HomeDemocratic PlatformGreen party’s Jill Stein invites Bernie Sanders to take over ticket
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
TomP

Bernie has no interest in that.

TomP

As to this point, maybe:

“Does a stronger Green Party (for the sake of conversation without Bernie) help pull Dem’s to the left?”

Back in 2000, many folks in safe states voted Nader. I think the Dem Party was more conservative then, though. With this platform and Bernie’s movement, the Dem Party has moved leftward (compared to 2000).

So I am a maybe.

In a contested state, a Green vote has a different calculus. But, obviously, for those who see the Dem Party as irredeemable, a Green vote makes sense. Bernie, however, has a different strategy.

To me it is a strategic choice, but emotions often get involved. There is no way of knowing which path, if any, will prevail. We just make a choice. And that choice might change in different circumstances.

Glad you posted this, LD.

Bern_So_Good

I’m not. It promotes CTs. Bernie is not going to green and why do we want to splinter voters so Trump wins?

I can’t sign off this. I’m sick today over the lynchings and police shootings. If people refuse to see what a Trump presidency could do to my son and every other black American, I can’t be involved with that. I just can’t. That’s where I draw the line.

TomP

I understand.

Bernie is not going Green.

Take care.

TomP

My point was only about a stronger Green Party. You and I agree about voting for Hillary and supporting Bernie. Mine was more about the academic discussion.

Bernie is endorsing Hillary.

Bern_So_Good

I know you are voting for Hillary and have been clear about it but many here are talking about voting for Trump or 3rd party.

This discussion is pandering to them and feeds their cts that Bernie may go 3rd party. Not going to happen.

I’m done being nice about this. I was just as invested in Bernie as the candidate as anyone else here. I was just as disappointed, angry and heartbroken over the loss. But I have moved on in a realistic way and will not coddle people’s fantasies.

Trump is a hate monger and would put many of our loved ones, friends and community members in danger.

TomP

I hear you.
I understand your point about the overall discussion.

Totally agree with this: “Trump is a hate monger and would put many of our loved ones, friends and community members in danger.”

See my comment below. Already, before Bernie endorsed, more Bernie voters support Hillary than Hillary voters supported Obama at the same time in 2008.

Jill Stein will not be relevant in this election except on blogs.

Take care.

joe from Lowell

I don’t think everyone appreciates your point about Trump and danger to people of color. This isn’t just about the public policies he would adopt. It’s also about mass movement politics. I worry that a Trump victory would be a green light to every white supremacist in America to beat up my neighbors.

Bern_So_Good

I think you’re right. I’m seeing more and more of that denial. In fact, one said it was just “cultural wars” and “fear mongering” to say that about Trump.

I was like, uh no, it’s about rolling back civil rights, women’s right to choose and an uptick in hate crimes. (I had mentioned gay marriage, abortion-w/re to Scotus appointments) and racism.

Trump will set us back decades with civil rights. None of us should want to go back to that ugly place. And this is one area we can trust Hillary will not backslide on.

jcitybone

Agree totally–that’s why I will vote against Trump (and all current Republicans). The Democrats are light years better than the Republicans on civil rights issues. Trump’s election would be a disaster in that area.

magsview

That’s one of my biggest worries about a Trump presidency. I think it would embolden and empower a lot of dangerous people.

I know a woman (not a friend) who is dating one of those dangerous people. My friend lives near her and has the woman as a fb friend. My friend has told me about some of the crazy stuff she sees the woman and her bf spew there and on his web site. It deeply disturbs her, so I asked her why doesn’t she just unfriend?

She said that the stuff is so crazy, extreme far right, white supremacist, foaming-at-the-mouth stuff, that she wants to keep an eye on them. Woman’s bf is from out-of-state, drives around in a huge gas-guzzling truck with the biggest American flag I’ve ever seen flying from a vehicle, and of course he always dresses in camo.

From the sounds of it he is just waiting for the first opportunity to act. I can only imagine what kind of crazy video he is filming of himself ranting (and then posting to his web site) today.

magsview

And he has lots and lots of guns..

joe from Lowell

Yikes!

