numbers, but they have good ideas for the future of the country that need to be considered.

                We need more Bernies & AOCs on the inside to pull dems back (at least) toward centre and make them understand that 3rd party voters have some great ideas for bringing positive change and equity. Even if the Dems can’t fully embrace them, let’s nudge the needle back toward progress by paying attention to them. The Dems might do. The GOP won’t. So if there are only two viable parties in the presidential (and congressional) race there’s a clear choice if anyone really wants the opportunity to (frustratingly slowly) change anything for the better.

                I always say it’s easier to shame dems into doing the right thing. The GOP have no shame to leverage.

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      I agree. This feels the similar to gerrymandering or restricting access to vote for minorities. They should be able to win without having to walk through a gutter.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Fine, I’ll vote for a different 3rd party candidate. Clearly the DNC just wants to make sure we don’t vote for Stein and they don’t have an issue with anyone but Harris, right?

    • prole
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      Fine, I’ll vote for a different 3rd party candidate.

      You sound like a fucking child. Are you sure you’re old enough to vote?

      Leave the Palestinian people out of your childish temper tantrum.

          • ArxCyberwolf@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            23
            ·
            1 day ago

            Pfft. What a way to twist my words. The single-issue people who constantly talk about voting third party over Gaza are going to be responsible for a Trump administration that will accelerate the genocide in Gaza. If any of these useful idiots actually gave a fuck about Gaza you’d work with the only viable party that could get a ceasefire to happen.

            It’s also ignoring the severe harm a Trump administration will do to the American people. Sure, you voted third party so technically your hands are clean. But it’s also throwing women, people of colour, LGBTQ, and everyone else who isn’t a straight white male under the bus. It’s throwing everyone in Ukraine (who by the way, are ALSO being genocided. But fuck them, right?) under the bus by withdrawing support and there very likely won’t be another election in 4 years to get those progressive policies you want so bad from the Dems if Trump wins.

            There is far more at stake than just Gaza. Get your heads out of your asses. If your third party nonsense helps Trump win then you’re just as responsible for the deaths of countless Palestinians.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          23 hours ago

          It’s crazy to me that democrats use extreme language when speaking of the risks of middle eastern conflic escalating into Europe, but then dismiss it as an unimportant issue as soon as it’s pointed out that they are actively contributing to that escalation.

            • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              ‘Hyperbolizing’ what, exactly? In the middle of what, exactly?

              It would be easier to tell if you’re suggesting a false compromise if you were at all specific about what you’re talking about instead of making vague centrist gestures.

              • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                14 hours ago

                I’m referring to the two extreme positions you wrote. Not sure how that’s so vague, but I’ll spell it out for you anyway. I’m suggesting you presented two hyperbolized straw men in your comment above. Very few democrats, if any, do either of these:

                use extreme language when speaking of the risks of middle eastern conflic escalating into Europe

                dismiss it as an unimportant issue as soon as it’s pointed out that they are actively contributing to that escalation

                the position “in the middle” that’s closer to reality is something like “It is a major conflict that has the potential to escalate, but it’s also not the only thing at stake in this election.” That isn’t a false compromise, that’s just how it is.

                • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  13 hours ago

                  “It is a major conflict that has the potential to escalate, but it’s also not the only thing at stake in this election.”

                  Idk what to tell you, that’s a dismissal of the issue as unimportant, even if simply unimportant as compared to the other things you say are at stake.

      • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Leftists, obviously. The people they pay lip service to and then fuck over. The whole reason people vote for the green party in the first place.

    • batmaniam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 day ago

      As someone in a state where my presidential vote is very much decided… I voted Gary Johnson in 2016. I know there are a lot of very real critiques of the libertarian party and/or platform, but it’s really sad the green party puts it to shame… it’s not a high bar.

      My point being… wtf is she still doing doing this stuff? Libertarians push local candidates all the damn time, and make a push for the presidential seat when they can, but soundly rejected Trump, and hell, even in 2016 you had the VP libertarian cantidate saying “vote Hillary”. Like I am upset as anyone else, but if you’re still in the green party you’re just kidding yourself… and thats from a freaking libertarian that hates his party a good 50% of the time.

    • ArxCyberwolf@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 day ago

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

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      120
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days 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
        30
        ·
        2 days 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
          48
          ·
          2 days 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
            18
            ·
            2 days ago

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

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          65
          ·
          2 days 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!”

        • sarcasticsunrise@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          30
          ·
          2 days 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

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          54
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days 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.

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            20 hours ago

            I like how everyone who is aware of the terror America has caused all over the world is immediately a Russian asset.

            I like that she has the balls to rightfully call our living current and past presidents war criminals. Not every american is so brainwashed.

            And before you ask I’m voting Democrat. I like that Jill Stein is putting pressure on the Democrats, and I can’t say I disagree with anything in the statement they released.

