Democrats aren’t attacking Jill Stein because they think she is taking votes from Kamala Harris. No one I know who’s voting Green would consider a vote for Harris at this point. They’re attacking Jill Stein because they don’t want voters to know that there can be a worker-centered party to the left of the Democrats that supports popular policies like Medicare for All, a $25 wage and federally guaranteed housing.

There are 80+ million eligible voters who don’t vote at all because they don’t see the point. Democrats are okay with this, in fact, they don’t want any candidate to their left to appeal to those voters with popular policies.

The fact that the Green Party exists shows that the Democrats aren’t pushing the most progressive policies. Jill Stein’s candidacy shows that it’s possible to support reproductive justice AND be against funding and arming a genocide. That we can end homelessness if we stopped funding endless wars around the globe.

Democrats don’t want anyone to the left of them to exist because it’s the only way they can convince Americans that Dem policies are “the best that we can do”. To Dems, anything else is just “asking for a pony”.

Don’t fall for it. Despite Dem’s desire to have you think otherwise, things don’t have to be this way.

Another world is possible.

  • averyminya@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    22 minutes ago

    I feel like the real reason Democrats would be attacking her would be due to her happily accepting donations from Republican led sponsors, aiming to actively sway Democratic voters instead of specifically both, and the distance that she has from actual election given that she’s not on the ballot in a number of states and is posing herself as the anti-war candidate despite saying that Russia invaded Ukraine because they needed to defend themselves from nukes. Odd how it’s okay to be apologetic to Russia but not Israel. You must understand - as a third party they can claim to have a plan for world peace, but what members in Congress will sponsor those bills? Even if Jill Stein did become President, who is approving her policies?

    All that aside – she does very little in between election years. The Green Party as a whole has accomplished less of its supposed goals while having far more funding than the SRA. I would also expect that the leader of the Green Party practice what she preaches, as her and her husband have stock in just as many oil companies as the Democrats do. So quite honestly, it’s hard to see her as anyone but a faux candidate who shows up to take money from Green Party voters, preventing actual change from happening with that money because it’s going into a candidacy that will go nowhere.

    If she cared, she would campaign for her donations to be given to something that would actually have meaningful effects, and she would push for more local candidates to run. The sad fact of the matter is that the Green Party has candidates who start out Green then move to a different party and are completely happy taking donations from Big Oil just like Kyrsten Sinema.

    To call the Democrats a joke party when the tactics of the Green Party have been laughable is just one reason why they aren’t taken seriously. Another would be this quote:

    there are more open socialists in just the New York state legislature right now (8, all caucusing together, will be 9 next year) than have been elected total above the local level for the Green Party (5). even accounting for party switching, this expands to just 9 people in history.

    We can also just look at the Public Office Holders for the Socialists and the Green Party.

    In short – The Green Party is the vote of choice because there is a Presidential candidate, but they offer nothing else through the four years. People are asking where the Democrats have been for them, what about the Green Party? Why are they all too happy to take money from you but do nothing in between for local activism? People are saying that the Democrats only provide lip service when they say things like supporting a two state solution, but lip service from the Green Party is totally fine? The Socialists or the DSA seem to at least aim for actionable goals, but is there no support for them because there’s no Presidential candidate? We’ve also seen that they (Socialists) actually have a chance of being elected if they run on a democratic platform and push bills that we can be proud of, something that historically cannot be said for members of the Green Party.

    I hope this provides some insight on why people, not just Democrats, don’t feel like the Green Party is a worthwhile option.

  • chaos@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 hours ago

    They’re attacking Jill Stein because she’s running a campaign that will have absolutely no impact on the world except for enticing some number of would-be Harris voters to instead throw their votes away. If the Green Party were serious about change, they’d focus on races where they could actually win instead of actively causing harm to the party that is much more likely to actually do the things they say they want. Instead, they’ve basically outright stated that all they care about is hurting the Democrats. It’s a terrible electoral system that needs to be fixed, but until it is, third parties are always going to present a false option that effectively does the opposite of what their voters actually want.

      • chaos@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        What does this have to do with anything? Yes, the Democratic Party is flawed. That doesn’t change the fact that voting Green will make my political desires slightly less likely, and will make my political fears slightly more likely, compared to voting for a Democrat.