This season has been a real wake up call for me, and a lot of people I know. There are a lot of people who have keeping some ugly stuff under wraps, and they’re letting their freak flags fly.

phatkhat

At least it isn’t a Confederate flag. That’s what they do down here.

loneaudience

@bernsogood Take care of yourself and your family. First and always.

Bern_So_Good

NOT going to happen. Why are these lies being spread on this blog? I thought it was a progressive site?

If this blog becomes a tool that helps to elect Trump, I’m gone.

Bernie and any true progressive would not lift a finger to support a Trump victory.

This promotes CTs: “Would Sanders going Green affect your vote in November?” and damages Bernie’s creds and reputation.

Really? Is that where you want to go with this? Trash Bernie’s creds?

jcitybone

Obviously, Bernie is not going to take up Stein’s offer, she’s just trying to woo his supporters. I’m voting against Trump (i.e., for Clinton), so I hope she’s not too successful, even though I generally support her stances.
I am going to ignore the Presidential contest as best I can and concentrate on Progressive candidates and ideas. That’s what the Clinton voters and the not Clinton voters have in common here. Down the road when things shake out that’s what I hope this site concentrates on.

TomP

Good points.

joe from Lowell

The best way for the Greens to get to 15% would be to bury Trump so deeply that the Democratic nominnee’s victory is pre-ordained. Then, enough liberals and leftists may be willing to go Green, comfortable in the knowledge that they won’t be electing Trump.

Bern_So_Good

I’m with you there. I would want nothing to do with the Greens if they are a spoiler and hand us a Trump presidency.

phatkhat

I scrolled down through the conversation, reading little, but seeing who is here. After yesterday, I don’t think I will comment on this one.

katchen

Wanna chat with me, phatkhat? I hope very much that Stein reaches the threshold to take part in debates, not because of how it would alter the outcome of the election, but because I’d like to see a Green candidate take part in every presidential debate from here on out. We critically need people on the national stage who put ecological issues at the forefront and do not allow them to be ignored. I hope the Green party gains in strength and prominence because this party has the welfare of the Earth at the top of its platform.

polarbear4

Me too, Katchen.

This is a very emotional time, so don’t want to say too much. But I’d remind everyone that we’ve had a Dem prez for 8 years and yet here we are.

And although I don’t think Trump has a chance, I wonder if a Trump presidency might wake up the politicians and the people who aren’t taking the steps needed to stop this. I wonder if it might not cause people to rise up and put a stop to these senseless murders and these bullies on both sides.

And I’m afraid that this may be the last time we have even a semblance of a fair election. And I’ve been actively campaigning for Dems all my life, was at the Occupy camps almost every day, etc., etc., so no one can really take away my “true progressive” credentials (sticks and stones). Worked very hard for Obama in 2008.

That said, I will not vote for Trump, of course. And I don’t think he has a bat’s chance in hell of becoming President.

Does anyone know if @chasingorion dropped out? Miss her input.

joe from Lowell

When you say “Here we are,” are you referring to Sanders’/the progressive movement’s historically-remarkable, record-setting primary run? I note that this didn’t happen after Reagan’s eight year’s, or Bush’s.

That’s not a coincidence. The Democratic Party moves left in response to large-scale electoral success, and right when they lose.

polarbear4

I’m referring to the violence.

Because no matter who is in power, anymore, they take power away from the citizens and this sets up the citizens to fight against each other. They even make big deals of small gains on social issues, while taking away our right to self-govern, our earth, our health, our jobs, our “entitlements.”

And we are always at war. We kill indiscriminately with drones. We treat third world countries terribly and wonder why they flee the bombs to new lands. The violence comes from many places, but it is most apparent that it comes from the very top. The arms merchants benefit.

I’m not looking to build the Dem Party, anymore.

