Jill Stein Is Killing the Green Party

geekwithsoul@lemm.ee to politics @lemmy.world – 525 points –
Jill Stein Is Killing the Green Party
newrepublic.com

“With membership at new lows and no electoral wins to their name, it’s time for the Greens to ditch the malignant narcissist who’s presided over its decline.”

327

You are viewing a single comment

Green party has been dead since Nader.

Pretending they had a chance in a voting system that can barely support two parties was kinda pitiable. Until we have RCV for federal elections at a minimum, they will never have a shot.

A-fucking-men.

The Green Party should be the RCV party and that should be their main focus. After that then they and any other party would actually stand a chance. Republicans are actively banning RCV from being implemented and Democrats are slow walking it, but we need to keep pushing.

TBH, I don't see it happening except organically from within the Democratic Party. If enough progressive Democrats get elected, I think it stands a chance to happen in our lifetimes.

Any democrat has a vested interest in first past the post continuing.

This is just not true. Places which are doing RCV are literally state at metro democratic strongholds. Democrats are literally the only ones pushing it.

Democrats are literally the only ones pushing it.

Also Alaska, for some weird reason.

I disagree, which is why I specified the word "progressive."

Vested interest meaning it benefits them, i doubt you disagree with the current system of only two parties being considered for elections improves the odds of those two parties winning elections

What I disagree with is your implication that they will only ever act in their own interests. I do not know that to be true in the future (and neither do you), as not everyone is motivated by money or power. Enough politicians who see it as vital to the health of US democracy, and change will happen.

I'm not proposing that it will, only that it is far from a precluded possibility. As Boomers die out and retire, I have hope for the Millennials and Gen Zers who replace them.

I do not know that to be true in the future (and neither do you)

We can sure make some educated guesses based on a lengthy history of evidence.

I like progressive democrats, but they want to get elected at a minimum.

But that's all they are: guesses. The fundamental flaw in looking to history for future behavior is the assumption that each person elected to office has the same motivations, ideals, and philosophies.

They want to get elected, sure, but wanting to get elected isn't the same as desiring to keep that office. If I had the skills to run for office, I would be willing to sacrifice reelection to ensure good legislation passed, for example.

Actually, an RCV system may help the democrats, at least in the short term.

For the last couple of decades, the "spoiler" candidates generally take from the democrats more than the republicans. Last big spoiler third party that screwed the right was Perot that I remember. With RCV, then the 'fringe' votes can still be cast and democrats can work toward being the second choice of those hardliners. At least in the short term, it alleviates the need to actually compete for votes with candidates that are going to lose anyway.

Longer term, it may cause a viable third party or more to get some steam (attracting practical candidates that no longer see the need to be a D or R to get votes, the parties generally getting left alone by outside forces that find them not worth weaponizing), but I don't think the politicians are too concerned on that long a time frame.

Unless they gain more support from endorsing RCV than they would lose to third parties. They're slowly bending to long term third party pressure.

1 more...
1 more...

That would mean actually caring about running campaigns for state goverments. State governments are the ones that can (and in Alaska's case have) implement RCV.

The Green Party should be the RCV party

They are. Holy shit.

That's all well and good, but useless in any federal race because the federal government does not dictate how the elections/voting are done.

Brings it back around to if you care so damn much, then focus your resources on state governments.

You should reread the elections clause. Congress has authority to regulate elections

1 more...

This is a little discussed problem with fptp (along with many others) it gives minor parties perverse incentive to play spoiler, which gives foreign actors an opportunity to find spoilers.

They have a shot, by joining the Democratic Party. The same way that progressives join liberals, make their voice heard, and let the voters decide.

Or, just here me out, the Democrats adopt ranked choice voting from the Green Party platform, ditch aid to Israel, and make Jill Stein obsolete. I know, I know, it’s crazy. But, it might just work.

Or just hear me out, the green party stops playing spoiler every 4 years. Proving that their platform is meaningless and empty. And instead focuses on running and recruiting for state and local legislature to actually pass ranked Choice voting. And where it makes sense, such as offices no Democrat is running for. Recruit and endorsed a candidate to run as the combined democrat/green party candidate. Instead of constantly splitting the vote helping conservatives and the bourgeoisie.

I guess we’re never getting ranked choice voting then. And the genocide will continue until morale improves, according to bourgeois liberals.

Until we have RCV

Whens that?

Depends. How hard are you working on it?

Im supporting the leading candidate that has ranked choice voting as part of their platform

And you’re completely aware that won’t work?

Its the only thing that can. Its not happening until then

So it won’t work. Okay then, we’re on the same page there.

San Francisco has had ranked choice voting for years, and the fucking Green party didn't get it for us lmao

Progressive Democrats like ranked choice voting.

If you are talking about federal candidates, it is not the only thing that can, and in fact it won't happen even then because a federal candidate gets zero say in how the elections are done.

No federal office is going to give you RCV.

The logistics of federal elections are the purview of the state governments.

That one's interest do not lie with understanding anything. They're either too naive to. Or paid to appear to naive to

When Congress votes it into law.

It's not up to Congress, states decide how to run their elections.

Until they don't. That's not a guaranteed feature. As SCOTUS and Conservatives have taught me over the last several years, historical precedent doesn't mean shit.

We elect congress

Yep. Glad you see the progression.

Step 1:elect people that support ranked choice voting.

I.E. jill stein

How can she be elected?

Votes. Same way as everyone else

If Jill Stein thought she had a chance, she'd join the Democratic Party and actually campaign to win. She's just running for the self-indulgence despite hurting civil rights and climate initiatives.

The democratic party is too conservative and corrupt. Steins platform doesnt align with theirs.

I've never heard a single position of hers that is too liberal. Even Andrew Yang was given his time to make his case. Voters said no.

The problem is that she's not actually popular enough with voters to get elected, let alone popular enough in the liberal half of the country to get nominated. She's saying the game is rigged because she doesn't actually have a chance.

The game actually favors her. RCV would help a moderate like Manchin get elected.

I didnt say shes too liberal, i said the DNC is too conservative. Corporate tax cuts, increased military spending, bribed by corporations, legislating on industries they own stock in, strike busting.

2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
2 more...

Why is the Green party not focused on congressional candidates then?

Maybe they should take some of the money they spend on Stein's vanity run and instead use it on their Congressional races.

When's the last time you saw an ad for a Green Party candidate? Or saw a candidate holding rallies in your state?

There's plenty of local and even state positions where Republicans run unopposed and Democrats don't even put up a candidate. Why aren't Greens investing in those races? Those are literally the perfect opportunity for Greens to start making headway.

Because when i think "spending too much on presidential campaigns", I think Green Party

This is the kind of disconnect that happens when you start from a conclusion (green party bad), and then try to work backwards to figure out why. I havent even seen an ad for Jill, let alone for less prominent green party candidates.

2 more...
2 more...
2 more...
3 more...
3 more...