            • prole
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              13
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              Whatabout whatabout whatabout whatabout though?

            • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              25
              ·
              2 days 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.

              • FatCrab@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                ·
                1 day ago

                In addition, people act like she isn’t also the acting VP during this campaign. It would be extraordinarily problematic for the VP to actively undermine the policy of the president with whom they are serving even if their own presidential policy would be significantly different.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days 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
                  19
                  ·
                  2 days 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
                  12
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 day 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…

      • blazera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        2 days 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

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              41
              ·
              2 days 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.”

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      2 days 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
        13
        ·
        2 days 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.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      2 days 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.

      • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        2 days 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).

        • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          49 minutes ago

          It does kinda, if you browse using the Hot sorting stuff with 0 or less net score typically won’t show up unless you go quite a few pages back.

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 day ago

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

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        58
        ·
        2 days 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
          7
          ·
          2 days 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.

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              20 hours ago

              Its not crazy to acknowledge that the current choices are genocide or genocide light. You can even still vote for Kamala and feel slightly bad about her stance on Israel. Wheres the problem with allowing some nuance here? Turning this into all or nothing, live or die, good or evil, is not very convincing in my opinion.

              • DancingBear@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                17 hours ago

                Yea well buddy, I’m sorry but I’m not going to just sit here and allow genocide or genocide light without calling you a jackass on the internet.

                But I will walk up to the store right now and get another beer.

                Brb

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

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

              • DancingBear@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                17 hours ago

                Zero intelligent ones, because everyone knows we just need someone to say it at this point.

                But you know what?

                Harris can’t even say out loud that she will stop the genocide.

              • prole
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 day 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
                28
                ·
                2 days 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
                  4
                  ·
                  2 days 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
                  4
                  ·
                  2 days 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.

          • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            26
            ·
            2 days 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.

            • blazera@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              2 days 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.

            • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 days ago

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

              • prole
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day 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?

                • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Netanyahu has Carte Blanche right now. The US has completed over 500 weapons deliveries to Israel. And Harris has already said she’s continuing the shit we have going on right now.

                  There are plenty of greens holding local offices right now, but you would know that if you looked instead of relying on someone to feed you propaganda that’s designed for their purposes.

                  Why is it every 4 years Democrats rise from the sewers and talk progressive and populous then go right back to legislating like their Republican counterparts after the election?

                  Telling someone their vote is wasted or meaningless is right-wing authoritarian voter suppression.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                13
                ·
                edit-2
                2 days 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.

                • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Both pose a threat to the country, but right now one dragged themselves out of the sewer like they do every four years to talk progressive and proactive, then proceed to legislate like their Republican counterparts after the election.

                  My goal is to defeat both threats to the country and our quality of life, not slowly extend everyone’s pain.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            2 days ago

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

      • YeetPics@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day 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…

        • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          No, it’s not a fully functioning democracy that does not represent the will of the people. The will of the people are saying they want a ceasefire, they want an end to war. Which falls on deaf ears to politicians. The only thing Democrats or Republicans ever respond to is the threat of money stopping, which was the only thing that kept Biden from running.

    • blazera@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

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

      • YeetPics@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 day 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…

    • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

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

  • SeattleRain@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    Maybe she wouldn’t be so popular among Muslims if, you know, Dems weren’t erasing their existence. Just Sayian.

    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      So hilarious! I too love parody! You nailed the ignorance and aversion to reality perfectly!

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      23 hours ago

      Would this be the same dems that provide wholehearted economic and military support too… just let me check my notes here… The House of Al Saud?

  • Marleyinoc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 days 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.

    • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days 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
        5
        ·
        1 day 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…

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day 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

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Or you could just reserve your opinion for who you are going to vote for, and respect the fact everyone is free to come to their own conclusion.

        I’m voting for Harris, but it wouldnt offend me If someone said they were voting third party. The same as I wouldnt expect it to offend them I’m voting for Harris.

        Y’all need to get off this good and evil Netflix drama.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          What they ultimately do with their vote is their business, but I’m just responding to the premise that would-be Stein voters would not vote for Harris anyway, because they are “too dumb” to vote for Harris, which is incorrect.

          As to discussing the strategic situation, I think that is important to reiterate the consequence of their vote. Stein will not win, it’s very obvious, so a vote thrown that way is merely a message to try to break the self fulfilling prophecy of third parties being hopeless. If you truly feel either candidate is roughly equal, this is a fine and strategic move. I could understand that perspective in most presidential races I have seen. Given the happenings associated with Trump’s first term, I personally can not understand that perspective, but ultimately it is their business.

          To be quiet on this would be to let what seems to be forces looking to weaken the Harris prospect prevail in swaying people to vote for Stein, despite those forces not actually wanting Stein, but just wanting a spoiler candidate to take some votes the way they want.