Oh! Another tired old "spoiler" accusation—it's the anthem of those too frightened to face the truth of their crumbling duopoly.
You dismiss Stein as a mere spoiler, yet seems you guys cry at the thought of her rising in the polls, threatening the power of the status quo you so dearly cling to.
It’s no surprise you bring up money—it’s the lifeblood of the corrupt duopoly system you defend.
Keep watching, friend. The winds of change are blowing, and no amount of slander will stop it. People are growing tired of the duopoly.
The problem with your statement is stein will never rise in the polls enough to threaten the duopoly. The best they can do is distract. If they really wanted change they would ignore presidential races and push for different voting methods down ballot.
If Stein and others like her will never rise enough to threaten the duopoly, then why the fury over her running?
The very anger people have shows the fear that the two-headed monster feels when its grip is challenged, even if only by a small percentage.
As a socialist, I stand with her efforts because every voice that speaks out against the status quo helps crack the foundation of this corrupt system.
If the duopoly had done its job, there wouldn't be such a demand for alternatives. The fact that they haven't is exactly why we need voices like Stein's pushing back, whether it's in the presidential race or down ballot.
There’s no fury. Just occasional commentary. Stein is barely a footnote because she doesn’t do anything to fix the problems you’re bringing up.
The replies and responses to this article sure does suggest that some folks might be more scared than they’re willing to admit. People don’t get this worked up over something they truly believe is irrelevant.
No, people just disagree with you, chump. Not everything is a fucking conspiracy.
And I respect and support their right to disagree with me. As you respect and support my right to disagree with them, right?
Also, please refrain from personal name-calling and lets keep this civil. There are civility rules in this community for a reason. Do you really have to call someone negative names to get your point across?
Here we go again with the victimization
It's not victimization to let someone know that they don't have to resort to name-calling, friend. I'm not a mod here, I didn't come up with the civility rule. If you have a problem with that rule or the mods, feel free to reach out to them with your concerns.
There’s no fury. Just occasional commentary. Stein is barely a footnote because she doesn’t do anything to fix the problems you’re bringing up.
The replies and responses to this article sure does suggest that some folks might be more scared than they're willing to admit. People don’t get this worked up over something they truly believe is irrelevant.
These posts are doing a little more than providing your agitprop a space to die by a thousand cuts. Adults don't get "worked up" over taking out the trash.
If my posts are just "trash" to you, it's curious that you're making this effort trying to take them out—seems like the only thing dying by a thousand cuts is your own argument. Best of luck to you, friend.
So you're fine with Trump. Got it.
So let me get this straight—you think a staunch socialist like me is somehow in bed with Trump? That’s laughable, and it just shows how deeply the duopoly has warped people's thinking.
I’m not even voting for Stein; I’m actually now casting my vote for a true socialist candidate.
But I still support Stein’s fight to break the stranglehold the Democrats and Republicans have on this country. It's amusing, really, how much people panic when someone dares to challenge the status quo.
The fact that you're so worked up proves just how terrified the establishment is of real change.
That's a lot of words to say you're fine with Trump winning and you're not planning on opposing him.
Ah, the classic tactic of distorting words to fit your narrative.
Let me be clear: my opposition isn’t just to one man, but to the entire corrupt system that gives us this false choice between two heads of the same capitalist beast. I’m not “fine” with Trump or any other servant of the ruling class.
I’m fighting for a revolution, for real change that terrifies people like you who are so desperate to keep the duopoly intact that you’ll twist anything to defend it. You want to talk about “opposing” something? I’m opposing the whole damn rigged game, not just one of its rotten players.
It's not a false choice. It's reality. You can either choose to oppose Trump or you can decide it's fine.
To be clear, I'm in a red state that has been directly impacted by Trump's judicial picks and his MAGA extremism. I take personal offense against me and my family when people don't do the bare minimum to keep Trump out of power.
You can take all the offense you want, but let me be clear: I’m not voting for Harris, and I sure as hell won’t be voting for Trump.
The real false choice here is being forced to pick between two faces of the same oppressive system.
And for the record, as I have said, I am not even voting for Jill Stein. I’ve shifted my support to a more socialist candidate, Rachele Fruit, because I refuse to be bullied into backing a duopoly that keeps the working class in chains.
