HomeUncategorizedUpdate: Nina Turner Considered Offer as Jill Stein’s Running Mate, But Says No Thanks
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
CaliforniaPat

Well, if that happens, the Green Party will get my vote in November! Great addition to the ticket. Best news I have heard since the news networks announced HRC the nominee before the CA primary.

CaliforniaPat

Probably should have said, this is the only good news I have heard….

Jo Crain

I wuz wonderin’

wi58

Say Yes Nina , could be the momentum that puts them into the presidential debates. After what the DNC inc pulled on her I hope she says yes. There are a lot of Berners that she will attract to the greens

Linda Thieman

I’m so pleased by this that I can hardly breathe. You know, I had some good news for us earlier today. A person I was talking to brought up the election. She’s the kind of person who is not at all political and who you might think would be totally disinterested. And she says she doesn’t really like either of the candidates and that she heard that there is a Green Party and they have someone named Jill. She thought she might vote for Jill. I tell ya, this is going much deeper that I ever imagined.

Antennaria

I love that Hillary and the DNC blocked Nina from speaking at the DNC convention to prevent a challenge from Nina in 2020 and now she might have a serious challenge from Jill/Nina in 2016!!!!!!!!! Praise be, I hope Nina accepts this. offer. Awesome opportunity for her, us, the Greens, Bernie’s agenda . . . . everyone!

Star Strider

Terrific! She’ll definitely give additional credibility to the Green Party as Jill’s running-mate. I only wish the Green Party was on the ballot in every state.

Jill Not Hill

occupystephanie

I only wish the Green Party was on the ballot in every state.

I am not sure that everyone flocking to the Greens knows this. I am not seeing the Greens go to any trouble to make it clear that it is impossible for Stein to succeed.

Nalepoc

For me, it is no longer about winning this election, our next Pres will likely be the Clinton machine, it is about building a new party for the future.

belle de jour

“I am not seeing the Greens go to any trouble to make it clear that it is impossible for Stein to succeed.”

Why in the world would any party ever seek to suppress the free will of its potential voters by announcing or warning that its candidate will surely fail????

occupystephanie

It is not suppressing free will but prevaricating. When a party exhorts you to vote X for President it makes the implication that this is a possibility. With the Greens only on about 20 to 22 states, how is this even possible? It is a protest vote.

One of the arguments that I have seen is that more Green votes would put them on the debate stage. When the DNC controls the debates–as we know only too well–how does that help whatsoever? We cannot leave the Democratic Party corrupt and powerful

As odious as it may seem, Bernie wants us to stay in the party and reform it. That is the hard job but the one that needs doing.

TruthFreedomKindness

Per the Greens: http://www.gp.org/ballotaccess

“The map below shows the Green Party’s ballot access status for 2016 (the Presidential election). As of July 10, 2016, we are on the ballot in 24 states and the District of Columbia, reaching over 60% of the population. Another 30% of the population is in states where we have active ballot access campaigns. Expect to see more states turning green soon. And in states where the remaining 10% of the population lives, we are working to have the courts overturn their draconian ballot access requirements.”

It looks likely they will be on the ballot in enough states to win if people turn out to vote. A green vote could be more than a protest vote.

Jo Crain

I hit the wrong thumb if it comes up with a down vote. Sorry.

Linda Thieman

Hitting the thumbs down will lower the thumbs up score by one. But you can easily fix this by hitting the thumbs up button and your vote will change.

belle de jour

It’s a pretty patronizing attitude to take that potential Green party voters aren’t smart or politically savvy or hard-working enough to understand exactly why they would choose to leave the democratic party and vote for Jill Stein.

And although you seem to look with disdain upon a “protest vote,” that sort of vote is still a powerful thing for many of us.

Fighting the system from outside is every bit as much of a “hard job” as fighting it from within – with the exception that you do not have all the resources if you are fighting from without.

Your false suppositions about the nature and intelligence of potential Green voters – as well as the implied lack of respect the Greens may have for ‘not telling their voters the truth’ – is breathtaking to me (and also one reason why I am happy to leave that attitude behind, in the democratic party, where it seems to belong now.)

With enough support and votes from hoodwinked dupes like myself, it is quite possible in future that a Green or Independent candidate could rally the resources to escape the corrupt two-party control and challenge the other candidates to meet them for a fair public debate – or face the consequences from an increasingly knowledgeable, educated, engaged, disgruntled and pissed-off electorate who are leaving the past ways of doing things in the dust.