If all we can do is nominate neoliberal, privatizing warhawks, then I am hoping for something along the lines of a huge third party, under the umbrella of something like the Bernie movement. Third parties would have to be willing to unite, like they did for Bernie, and compromise and allow egos to soften. But I’m hopeful.

Until then, I’m voting for downtickets from any party that will truly push a progressive agenda.

Now I’ve gone and gotten emotional again.

I hope all can take this as passionate, not against anyone who is voting for HRC. I respect that you have different opinions. This is mine, with some intensity this day.

As Bernie says, it’s the issues, not the candidate.

joe from Lowell

But third party candidates can’t actually push a progressive agenda, because they can’t do anything. The way to actually advance a progr waive agenda would be to take over one of the parties, and achieve a position from which an agenda can be meaningfully pushes. And Sanders’ run demonstrates that that is closer to happening than at any time in American history.

It seems crazy to give up on the party now, given both Sanders’ success and the ongoing trend. It would be like landing at Normandy, establishing the beach head, starting to move inland….and then turning around and going back to England because you haven’t taken.nBerlin yet.

polarbear4

Still voting down ticket and have donated and called. And will continue.

joe from Lowell

Which is great, and perfectly consistent with working to deny Trump the White House, as well as taking over the party.

Eagles92

And this is the glaring problem in our “democracy.” Third-party candidates “can’t do anything.”

If anyone here believes that the concessions to Bernie in the party platform will actually happen, well — I wish you luck.

joe from Lowell

It would be nice if our democracy worked better and made room for third parties, but we can’t just pretend this year that it does.

The platform is about shaping the debate, not creating a to-do list for Hillary. The Occupy protests didn’t force Obama to do anything, but did that make them useless? No, they changed how we think. They changed the political culture. They set the stage for Bernie and his 45%. Onward and upward!

Linda Thieman

Yes, and speaking of drones that kill people indiscriminately, did you know that most of these drones are manufactured by Israel and are labeled “Tested on Palestinians”?

I am a one-issue voter and that is my prerogative. I always have been, from my youth when the deciding factor was whether or not someone supported a woman’s right to control her own body–which is exactly how Bernie always phrases it and how I have always phrased it–then to Bush’s War and who was against it, and now it is who intends to help make a breakthrough in terms of the treatment of the Palestinians.

And for anyone above to imply that voting based on political strategy rather than conscience is superior, you go ahead and do it. I will leave you to your way of dealing with the world and I hope you leave me to mine.

polarbear4

omg, Linda. Do you have a link for the “tested on Palestinians”?

Linda Thieman

It was several months ago that I read it. I actually saw a photo of the label. I was so horrified that I couldn’t even speak about it to anyone for weeks. I’ll see if I can find something.

joe from Lowell

Sounds pretty implausible. American drones are made by Boeing and General Dynamics. Not Israeli firms.

polarbear4

At any rate, here is an article that quotes Human Rights Watch and Corporate Watch, including a chart on the percentage of Palestinians killed by drones, by year.

It looks like we do make at least a majority of the drones we use, although it is possible that we buy some from Israel.

It may be that somebody picked up the content and made a graphic, I don’t know.

Although there is a link in this article, writing about the top drone producers in the world, to what countries Israel exports their drones to, it is no longer good. Questions as to how much Russia and China are modeling their drones on Israeli drones.

More recent Israeli drone activity. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/04/05/israeli-made-kamikaze-drone-spotted-in-nagorno-karabakh-conflict/
I don’t know if the link will show. Don’t know how to add a link when editing.

All in all, as Pope Francis said, the whole world is in this murderous business for the money, to hell with the lives, and it’s high past time to put a stop to it.

joe from Lowell

Yes, Israel does export to some countries. Not ours, though.

Linda Thieman

I read just the other day that Israel manufactures 60% of the drones used in the world. I don’t have a link and I’m taking a Palestine-free day today. But it is definitely something worth looking into.

polarbear4

Yes, you are right on the 60%, iirc.

grapevines

Elbit Systems Ltd. is an Israel-based international defense electronics company engaged in a wide range of programs throughout the world.
The Company, which includes Elbit Systems and its subsidiaries, operates in the areas of aerospace, land and naval systems, command, control, communications, computers, intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance (“C4ISR”), unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”/DRONES), advanced electro-optics, electro-optic space systems, EW suites, signal intelligence (“SIGINT“) systems, data links and communications systems and radios.