If you think doing the bare minimum is enough to stop Trump, then you’ve already surrendered to the system that put him there.
If you're not doing the bare minimum, your opinion literally does not matter.
Also, nobody said bare minimum is enough. It's the bare minimum, by definition.
If you're content with doing just the bare minimum, then you're settling for a system that barely works for the people. Real change demands more than just the basics; it requires a fight, a push beyond what's convenient or easy.
Nobody said to ONLY do the bare minimum. I said you're doing less than the bare minimum.
I'm thinking you're being intentionally dense.
If pushing for real change beyond the bare minimum makes me "dense," then I'll wear that label proudly.
But that’s not what you’re doing. You just come here to start specious arguments then claim victimhood when you get called out for it.
You just come here to start specious arguments
I shared a political news article to this political news community on Lemmy. And I have never claimed to be a victim.
I didn’t write the article, my friend. This community values diverse political views and open discussion.
I’m not the creator or a mod of this community. If you have an issue with the article being posted, feel free to reach out to the mods.
I voted for Stein in 2016. Yeah, I’ve learned my lesson.
I’ll vote for anyone but democrats or republicans in any election where they have a chance. I’m a leftist and I want change just short of taking up arms and making it happen. I know which elections I’m beaten though and I will vote for an undesirable option to hope that I avoid the absolute worst option.
I get where you’re coming from, and I respect your perspective. But for me, I don’t cast my vote out of fear of what the other party might do—I vote for the party that aligns with my values, even if it’s not the “safe” choice.
I believe in supporting candidates who push for the change I want to see, even if they face long odds. Compromise has its place, but I’d rather stand firm in my principles than settle for the lesser of two evils.
I feel the same but my morals won’t let me enjoy my loved ones being hurt by the greater of two evils.
Morals are for grassroots, organizing, etc. They’re not for waiting until a general election.
I respect your decision and understand where you're coming from, but I’m choosing to vote differently.
We each have to follow our own convictions when it comes to these things, friend.
I believe in supporting candidates who push for the change I want to see...
That will be a cool thing to tell everyone when donnie's goons are rounding people up for the "reeducation camps".
I'm not scared of Trump. And I'm not voting for him. And I'm not voting for your candidate either.
Your most telling comment yet. You're not scared of someone who has shown that he will destroy any bit of progress the United States has made in the past 50 years and will take any, and we do see any, measure to seize power, illegally or not, because he is a textbook fascist. You aren't afraid of Donald Trump, because you fully support and embrace his brand of fascism. This veneer of "socialism" you're lying about is razor thin. Zero people believe it. Maybe you'd have better luck with your canvassing on Facebook?
You accuse me of backing fascism, yet it’s you who defends a corrupt duopoly that keeps the people chained! I don’t fear Trump because I refuse to cower before the choices the ruling class hands us.
And it's not my job to convince you of anything. If you’re getting worked up over a news article I didn’t even write, that’s your problem.
I posted an article that's already widely available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy. I didn’t write it or create the content. It's already out there for anyone to see, so all I did was share it here for discussion. 'm under no obligation to prove anything to you. I’ll share my opinion, and you can take it or leave it. Either way, not my problem.
defends a corrupt duopoly that keeps the people chained
Ah yes abstract vagaries, which are so much more important than the real people you will kill and the lives you'll destroy if you elect trump.
Your desperation to throw around accusations just proves how terrified you are of any challenge to the duopoly. It’s becoming clear that you’re the one secretly pushing for Trump, hiding behind fear-mongering while trying to sow confusion and division.
trying to sow confusion and division.
Did you copy paste this from your CV?
I posted an article that's already widely available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy. I didn’t write it or create the content. It's already out there for anyone to see, so all I did was share it here for discussion. If you disagree with the article itself, that's fine, but calling for it to be censored or accusing me of pushing an agenda simply because it's not what you want to read is misguided and lazy. Open debate requires different perspectives, not shutting down content you don't like.
Stein is not ever going to win the presidency and her running is an active campaign for Trump, full stop. If the Green Party was a serious political entity they would be running down ballot candidates before just running one charlatan for president.