“When a party exhorts you to vote X for President it makes the implication that this is a possibility.”

Not necessarily. Yet if that party gets enough votes to win, then it is always a possibility that it can win. Unless, of course, others rig the process beforehand and engage in voter fraud – as many believe the democratic party has done this time around.

NVPainter

I don’t think @occupystephanie had any intention of slighting anyone or looking at them with disdain! I think she’s talking strategy, not getting personal. Talking strategy will help us come up with ideas to carry the revolution forward.

And we’re bound to disagree — that’s okay! It’s important, though, that we don’t personalize it, or this will all dissolve in anger.

And I absolutely agree with you, @belle de jour, that fighting election fraud is critical. The kind of fraud and suppression we’ve seen this year on behalf of HC is the kind of stuff usually pulled by Republicans — God forbid that Dems use lawless tactics out of Karl Rove’s playbook. The last thing we need is vote stealing by any means possible.

(“Voter fraud” is the term Republicans use to justify making it harder to vote — because, they maintain, the problem is individual voters who aren’t voting legally — i.e. immigrants. They use the term to justify taking Democrats off the rolls.)

We can work from both the inside and the outside, as we see fit.

belle de jour

I can see by your other comments just today – referring to another poster who seems intent upon very personally insulting as many others as possible, right and left – that you and I have some vastly different assessments of when people should rightfully defend themselves, of when they should call out an attack or blatant insult or bullying, of what people actually mean, of what people actually say, and of how they actually say it.

(If you don’t think “prevaricating” is most certainly a pejorative term when referencing Greens, for instance, I don’t think we are even speaking in the same language, or with words that have the same meanings.)

Thank you for your comments; we could not disagree more about the substance or intent or insults inherent in other comments, but I appreciate you took the time to make and share your own.

NVPainter

Thank you for your thoughtful comments, @belle de jour. Frankly, the comment you’re referring to — “lying” was the term used, if I remember correctly — was added after I posted my comments that you’re referring to — or at least I read it after I added my comments. And no, I don’t think it’s okay,

My subsequent comments (and I’ve spent way too much time on them, and definitely need to get to work) have all been made in the hopes of cooling the rhetoric down on all sides.

It looks to me as though we’re all at some stage in the process of grieving, which is completely understandable. Kubler-Ross’s five stages of grief are denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. I think a lot of us are at Stage Two right now — and anger is understandable, especially given the DNC’s betrayals.

It does not help any of us if we turn that anger on each other. It’s not okay for us to step over the line, and accusations and name calling do that. But given what we’re all going through, I think it’s easy to see why we’re doing it.

What I hope we’re able to do is to remember to be kind. We have far more in common than we have differences. We all support Bernie’s Revolution. Probably most of us remember when the Democratic Party was the “big tent” party, with room for differences. @occupystephanie wrote a wonderful article about taking time to heal — and that’s just what we need now.

So I hope we can give ourselves the mental and emotional space to cool down, not get caught in the rhetoric, stay away from name-calling and all the behaviors we can’t stand at TOP, and allow the healing to happen. We can help each other in the process, too.

I truly believe that we need to be the change we want to see in the world. If we want to see the world around us be a kinder, more peaceful place, it starts with us. I’m hoping we can get through this and make peace happen here, too.

Also calling on @joe from Lowell, @RaggedyAnn, @magsview, @StarStrider, @polarbear4, @Toby Ziegler if you’re listening, and @LieparDestin — I don’t mean to leave anyone out, though I know I have, not intentionally — is this something we could all work together on?

belle de jour

Just to be clear: occupystephanie used the term “prevaricating” to which I referred; joe from Lowell used the more direct accusation of “You’re lying” to address Star Strider in today’s Open Thread. (He also then proceeded to insult both magsview & polarbear in the same thread; please read all the personal digs and jabs at their intelligence or comprehension he gets in amidst his many petulant comments, if you still indeed believe “he doesn’t call names.”)

Although I honor your intentions, I don’t feel the need to agree or work with everyone; I don’t yearn to refrain from rhetoric (which I actually quite enjoy & think is useful, especially when done skillfully and with respect – since a great deal of politics involves rhetoric, like it or not); nor do I agree that we necessarily need to remain calm or ‘kind’ when discussing & debating some of the most nefarious political doings & manipulations we’ve seen in many years.