Here’s a Wikipedia link regarding Elbit Systems of America LLC:

United States – Elbit owns several companies in the United States through its American subsidiary, Elbit Systems of America (ESA):

EFW in Fort Worth, Texas (the EFW facility also houses ESA’s home office)
EFW manufactures various components for the F-16, V-22, and Bradley Fighting Vehicle, among other programs. It was initially the electronics manufacturing facility for General Dynamics operations in Fort Worth; when GD sold its aviation business to Lockheed Martin the latter was not interested in the facility which was then sold to Elbit.

IEI in Talladega, Alabama (formerly International Enterprises, Inc.)
Kollsman Inc. in Merrimack, New Hampshire (founded in 1928 by Paul Kollsman, who invented barometers and instrument flight in airplanes)
Kollsman is a subcontractor to Boeing on SBInet, a high-tech security system for the U.S.-Mexico border in conjunction with the United States Department of Homeland Security.
Talla-Com in Tallahassee, Florida
Innovative Concepts, Inc. (ICI) in McLean, Virginia, purchased in November 2008 from Herley Industries
VSI in San Jose, California (a joint venture with Rockwell Collins, formerly known as Vision Systems International; Elbit and Rockwell Collins each own 50%)
UAS Dynamics in Fort Mill, South Carolina (originally a 50–50 joint venture with General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products; on December 1, 2011 Elbit purchased GD’s 50% share)
M7 Aerospace in San Antonio, Texas

joe from Lowell

Taking outcomes into account IS voting based on conscience. It’s an odd conscience that doesn’t consider the consequences of one’s actions more important than the psychic reward for the actor.

Linda Thieman

I just cannot see a point of view that tells me that voting for evil is superior to voting my conscience. Perhaps you did not understand that I do not feel that there actually is a lesser of two evils. I think they are both the devil and that both would be as destructive as the other. Therefore, I will vote for a future that is bright and clear, and I’ll let this one descend into the toilet where it might be already.

And you appear to be unaware that there is such a thing as a higher outcome.

joe from Lowell

Except that it’s other people, not you, who will have to suffer for that. Again, my conscience is driving me just as much as yours. I’m just more other-directed.

Linda Thieman

So, apparently you are a TRUE Dem. I am not. My opinion varies greatly from yours as you actually think there is a better toilet for us to sink into. To me, both choices are full of….

I think it is completely inappropriate for you to continue to call my integrity into question. It’s rude and it’s obnoxious and I strongly believe that you have gone way too far over the line of what is acceptable on this blog. Even if such personal attacks were allowed at the other place, they should not be allowed here.

Raggedy Ann

{{{Linda}}} I’m with you all the way. Please ignore this bully.

Linda Thieman

Thank you for your support. I will take your advice. But why is this even being allowed here? I thought we were supposed to be protected from these tactics on this blog?

Raggedy Ann

I agree, Linda. I brought it up on the morning open discussion and Liepar is working on a solution. Hang in there. We need your voice.
Hugs. 🙂

Linda Thieman

Thank you! I also brought it up privately. He said he will act after he gets back from his birthday date! 🙂 If you can figure out how to direct message me, please do. I can DM some folks but not others.

Eagles92

Hugs, Polarbear. I’m with you.

ISSUES, not candidate, or party. For the love of our planet and our collective future.

grapevines

I too shared a reluctance to join the discussion after reading most of the dominating comments at first on LD’s post..but am so glad to have scrolled down! I’ve been reading up on the Green Party the last few days as its’ an option I am considering voting for during the GE.

I would love to see Bernie at the top of their ticket, even though I doubt he will join them…but you never know…this has been a strange election cycle and at this point I think anything could happen.