That being said; this is a Newsweek article so I question any validity to it. I have been asked to respond to a poll if I would be voting for Harris and I actively chose not to because I didn’t like the sassy bullshit language used in the text. Polls are useless bullshit.
I personally don't think that Jill Stein’s campaign is an endorsement of Trump at all; it’s a challenge to the status quo that’s kept working people down for far too long.
The Green Party’s efforts bother some people because they’re exposing the failures of a system that’s more interested in maintaining power than in real change. Dismissing her as a charlatan is just another way to silence dissent and keep the duopoly intact.
As for the polls, they might be flawed, but the frustration they reveal is very real, and it’s not going away just because you dismiss it.
She could run for a state house position, for congress, for governor. She is instead making a small amount of noise for a small amount of stupid people who think her candidacy means anything other than bleeding a small amount of votes from the candidate that actually has a chance to win in a race that is between the continuation of American democracy or its cessation.
Yes the two party system is a problem, but the presidential race is not where that problem is solved, local elections are; but there’s no way to grift people at a national level in small elections.
I agree that running for other offices could be a more impactful path. Many in the Green Party do just that and find success in local elections.
This is the reality.
Keep talking about stein being “labeled” while everyone else is talking about the reality of her actions…
She sits with Putin, she doesn’t get elected, and multiple times she only just spoils elections.
You want to attack a “duopoly” but what has Jill Stein done other than reenforce the worst half of that duopoly ? I mean that’s her legacy. Reinforcing the system and making it worse not moving anything in a better direction. So why keep backing that person?
I’m not voting for Stein—I’ve shifted my support to Rachele Fruit of the Socialist Workers Party, who aligns more closely with my socialist convictions.
But I still stand by Stein's efforts to shatter the stranglehold of this corrupt two-party system.
You see, the fear you harbor of someone disrupting your precious status quo speaks volumes. Stein may not have won anything major yet, but she’s rattled the cages of power, and that’s more than most are willing to do.
The legacy of fighting against the duopoly, of challenging the complacency that keeps the rich in power and the workers down, is one I’ll always support, whether it’s through Stein or anyone else who dares to defy the system.
Nah I don’t have any worries about a precious system or who or whatever glass jawed bullshit you are clinging to.
I am asking straight out, do you see her shattering anything by running in that system?
What has she done to build a ranked choice coalition? Sounds more like she just happily participates in the very system you claim she “shattered”? Jill Stein reinforces the duopoly by participating in it alongside Putin and not offering any other suggestions.
You are taking the biggest shill for the system and claiming them as a saint.
It’s curious how someone supposedly so harmless can provoke such a strong reaction. If she’s truly just a shill for the system, why do her efforts to challenge it draw so much anger?
Brother, again, I'm not personally voting for Stein. But I still support her aim to disrupt the duopoly—something that clearly has some folks rattled, despite their denials. And I have never claimed she is a saint. I'm voting socialist this year.
And let’s be clear: breaking the system isn’t about instant success but about sowing the seeds of real change, which terrifies those who cling to the status quo.
She does not. This fanaticism does. This is moronic cosplay that is so on-its-face logically flawed that it’s frankly kinda funny to explore and to just frankly keep asking you to keep talking…
So this is how we “break the system”???
By all means continue…
Your desperate attempts to dismiss genuine struggle as "moronic cosplay" only reveal your fear of real change—keep laughing while we keep trying dismantle the duopoly you cling to. I'm still not voting for your candidate. :)
Def a “struggle” is present here.
I don't know what that means. But ok, I guess?
You literally posted an article about Stein being a spoiler candidate. That's the entire point of the article, that her and the libertarian candidate could cost Harris the election. That's "spoiling" the election.
In order for a third party to win and dethrone the shitty reality of a 2 party system, that third party has to have the infrastructure of members in the house and senate so that if they win, people will work with them, and the party has to have people rally behind them. The problem right now is that there aren't third parties currently in the house or senate, Independents don't count cause there is no Independent party. And there isn't a third party candidate people are trying to rally behind. It's Jill Stein, or Cornell West, or Claudia de la Cruz, or Jasmine Sherman or others. It's never one singular candidate. In order for a third party to win, it has to be 1 candidate. And people who advocate to vote for a third party need to decide on who that 1 candidate should be. Because otherwise you're splitting your vote between multiple candidates, cutting your chances of winning significantly.