I appreciate rigorous debate, strong opinions, reasoned & impassioned dissent. I think it’s healthy. I also appreciate being able to be honest.

None of the above is mutually exclusive with moving forward, enjoying our points of agreement and strong disagreement, supporting progressive candidates, and helping to defeat awful ones.

What I saw coming today, however – and what did, indeed, evolve and erupt from one commentator on this board – was further degradation of any sort of respectful, civil discourse about issues & points themselves. A totally predictable decline, imo (speaking from personal experience with this commentator’s modus operandi.)

If LD chooses to allow most sorts of free speech – and there are many valid arguments to do so – I sincerely hope he can also figure a way for some of us to engage an ‘ignore’ feature as well.

In fact, I’m coming to believe that an ‘ignore’ feature – providing a dignified subsequent excuse not to respond (even when someone is egging you on, insulting you, trying to provoke a response, or mischaracterizing what you’ve said)… in addition to refusing engagement in anything but respectful & civil debate, albeit incredibly heated, at times… would be a wonderful option that would serve everyone’s personalties, proclivities, and preferences.

magsview

Thank you belle de jour. I really didn’t need those personal attacks today. Lots going on, none of it good. I appreciate your comments. XO

belle de jour

You’re most welcome, chere. And thank you for your smarty-pants, feisty comments; you’re often every bit as outraged (but more patient & politic than am I), and it’s always a pleasure looking forward to a lesson in how magtemperance is done.

Sounds almost as though you are having my dreadful yesterday. Am already wishing you a much better tomorrow this evening, Madam.

polarbear4

Sounds like an interesting weekend (i was gone). Don’t know that I’ll have time to go back and read it all, but certainly don’t want to lose you, belle.

If it’s not too hard, an ignore button might be a good way for some to stay sane.

I agree that tone and implications that someone is not thinking properly are not conducive to civility.

I usually either ignore or stand my ground with Joe, and sometimes (gasp!) agree with him.

I’ve noticed that I sometimes get a little buzz (an argument buzz?) when arguing with folks, and wonder if that isn’t part of the attraction of a political blog.

This is something I’m really looking at and hope to journal about with myself.

I hope Toby and some others return.

And here’s to a good week!

belle de jour

“I’ve noticed that I sometimes get a little buzz (an argument buzz?) when arguing with folks, and wonder if that isn’t part of the attraction of a political blog.”

Ha! Good for you being honest enough to acknowledge the pleasure you get from it. Suspect you aren’t alone in that, either 🙂

phatkhat

Also guilty, LOL. I love to argue politics – it keeps my brain working. Goodness knows, out here in the boonies of Arkansas I’d go mad if I didn’t have the Internet to keep me in contact with the outside world. It’s too easy to sink into deep depression thinking that the people around me are the only kind there are, and I’m a total misfit.

occupystephanie

Making “you” statements is on you not me. You have embroidered what I have written and personalized it and vilified me. Just like the old place!

Please tone it down for everyone’s sake. I am no enemy.

belle de jour

It is regretful that you cannot take responsibility for the very words & implications right there in your own writing, in your own comments.

You often try to pass off your knee-jerk criticism and aspersions regarding anyone choosing to work outside of the precious democratic party as you ‘being too angry and upset right now’; this is certainly not the first time you’ve done it (and not the first time you’ve done it to me in particular) – and you’ve even had to apologize for it (again, also to me) before. So perhaps you should take some of your own free advice from your post the other day, and – as you have been strongly urging all the rest of us to do – give yourself a time-out, including some time to heal.

I am not a Green; I do not take this or your post personally, nor did I personalize my criticism of your comments. There was no need to ’embroider’ what you wrote, because what you wrote was typical, precedented, and offensive enough, all on its own.

Again: I have no need to look for offense or insult about a Green party that is not even mine, nor to take criticism of it personally.

Yet you seem to take criticism of a generalized voter, politician or random citizen (i.e. anyone) staying in your democratic party extremely personally – and especially seem antagonistic towards anyone or any party offering a (gasp!) alternative home or course of action. Not only that, though; you seem to need to take down any and all outsider choices when you can’t build support for the corruption in your party based upon on its own merits – and conduct during this latest campaign.