After seeing Congress (including many establishment Dems) vote down legislation regarding Citizens United and the Dem Party’s reluctance to commit to strong Climate change goals, Universal Healthcare and refusal to sign on too stop a vote on the TPP, I’m beginning to think that real change inside the party is not going to happen…in spite of all of Bernie’s and our hard work too make it happen.

The Green Party certainly has a stronger platform regarding how to deal with Climate Change than either the Republicans or the Democrats at this time.

I’m also in favor of inclusive national debates with the Libertarian & Green presidential candidates included. Otherwise, in my opinion, those debates will just be a clash of personalities with very little real policy discussion going on.

Thanks for bringing up an interesting topic for our discussion @LieparDestin , as I’m sure many Bernie supporters are going to vote Green or at least at this point, before the GE actually gets underway, are considering our options if we don’t want to vote for either Clinton or Trump.

@polarbear4 I haven’t heard from @chasingorion either and am concerned about her. I hope she’s just on vacation.

polarbear4

Me, too. (On all of it.) :O)

Raggedy Ann

I’m with you, katchen. I will probably be voting green in the GE, unless by some miracle Bernie gets the nod. Once the conventions are over, we will be able to have full-bodied discussions on the GE and where we go from here.

phatkhat

Gary Johnson is close to 15%, and I, too, want all hands on deck for the debates. I think it’s healthy. And I also would go further, and say we need to move to a parliamentary system that gives minority parties an actual voice, as they do in Europe. I think it is important to consider all ideas, not just the ones from the dominant political force.

joe from Lowell

Stein is fibbing in her assertion that an “overwhelming” number of Sanders supporters are moving over to the Greens. All of the actual evidence shows this to be untrue.

Based on the example of 2000, it seems equally dubious to think that a strong third-party run would pull the Democrats to the left. They don’t move left in response to defeat; they move to the center. If you look at the periods when the party did move left – LBJ’s first term, or the Early New Deal – you’ll see that the party’s periods of progressive advance followed big victories, not defeats or third-party challenges from the left.

Star Strider

I tend to believe FDR’s ‘big victory’ was the result of the Dems move to the left in 1932, as well as the resounding failure of Hoover’s approach to the Great Depression. LBJ’s ‘big victory’ in 1964 was as much his being relatively progressive (for the time) and his having been Kennedy’s VP as it was an overwhelming aversion Goldwater’s right-wing extremism (except for she-who-must-not-be-named, who was an enthusiastic Goldwater Girl, and I believe still is at heart). Nixon’s victories were largely a reaction to the relative progressivism of 1961-1968, and although not known at the time, Kissinger’s interference with the Paris Peace Talks, in order to deprive the Dems of claiming to have stopped the War, and to prolong the Vietnam War for another four years. (We must not forget that she-who-must-not-be-named is also a devotee of Kissinger.)

joe from Lowell

FDR ran a centrist campaign as a technocrat in 1932, criticizing Hoover’s deficits. The leftist stuff came after he won. There was no “I welcome their hatred”‘language or stance during his campaign. He moved towards that after winning.

polarbear4

FDR served four terms as President.

I remember TIME had a cover with Obama as FDR, which many of us actually believed would happen.

grapevines

I think the party moved more too the left with LBJ in reaction too the assassination of JFK who was considered progressive, for his time, on many issues. It was also a reaction to the ultra right wing conservative policies of Barry Goldwater. The party also moved more to the left and progressive thought with the election of JFK in 1960. I also think the party shifted slightly left, following the resignation, and national hatred and contempt of Richard Nixon.

joe from Lowell

Kennedy was not to left of Truman. Truman was the better liberal. Kennedy’s nomination was partly the result of him being seen as a reliable hawk, in response to the terms of Eisenhower and his strength with national security voters.

grapevines

not really sure how your comment relates to the statement I made proceeding it. Kennedy brought progressive leaning too the party (and I might add that the party was dragging its heels and protesting that change) after he was elected president.