If you think a third party should rise, fine. That's understandable, the current parties have significant problems, what with one being nazis and the other not being as left as the populace would want. But unless you pick someone to advocate for and rally behind, your point is moot. You will never win.
Let me make one thing clear—I am supporting Rachele Fruit of the Socialist Workers Party because she truly aligns with my values. But I post about third parties too, because it's interesting. It's political news and this is a political news community.
But let's get something straight about Stein and others who dare to challenge the duopoly: it's not about spoiling an election, it's about pushing the boundaries of what's possible in a system designed to keep the status quo in place.
The fact that there isn’t a singular third-party candidate to rally behind is a symptom of the very problem we’re fighting against—a rigged system that stifles real alternatives.
But dismissing the efforts of multiple candidates who refuse to toe the line of the two-party stranglehold only serves to protect the very power structure that continues to fail working people.
lol you’re so insecure
lol you’re so insecure
Because I stand up for myself and defend my values?! Um, ok... lol
You don’t have values. You have copy paste rage.
I'm not angry at all though. And I've stated my values.
And I totally respect and support your right to disagree with them. Just like you support and respect my right to disagree with you, right?
You’re in it for the gotcha. This isn’t about policy, it’s about being right and trying your hardest to convince others that you are right.
Strange thing to say, coming from someone determined to protect the status quo at all costs. This isn’t about “gotcha” moments for me—it’s about exposing the truth, challenging the system, and pushing for real change.
If that makes you uncomfortable, then maybe it’s time to ask yourself why.
And this conversation has come to its expected conclusion.
Guy uses the same talking points and buzz words in each and every thread he posts. Then, he doubles down on victimizing himself and refuses to listen to anyone else's opinions. Dude is unhinged and thinks everyone is out to get him.
I'm gonna draft some bingo cards to go along with his posts.
Guy uses the same talking points and buzz words in each and every thread he posts
Because I keep getting the same questions and accusations.
Then, he doubles down on victimizing himself and refuses to listen to anyone else’s opinions.
Says the guy who has had several replies in this community removed for civility. So....
And I'm not going anywhere. This sub allows and promotes diversity of thought.
Oh! Another tired old "spoiler" accusation—it's the anthem of those too frightened to face the truth of their crumbling duopoly.
You dismiss Stein as a mere spoiler, yet seems you guys cry at the thought of her rising in the polls, threatening the power of the status quo you so dearly cling to.
It’s no surprise you bring up money—it’s the lifeblood of the corrupt duopoly system you defend.
Keep watching, friend. The winds of change are blowing, and no amount of slander will stop it. People are growing tired of the duopoly.
The problem with your statement is stein will never rise in the polls enough to threaten the duopoly. The best they can do is distract. If they really wanted change they would ignore presidential races and push for different voting methods down ballot.
If Stein and others like her will never rise enough to threaten the duopoly, then why the fury over her running?
The very anger people have shows the fear that the two-headed monster feels when its grip is challenged, even if only by a small percentage.
As a socialist, I stand with her efforts because every voice that speaks out against the status quo helps crack the foundation of this corrupt system.
If the duopoly had done its job, there wouldn't be such a demand for alternatives. The fact that they haven't is exactly why we need voices like Stein's pushing back, whether it's in the presidential race or down ballot.
There’s no fury. Just occasional commentary. Stein is barely a footnote because she doesn’t do anything to fix the problems you’re bringing up.
The replies and responses to this article sure does suggest that some folks might be more scared than they’re willing to admit. People don’t get this worked up over something they truly believe is irrelevant.
No, people just disagree with you, chump. Not everything is a fucking conspiracy.
And I respect and support their right to disagree with me. As you respect and support my right to disagree with them, right?
Also, please refrain from personal name-calling and lets keep this civil. There are civility rules in this community for a reason. Do you really have to call someone negative names to get your point across?
Here we go again with the victimization
It's not victimization to let someone know that they don't have to resort to name-calling, friend. I'm not a mod here, I didn't come up with the civility rule. If you have a problem with that rule or the mods, feel free to reach out to them with your concerns.