You flat-out stated that the Green party was ‘prevaricating’ by not informing potential voters that it could never win (which is a truly bizarre and almost unhinged-sounding requirement to make of any political party); you insinuated that if they did not state this fact, their future voters might not understand that it would not win (a ‘fact’ you don’t know, and a sad statement about the intelligence of anyone voting Green); you then dismissed a vote for the Greens as ‘a protest vote’ – managing to insult both Green viability and a valid anti-establishment protest vote all at the same time; then you assured us that, after all, if Bernie wants us to stay in the dem party, well, then, of course we should do as he says; then you declared that ‘the hard work’ was doing that – implying, again, that this position owned ‘the hard work’ (this is rhetoric & vocab 101; please don’t even pretend that what you did not literally say does not make that ‘the hard work’ say something that excludes alternatives.)

Funny you accuse me of engaging in dialogue ‘just like the old place’ by actually calling you out on your party prejudice (when we could not do that at the other place). On the other hand, your need to disparage and question the integrity and intelligence of anyone working outside the democratic party – as well as your misplaced entitlement that you have any right to advise me about my ‘tone’ – is exactly like the old place!

Happily, I don’t take orders or advice or ‘helpful’ suggestions from you regarding freedom of tone & expression (and especially not with your self-appointed representation for ‘everybody’s sake’) – so when someone somewhat hypocritically asks me to ‘tone it down’ (when she doesn’t – and won’t even own her own insulting words), and informs me that I’m expressing an opinion in a way that’s ‘just like the old place’ (when she’s engaged in the exact same sort of censorship and authoritarian party voice as the old place), and that I need to stop taking & making things personal (when she’s the one doing it), then I value that denial and unasked for advice at exactly what it’s worth.

I certainly don’t see you as an enemy, nor as my enemy; that seems rather melodramatic, to be honest. But I do see faulty logic, insinuations and denial in comments as something it’s possible to refute and respond to on this site.

I’ll return the favor you extended me of eliminating bogeymen:

The Greens are not your enemy. Progressives who wish to work outside the corrupt democratic party – in any alternative scenario – are not your enemy. Fellow progressives who call us (and any affiliated party) out on what we actually do say – and what we most definitely imply – are not our enemies.

Jo Crain

I think too, that Bernie has provided ample evidence in this presidential campaign that thinking he COULD NOT BE ELECTED was in itself a self fulfilling prophecy.

So given that logic NOTHING WILL EVER CHANGE.

phatkhat

I’ve thought about that, too. That he intended to raise awareness, and by the time he realized he COULD be elected, it was too late to change his course. Of course Her Heinous and minions did all they could to destroy him when it became clear he was far more popular than she was.

I can see her saying, “Mirror, mirror, on the wall, who is the most popular of all?” and the Mirror replying, “Bernie Sanders.” At which point she flies into a rage and screams, “Destroy him!” to her minions.

NVPainter

I’d love to see Nina as a candidate for the Dems — maybe on a ticket with Bernie in four years? I don’t know if he’d want to run again. Or running for President herself, in four or eight years? Between then, Congress? The governor’s race?

joe from Lowell

Kasich is up for reelection in 2018.

Rob Portman is up for reelection this year, and then 2022. Sherrod Brown is up for election in 2018, but he would make an odd target for a progressive primary challenge.

I don’t know anything about her home Congressional district.

NVPainter

So it’s too late for her to run for Portman’s office, and no sense to run against Sherrod Brown. It may not make sense for her to run against the Democratic congressperson in her district, either.

Governor? I wonder how she’d do if she ran in 2018.

Jo Crain

Unless Nina toes the line she will be treated just like she was at the convention – shoved under the rug. This is our dem party in action. Nina knows if she does go into the green party that she will be treated as a fringe element and not credible. It will take enormous courage to do that. Bernie was under no illusions about how they would treat him. He got by for quite some time being ignored as his campaign ignited.

belle de jour

It is ironic to me that even hardcore dems here who were loudly supporting Bernie’s ‘impossible’ goals & candidacy merely weeks ago are now declaring other possibilities, goals & candidacies to be impossible or misleading – then insulting those who dare to declare or hope for them.

NVPainter

Insults definitely won’t help us. We have to work together! We have a lot of figuring out how to take the next steps. Bernie does politics awfully well. I’m looking forward to what he sees as our next steps — beyond getting downticket candidates elected, of course.

belle de jour

Agreed; I saw no need for a supporter of Bernie’s unlikely progressive candidacy to engage in hypocrisy by disparaging supporters & promoters of another unlikely progressive candidacy espousing so many of the exact same goals and principles.