In other words, my statement was pointing out that the party shifting to the progressive left doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with who was a president in the previous cycle. There are a variety of elements, historically, that cause that leftward progressive shift to come in to play.

joe from Lowell

My comment rebuts the claim that Kennedy’s nomination is inconsistent with the pattern. 1960, too, is an example of the party moving right after defeat. Again, Kennedy was to Truman’s right, not to his left. He was less progressive than Truman.

There are, indeed, a variety of factors that influence the party’s movement. There is a question here about how general election defeat influences it, whether it moves them left or right. It seems worthwhile to consider this one, since a number of people are arguing that a Dem defeat this year would be useful or consistent with the effort to make the party more progressive.

grapevines

I never made the claim that Kennedy’s NOMINATION had anything to do with the pattern. I never mentioned the word “nomination” in my original post, please read it again. thanks.

The shift to the progressive left occurred AFTER he was elected…he created the shift too the progressive left by many of the progressive actions he took while in office.

phatkhat

Yes, dropping Fat Man and Little Boy on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were extremely progressive actions. Getting us involved in Korea was another. Remember the domino theory about Southeast Asia? Well, Korea was the first domino, and we ended up involved in that quagmire for over twenty years. (Anecdotal aside: the beginning of the Korean war is one of my earliest memories. We were at a neighbor’s house watching one of the first TVs in the county, and whatever was on was interrupted by a news bulletin. The neighbor burst into tears, and my mother said “Oh my god, we’re in it again!” Funny what a 2-1/2 year old absorbs.)

I will grant that Truman began integrating the military. That was about it for progressive, IMHO.

Josh

Tell me, how does voting for the establishment Democrats and DINOs like Hillary Clinton force them to be more progressive?

“They don’t move left in response to defeat; they move to the center. If you look at the periods when the party did move left – LBJ’s first term, or the Early New Deal – you’ll see that the party’s periods of progressive advance followed big victories, not defeats or third-party challenges from the left.”

Correlation does not mean causation.

joe from Lowell

Voting for a general election candidate doesn’t move the party in any direction. I haven’t claimed they did. Primary challenges force them to be more progressive.

Defeat, on the other hand, moves the party to the right. Such as, the DLC being founded after 1984, or one of the founders running right and getting the nomination after 1988.

Also, correlation suggest causation a whole lot more than does a complete lack of correlation. Can you name one time Democrats reacted to defeat by moving left? One?

.

polarbear4

Yes, and this time, especially, it would be obvious that defectors want more progressivism, not less. For the Party to move right would be just an excuse to move right in the face of an obvious preference for the left among a majority of the population (see Sanders campaign).

Not that I believe for a minute that she will lose. A lot of centrist Republicans will vote for her.

Star Strider

I’m ‘Voting Green No Matter Who’ !

I cast my one an only vote for a Clinton in 1992. I’ll never make that mistake again!

Fleur de Lisa

Bernie is working the system as he has consistently done, earning him his “amendment king” moniker. He fights strenuously, negotiates skillfully, using the rules of the system, to make any gains he can in the direction of progressive change. That’s what he’s doing here with the platform fight, and he’s positioning himself as well as he can to have the goodwill and leverage to get progressive planks in. He expects us to keep establishment dems’ feet to the fire, and elect as many true progressives as we can, to push the platform into policy.

Contrary to HRC’s mocking remarks about him during the primaries, he’s not an unrealistic dreamer who promises rainbows, he’s the true progressive who gets things done, and he’ll continue to do so. It doesn’t necessarily look very idealistic from the outside, but this is how Bernie works it. Remember that he has a history of working with some unlikely (ideological foe) allies to make progress. If he can work with McCain or Inhofe, he can work with Hillary. Some of us may find that distasteful, and I truly respect those feelings.

[edited grammar error]

belle de jour

Thanks for the article link and for the opportunity to discuss the topic, LD.

I would be thrilled if Bernie went red rover and crossed over; probably one of the few times him breaking his word would be welcomed (or even encouraged!) by many. Very canny move by Dr. Stein to invite Bernie and Bernistas to greener pastures, where their dearest ideals and goals might flourish.