There’s no fury. Just occasional commentary. Stein is barely a footnote because she doesn’t do anything to fix the problems you’re bringing up.
The replies and responses to this article sure does suggest that some folks might be more scared than they're willing to admit. People don’t get this worked up over something they truly believe is irrelevant.
These posts are doing a little more than providing your agitprop a space to die by a thousand cuts. Adults don't get "worked up" over taking out the trash.
If my posts are just "trash" to you, it's curious that you're making this effort trying to take them out—seems like the only thing dying by a thousand cuts is your own argument. Best of luck to you, friend.
So you're fine with Trump. Got it.
So let me get this straight—you think a staunch socialist like me is somehow in bed with Trump? That’s laughable, and it just shows how deeply the duopoly has warped people's thinking.
I’m not even voting for Stein; I’m actually now casting my vote for a true socialist candidate.
But I still support Stein’s fight to break the stranglehold the Democrats and Republicans have on this country. It's amusing, really, how much people panic when someone dares to challenge the status quo.
The fact that you're so worked up proves just how terrified the establishment is of real change.
That's a lot of words to say you're fine with Trump winning and you're not planning on opposing him.
Ah, the classic tactic of distorting words to fit your narrative.
Let me be clear: my opposition isn’t just to one man, but to the entire corrupt system that gives us this false choice between two heads of the same capitalist beast. I’m not “fine” with Trump or any other servant of the ruling class.
I’m fighting for a revolution, for real change that terrifies people like you who are so desperate to keep the duopoly intact that you’ll twist anything to defend it. You want to talk about “opposing” something? I’m opposing the whole damn rigged game, not just one of its rotten players.
It's not a false choice. It's reality. You can either choose to oppose Trump or you can decide it's fine.
To be clear, I'm in a red state that has been directly impacted by Trump's judicial picks and his MAGA extremism. I take personal offense against me and my family when people don't do the bare minimum to keep Trump out of power.
You can take all the offense you want, but let me be clear: I’m not voting for Harris, and I sure as hell won’t be voting for Trump.
The real false choice here is being forced to pick between two faces of the same oppressive system.
And for the record, as I have said, I am not even voting for Jill Stein. I’ve shifted my support to a more socialist candidate, Rachele Fruit, because I refuse to be bullied into backing a duopoly that keeps the working class in chains.
If you think doing the bare minimum is enough to stop Trump, then you’ve already surrendered to the system that put him there.
If you're not doing the bare minimum, your opinion literally does not matter.
Also, nobody said bare minimum is enough. It's the bare minimum, by definition.
If you're content with doing just the bare minimum, then you're settling for a system that barely works for the people. Real change demands more than just the basics; it requires a fight, a push beyond what's convenient or easy.
Nobody said to ONLY do the bare minimum. I said you're doing less than the bare minimum.
I'm thinking you're being intentionally dense.
If pushing for real change beyond the bare minimum makes me "dense," then I'll wear that label proudly.
But that’s not what you’re doing. You just come here to start specious arguments then claim victimhood when you get called out for it.
I shared a political news article to this political news community on Lemmy. And I have never claimed to be a victim.
I didn’t write the article, my friend. This community values diverse political views and open discussion.
I’m not the creator or a mod of this community. If you have an issue with the article being posted, feel free to reach out to the mods.
I voted for Stein in 2016. Yeah, I’ve learned my lesson.
I’ll vote for anyone but democrats or republicans in any election where they have a chance. I’m a leftist and I want change just short of taking up arms and making it happen. I know which elections I’m beaten though and I will vote for an undesirable option to hope that I avoid the absolute worst option.
I get where you’re coming from, and I respect your perspective. But for me, I don’t cast my vote out of fear of what the other party might do—I vote for the party that aligns with my values, even if it’s not the “safe” choice.
I believe in supporting candidates who push for the change I want to see, even if they face long odds. Compromise has its place, but I’d rather stand firm in my principles than settle for the lesser of two evils.
I feel the same but my morals won’t let me enjoy my loved ones being hurt by the greater of two evils. Morals are for grassroots, organizing, etc. They’re not for waiting until a general election.
I respect your decision and understand where you're coming from, but I’m choosing to vote differently.
We each have to follow our own convictions when it comes to these things, friend.