        • تحريرها كلها ممكن@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          I have an idea, how about everyone votes for whoever they like? Freedom of choice and all that. I personally don’t like racists and genociders, so Harris lost my vote and Trump never had it. I was actually willing to give Harris a chance after Biden dropped but she delivered one insult after another, she clearly doesn’t want my vote. Would you vote for someone who insults you or those you care about?

          • chaos@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Of course anyone can vote for who they like, or not vote at all, no one’s saying otherwise. It’s Harris’s job to earn your vote, and she clearly hasn’t. But pushing third parties as the solution to any problem is going to do more harm than good until we get a better election system. It may feel better to vote for a party that more clearly aligns with your positions, but if they have no path to actually acquiring any power to make change, you’re doing nothing while feeling like you did something. Changing the policies of a flawed party that actually has power is much harder, and yes, there might be compromise or half-measures, but that’s an infinitely more productive path. (More productive than that is doing direct action outside of the electoral system entirely, but both things can be done at the same time.)

    • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Everyone the establishment doesn’t like is a Russian troll these days. Coincidence, or propaganda?

    • dontgooglefinderscult@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I like that you specifically posted a right wing source that liberals spent years demonizing during Trump’s and Biden’s terms. It’s weird how right wing you people are just openly being.

    • تحريرها كلها ممكن@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You don’t have the moral high ground you think you have. You can’t scare me with Russia when the US and many Western countries are guilty of enabling a genocide.

      Here’s what the Financial Times wrote a year ago:

      “We have definitely lost the battle in the Global South,” said one senior G7 diplomat. “All the work we have done with the Global South [over Ukraine] has been lost . . . Forget about rules, forget about world order. They won’t ever listen to us again.”

      “What we said about Ukraine has to apply to Gaza. Otherwise we lose all our credibility,” the senior G7 diplomat added. “The Brazilians, the South Africans, the Indonesians: why should they ever believe what we say about human rights?”

      Just four weeks before the Hamas assault on Israel, leaders from the US, EU and western allies attended the G20 summit in New Delhi and asked developing nations to condemn Russia’s attacks on Ukrainian civilians in order to uphold respect for the UN charter and international law. Many of those officials told the Financial Times they have had the same argument read back at them in demands for condemnation of Israel’s retaliatory assault on Gaza, and of its decision to restrict water, electricity and gas supplies there.

      source: https://www.ft.com/content/e0b43918-7eaf-4a11-baaf-d6d7fb61a8a5

      archive: https://archive.is/TxkRb

    • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Agreed 100%. I reached voting age in 2008 and I was one of those “both sides suck” idealistic young voters who voted third party. I did again in 2012 and again in 2016 thinking “Hillary’s already got this one, I can protest vote”. Nope, we ended up with Trump. Ever since that I will only vote blue no matter who, at least as long as the Democrats are the only viable party with some sense of normalcy. Third parties are completely unviable in the US election system. We need ranked choice for a third party vote to not be a throwaway vote. Until that happens, we can’t afford to pick “the best choice”, we have to pick “the best choice that actually has a chance”. Even if it’s not really the best choice. Very happy to have gone out and voted early last week. We need the blue wave. Once the Republican party is thoroughly stomped into the ground and made completely unviable can we focus on a truly liberal third party, but honestly we probably have a better chance of slowly moving the Dems left than we do a third party taking over. It may not happen in my lifespan but I’d rather see progress than regression.

    • تحريرها كلها ممكن@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      if you at all believe in a free Palestine, you will take action to vote for Harris

      How? Harris isn’t even allowing Palestinian Americans to speak. She isn’t even trying to appeal to them or acknowledge them.

      I was idealistic when I was young too

      Thanks for the compliment but my bad back calls bullshit on me being young.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      There’s a few running, that the democrats tried and failed to kick off the ballot in many states. Party for Socialism and Liberation is one.

      The US greens are also an eco-socialist party. Ajamu Baraka is a great anti-imperialist / communist writer, and he was the green party’s VP pick last time.

      • Rob200@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I heard of greens, but as a party I hadn’t actually seen them or any of the others covered much. Usually you just hear about Republicans and democrats. Might just be censorship and lack of exposure in the u.s.