It’s not all about the party.

Jo Crain

I tried to reply and rate up your previous comment but for some reason it wouldn’t let me do it. This comment it would. wtf???

belle de jour

No worries. Thanks for taking the time to do so in this one!

phatkhat

As Truth pointed out, the Greens are ON the ballot in 24 states, and 6 more have been filed and are waiting on confirmation. Two have write ins available for Stein/Baraka. The rest, except for Oklahoma, are all in the process of petition drives.

It may not be possible at this point for a third party candidate to actually win, but it is important for the Establishment RNC/DNC to understand we are sick to death of them.

I am not voting for $hillary. Not only no, but HELL no. And I don’t really know what Bernie wants and what he was forced to say. No one knows how he will mark his ballot when the time comes.

Blueslide

A Green vote may be enough to get the Party public funding at the 15% threshold. A Green vote may mean that Independent voters (the majority) can re-register at a new home and party identify themselves.

We have to say no more, to the two party system mandate. Some have argued it can’t be done. Still others argue the only way to do that, is to form a 3rd party from the bottom up. Electing 3rd party candidates thru local and state party organizations gaining seats in lower offices before running for President.

I say “How do you know ?”. A 3rd party has not been successful in centuries, with the new party replacing an older one. It must start somewhere. Our future and our earth depend on it.

Nalepoc

As a former Dem. recently moved to Green, I believe Nina would make it it great ticket and help to build the Green party.

polarbear4

OMG. Nina should be the President, tho. I would soooooo love to vote for that ticket!

I’m hoping that this run will get her more name recognition for the next cycle, when she can run a very prepared, long-term campaign.

trubludude

I will so be voting Green if she’s on the ticket. Nina Turner is the real deal!So proud she’s an Ohioan 🙂

phatkhat

Nina Turner should be the first female POTUS. She deserves that honor – $hillary does not.

I hope she accepts the invitation. She could bring a lot of credibility to the campaign, since she has political experience that Stein lacks. It would also make a statement that the Greens are a party for everyone, not just affluent whites, which seems to be the assumption.

#NeverHillary #NeverTrump

magsview

Remember Portia?

So far almost all of the replies think it’s a great idea. This comment was interesting:

magsview

Written ironically, just so you know:

I don’t know if it would be better for Nina to go this way or that. All I know is that I will support her wherever she goes, whatever she does. She has earned my loyalty.

jcitybone

Continuing the fight within the Democratic Party is the right decision, and it is the one I had little doubt she would make.

wi58

Jill Stein selected Ajamu Baraka as her vp an human rights activist. A Stein- Turner would sure have been interesting though

phatkhat

Green Party presumptive Presidential nominee Jill Stein has offered her vice-presidential bid to international human rights scholar and activist Ajamu Baraka.

Jill Stein Picks Long-Time CounterPuncher Ajamu Baraka as Her VP Running Mate

Mr. Baraka sounds like he has some excellent background and qualifications. Interested to learn more.

KnotIookin

And now the line being used against the green ticket, on places like GOS, to keep Bernie supporters from going green is that steins VP pick called Bernie’s supporters racist… And when I read that, on GOS, I laughed and what I didn’t post in a comment but wanted to was the question… Did he also call us sexist MYSOGENIST ignorant whitesplainin 22 year old male morons like you all did for the last year

(Smile)

TheLeftistheCenter

With both Bernie and Nina working through the party I have to believe that is ‘currently’ the best course of action. I don’t believe for a second either has sold out, so if they are trying to route the movement through the party I think thats all I personally need to know for now.

KnotIookin

Gawd I wish NINA would run for a seat in the House. we NEED her voice there, especially within the black caucus and especially now that Boss Rangel has (finally ) retired… And his hand picked successor lost his primary bid.

occupystephanie

Here is what Nina Turner had to say:

“I’m going to keep fighting in the party, even though I’m disappointed,” Turner said in a telephone interview. “I’m a Democrat, and that’s worth fighting for.”

#StillWithNina
#DemEnter

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2016/08/nina_turner_turns_down_offer_t.html

occupystephanie

So guess I am the “Enemy de jour” today.

Gonna go plant some fall veggies and take a break from here while I am cussed and discussed.

wpDiscuz
Skip to toolbar