That will be a cool thing to tell everyone when donnie's goons are rounding people up for the "reeducation camps".
I'm not scared of Trump. And I'm not voting for him. And I'm not voting for your candidate either.
Your most telling comment yet. You're not scared of someone who has shown that he will destroy any bit of progress the United States has made in the past 50 years and will take any, and we do see any, measure to seize power, illegally or not, because he is a textbook fascist. You aren't afraid of Donald Trump, because you fully support and embrace his brand of fascism. This veneer of "socialism" you're lying about is razor thin. Zero people believe it. Maybe you'd have better luck with your canvassing on Facebook?
You accuse me of backing fascism, yet it’s you who defends a corrupt duopoly that keeps the people chained! I don’t fear Trump because I refuse to cower before the choices the ruling class hands us.
And it's not my job to convince you of anything. If you’re getting worked up over a news article I didn’t even write, that’s your problem.
I posted an article that's already widely available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy. I didn’t write it or create the content. It's already out there for anyone to see, so all I did was share it here for discussion. 'm under no obligation to prove anything to you. I’ll share my opinion, and you can take it or leave it. Either way, not my problem.
Ah yes abstract vagaries, which are so much more important than the real people you will kill and the lives you'll destroy if you elect trump.
Your desperation to throw around accusations just proves how terrified you are of any challenge to the duopoly. It’s becoming clear that you’re the one secretly pushing for Trump, hiding behind fear-mongering while trying to sow confusion and division.
Did you copy paste this from your CV?
I posted an article that's already widely available on a much bigger platform than Lemmy. I didn’t write it or create the content. It's already out there for anyone to see, so all I did was share it here for discussion. If you disagree with the article itself, that's fine, but calling for it to be censored or accusing me of pushing an agenda simply because it's not what you want to read is misguided and lazy. Open debate requires different perspectives, not shutting down content you don't like.
Stein is not ever going to win the presidency and her running is an active campaign for Trump, full stop. If the Green Party was a serious political entity they would be running down ballot candidates before just running one charlatan for president.
That being said; this is a Newsweek article so I question any validity to it. I have been asked to respond to a poll if I would be voting for Harris and I actively chose not to because I didn’t like the sassy bullshit language used in the text. Polls are useless bullshit.
I personally don't think that Jill Stein’s campaign is an endorsement of Trump at all; it’s a challenge to the status quo that’s kept working people down for far too long.
The Green Party’s efforts bother some people because they’re exposing the failures of a system that’s more interested in maintaining power than in real change. Dismissing her as a charlatan is just another way to silence dissent and keep the duopoly intact.
As for the polls, they might be flawed, but the frustration they reveal is very real, and it’s not going away just because you dismiss it.
She could run for a state house position, for congress, for governor. She is instead making a small amount of noise for a small amount of stupid people who think her candidacy means anything other than bleeding a small amount of votes from the candidate that actually has a chance to win in a race that is between the continuation of American democracy or its cessation.
Yes the two party system is a problem, but the presidential race is not where that problem is solved, local elections are; but there’s no way to grift people at a national level in small elections.
I agree that running for other offices could be a more impactful path. Many in the Green Party do just that and find success in local elections.
This is the reality.
Keep talking about stein being “labeled” while everyone else is talking about the reality of her actions…
She sits with Putin, she doesn’t get elected, and multiple times she only just spoils elections.
You want to attack a “duopoly” but what has Jill Stein done other than reenforce the worst half of that duopoly ? I mean that’s her legacy. Reinforcing the system and making it worse not moving anything in a better direction. So why keep backing that person?
I’m not voting for Stein—I’ve shifted my support to Rachele Fruit of the Socialist Workers Party, who aligns more closely with my socialist convictions.
But I still stand by Stein's efforts to shatter the stranglehold of this corrupt two-party system.
You see, the fear you harbor of someone disrupting your precious status quo speaks volumes. Stein may not have won anything major yet, but she’s rattled the cages of power, and that’s more than most are willing to do.
The legacy of fighting against the duopoly, of challenging the complacency that keeps the rich in power and the workers down, is one I’ll always support, whether it’s through Stein or anyone else who dares to defy the system.