The Greens seem like a natural fit for any truly progressive party, and their main concerns easily accommodated and incorporated into a genuinely forward-thinking agenda. It would only strengthen the democratic party, imo, the closer they got to representing its ideals and principles.

It’s difficult to imagine how much better the dog and pony show of debates would be if elevated by the participation of Greens and Indies… but a girl can dream.

I believe our two party system has failed us, and am eager to entertain new models and ideas. It is inconceivable to me how people can pick party over person, and I will not cast my vote under the oppressive thumb of that cynical, useless stricture.

I’ll be stubbornly and joyfully voting for the ethical, trustworthy, progressive candidate for president – whether that’s Bernie Sanders, or Dr. Jill Stein. I’ll be doing this fully understanding that though they may not win, the intentional beginning of the end for a dysfunctional two-party disaster that represents fewer and fewer people needs to begin right now.

mouselander

A very noble and magnanimous gesture from Jill Stein. Unfortunately, since Sanders said just yesterday that he’ll do everything possible to help elect Clinton, the offer will clearly fall on deaf ears. More’s the pity. Personally, I am fed up to the teeth with all the warmed over lesser-evilism crap.

What’s kind of ironic is that one of LEV’s high priests, Noam Chomsky, told an interviewer recently that 2008’s Lesser Evil, Barack Obama, was actually worse in many ways than 2000’s Greater Evil, George W. Bush. But hey, who knows? Maybe this is the year that the Lesser Evil turns out to be less evil, or at worst no more evil, than last cycle’s Greater Evil. Stranger things have happened.

Jill Stein has implicitly posed the question: Exactly why do people choose to vote for the (supposed) Lesser Evil? Is it because they don’t want the US to be in a permanent state of war? Because they fear an imperial president who appropriates to himself the power to kill or imprison without due process? Because they fear a surveillance state that encroaches on civil liberties? Because they’re tired of arm waving and lip service given to the apocalyptic threat of man-made climate change? Because they’re tired of a government that bails out perpetrators of systemic bank fraud and thumbs its nose at the middle class? Because they’re sick and tired of “free trade” agreements that surrender national sovereignty and ship good paying jobs overseas?

It very well could be – unfortunately, under a system in which “Not Evil” is widely considered to be a mere vanity vote, there is absolutely no effective counter-balance to push back against the forces that dominate both major parties and which are committed to perpetuating all of the above, regardless of which candidate wins a particular election. So many voters end up voting for candidates they generally consider worthless, in order to prevent the election of candidates they consider even more worthless. All of this calls to mind that famous quote from H. L. Mencken : Democracy is based on the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. Hillary, at least, will make sure of that.

belle de jour

*laughing* I hadn’t thought of that quote in quite a while 🙂

nycjoc

I am voting Green full stop. If the Democrats insist on their path have at it. My family is split three ways; some will vote Democrats, some Green, and others not at all. I worry about my brothers, especially my deaf brother who already had a scary ass encounter with the police. I worry about my nephews too, especially my oldest because he is a gay black male, a double whammy of worry for me. However, after living and growing up in semi racist Indiana I know this. Whether Trump wins or lose the racists already feel emboldened. I really can not pretend a Trump lose is going to calm things at all. I think it will keep getting worse regardless of him. Yes, trump would enact horrible laws, I won’t deny or make light of that but I’m not feeling Clinton new Democrat bull either. However I do know that if trump loses, they’ll just present a more polished asshole racist next time.

For me voting green means voting where I want this country to go. I’m voting for that version of progress. I will not backdoor endorse Clinton to stop trump out of fear of what the racist will do. They are going to do it anyway. That’s just the way I feel. I respect others who don’t feel that way.

I will vote for any and all progressive in the Bernie fold but lip service progressives/liberals can go the way of the woolly mammoth for all I care.

However, I live in New York so I have a luxury others don’t feel. But I have never voted for a Clinton and I don’t plan to start now.

phatkhat

I agree with your assessment. Just yesterday, a black man was found hung from a tree in an Atlanta park frequented by the KKK. On top of the two killed by police the days before. Racism seems to have gotten worse under Obama, because of the resentment among the white supremacists over the “*** in the White House”. And it won’t get better with Hillary, they will just add more violence against women to the mix.

I live in a pretty white part of the South, and I hear it all the time. And it never ceases to amaze me that the ones crowing loudest about white superiority are always the ones that look like they were scraped out of the bottom of Darwin’s barrel.

belle de jour

I am woefully ignorant about what sort of polling would put Greens & Indies into the debates.

Questions:
Are these national, private polls? And/or are they affiliated with individual campaigns and parties?
Do they select respondents randomly?
Is there any way one might increase their chances of participating in such a poll?

All answers & suggestions welcome, and appreciated!

(I would gladly sacrifice any dignity or remaining patience as just the goat to volunteer my opinions to almost any wascally weasels if it meant it might give the Greens and the Indies a chance to participate in and enlighten national debates.)

wi58

I’m just going to let it play out. to many tangibles out their with both frontrunners Nov is 6 months off so time is on our side. Ive already stated that I wont vote for Trump or Hillary as I don’t trust her period. I realize that some of us think to vote for the better devil you know but I’m done with that- had enough. I will consider Stein or write in Bernie . Who knows for certain as future events could lead Bernie to go with Steins offer. But will support down ballot Dems in WI as that is where the battle starts for the ground up revolution in Wi. I realize that Bernie is fighting like hell for the Dem platform but history shows that almost all platforms are forgotten the day after the election.

jbob

Hi LD et all, I wanted to comment earlier but can not do that from work. Bernie was asked that question at the “where we go from here” town hall in Albany. Specifically if he would run with Jill Stein on the Green ticket. His answer was an unequivocal no. He said that he gave his word that he would not to run third party when his campaign began and was going to keep his promise.

loneaudience

The Dems are a lost cause IMHO. I can’t see Bernie taking Stein up on her offer. He truly believes he can affect change from within. I doubt it. I’m moving my support over to Stein and will try to spread the word about her as well. I hope she reaches the desired thresholds and would LOVE to see her on the debate stage.

#NeverHillary

reflectionsv37

Not that it makes a difference in the big picture, but I’m going to make a prediction here.

I believe the great liberal bastion state of Hawaii is going to go for Trump. And I have a few reasons to truly believe that is going to happen.

First, Bernie defeated Hillary in the Hawaii caucus by a devastating 70-30 margin. In 2008, that margin was even greater with Obama on the ballot. People in Hawaii just don’t like Hillary Clinton.

Second, Hawaii has no write-in provisions. Any ballot with a write-in vote won’t count.

Third, Jill Stein and the Green Party will be on the Hawaii ballot.

Fourth, Hawaii has elected republicans to high level positions, i.e. Linda Lingle. Despite Hawaii being such a liberal state, there is a huge republican base there.

Hawaii’s liberals and progressive are very liberal and progressive. I do not believe they will give their votes to a status quo candidate like Clinton just because they have a small (d) behind their name. People in Hawaii just don’t like Hillary and I doubt there a single republican in the state that would vote for Clinton. The progressives in Hawaii are not going to vote the lesser of 2 evils in this election. If they can even figure out which candidate is the lesser of the evils.

Since I cannot vote write-in for Bernie Sanders, I will be voting for Jill Stein and the Green party and I know I am not the only one who feels that way in Hawaii. Many of my progressive friends in Hawaii feel the same way. It may not have a big impact on the final election results, but it would seem like a pretty big statement if Hillary loses a state as liberal as Hawaii. And if that happens, the only ones who deserve the blame is the DNC and the party apparatus that shoved such a flawed candidate as Hillary Clinton done the throats of the American public.

Linda Thieman

Well said, and thanks for posting this information!

wpDiscuz
Skip to toolbar