Nah I don’t have any worries about a precious system or who or whatever glass jawed bullshit you are clinging to.
I am asking straight out, do you see her shattering anything by running in that system?
What has she done to build a ranked choice coalition? Sounds more like she just happily participates in the very system you claim she “shattered”? Jill Stein reinforces the duopoly by participating in it alongside Putin and not offering any other suggestions.
You are taking the biggest shill for the system and claiming them as a saint.
It’s curious how someone supposedly so harmless can provoke such a strong reaction. If she’s truly just a shill for the system, why do her efforts to challenge it draw so much anger?
Brother, again, I'm not personally voting for Stein. But I still support her aim to disrupt the duopoly—something that clearly has some folks rattled, despite their denials. And I have never claimed she is a saint. I'm voting socialist this year.
And let’s be clear: breaking the system isn’t about instant success but about sowing the seeds of real change, which terrifies those who cling to the status quo.
She does not. This fanaticism does. This is moronic cosplay that is so on-its-face logically flawed that it’s frankly kinda funny to explore and to just frankly keep asking you to keep talking…
So this is how we “break the system”???
By all means continue…
Your desperate attempts to dismiss genuine struggle as "moronic cosplay" only reveal your fear of real change—keep laughing while we keep trying dismantle the duopoly you cling to. I'm still not voting for your candidate. :)
Def a “struggle” is present here.
I don't know what that means. But ok, I guess?
You literally posted an article about Stein being a spoiler candidate. That's the entire point of the article, that her and the libertarian candidate could cost Harris the election. That's "spoiling" the election.
In order for a third party to win and dethrone the shitty reality of a 2 party system, that third party has to have the infrastructure of members in the house and senate so that if they win, people will work with them, and the party has to have people rally behind them. The problem right now is that there aren't third parties currently in the house or senate, Independents don't count cause there is no Independent party. And there isn't a third party candidate people are trying to rally behind. It's Jill Stein, or Cornell West, or Claudia de la Cruz, or Jasmine Sherman or others. It's never one singular candidate. In order for a third party to win, it has to be 1 candidate. And people who advocate to vote for a third party need to decide on who that 1 candidate should be. Because otherwise you're splitting your vote between multiple candidates, cutting your chances of winning significantly.
If you think a third party should rise, fine. That's understandable, the current parties have significant problems, what with one being nazis and the other not being as left as the populace would want. But unless you pick someone to advocate for and rally behind, your point is moot. You will never win.
Let me make one thing clear—I am supporting Rachele Fruit of the Socialist Workers Party because she truly aligns with my values. But I post about third parties too, because it's interesting. It's political news and this is a political news community.
But let's get something straight about Stein and others who dare to challenge the duopoly: it's not about spoiling an election, it's about pushing the boundaries of what's possible in a system designed to keep the status quo in place.
The fact that there isn’t a singular third-party candidate to rally behind is a symptom of the very problem we’re fighting against—a rigged system that stifles real alternatives.
But dismissing the efforts of multiple candidates who refuse to toe the line of the two-party stranglehold only serves to protect the very power structure that continues to fail working people.
lol you’re so insecure
Because I stand up for myself and defend my values?! Um, ok... lol
You don’t have values. You have copy paste rage.
I'm not angry at all though. And I've stated my values.
And I totally respect and support your right to disagree with them. Just like you support and respect my right to disagree with you, right?
You’re in it for the gotcha. This isn’t about policy, it’s about being right and trying your hardest to convince others that you are right.
Strange thing to say, coming from someone determined to protect the status quo at all costs. This isn’t about “gotcha” moments for me—it’s about exposing the truth, challenging the system, and pushing for real change.
If that makes you uncomfortable, then maybe it’s time to ask yourself why.
And this conversation has come to its expected conclusion.
Guy uses the same talking points and buzz words in each and every thread he posts. Then, he doubles down on victimizing himself and refuses to listen to anyone else's opinions. Dude is unhinged and thinks everyone is out to get him.
I'm gonna draft some bingo cards to go along with his posts.
Because I keep getting the same questions and accusations.
Says the guy who has had several replies in this community removed for civility. So....
And I'm not going anywhere. This sub allows and promotes diversity of thought.
As long as it's civil, of course.
Ok, take care. Bye!