Jill Stein: The Grifter Who May Hand Trump the White House Again

SatanClaws@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.world – 528 points –
Jill Stein: The Grifter Who May Hand Trump the White House Again
newrepublic.com
269

You are viewing a single comment

"Once noble party" - ffs.

Jill Stein is a bad actor in this election, she understands how the electoral college works and she understands she's weakening the democratic party position. But let's not blame shift - the Democrats could be much better on climate change then they are today and if they were better Stein's BS wouldn't have such an easy time attracting voters. I dislike the title posing it as "Stein may hand Trump the whitehouse again."

Even if the argument about getting X% of votes was true, the states to campaign heavy in would be the deep blue/red states. Especially since they tend to get ignored by candidates.

Instead she sticks to the states where <30k votes could decide the election and the market is saturated with the most expensive ad costs

It's blantantly obvious what's she's doing.

the states to campaign heavy in would be the deep blue/red states.

Agreed. If a third party pulls off a major change in one of these states, it's still likely to go for it's color regardless so the presidential outcome is not affected, but it'd force the relevant parties to examine why the third party was able to make such huge inroads and what of their own policies that they should change.

It’s blantantly obvious what’s she’s doing.

But for posterity I'll state it; she's spoiling for a GOP win.

Yeah, that's the nature of the Electoral College. It sucks. Do you think the Electoral College is something Kamala Harris invented or even wants?

Hate the game, not the playa.

I think you may have replied to the wrong person?

No I think the point is that of course she campaigns in swing states cause she wants to get to 5% of the vote so she can get access to more money. But it's the same stayes everyone is paying attention too.

Its false logic to say she's only dangerous in those states cause they are already close and we just have to pay extra attention to them because they are the swing states.

Is coincidental pattern seeking.

Its false logic to say she’s only dangerous in those states cause they are already close and we just have to pay extra attention to them because they are the swing states.

The 5% can come from Cali alone and not effect the race tho.

And it would be cheaper because of less competition for ads, the voters there are often ignored and would more receptive, and there are way more voters who are left of the Dem.party there

If she is honestly trying to do what she says, then she is doing it in the least efficient way possible and has been for a very long time.

If what she's really doing is trying to hand Republicans the election, then she seems to have put a lot of thought into the best possible way to do it and is focusing on that.

So take your pick:

  1. She's honest but a terrible leader and absolutely dog shit at planning.

  2. She's a liar but either her or her handlers have put a lot of thought into how to get trump elected.

She would have to get over 5% in California for it to count at a federal level and there is of course the fact that it's a wealthy Democratic party stronghold so they actually might spend hard to punish her for trying to take votes. I mean look at all the lawsuits filed to keep Green Party off ballot elsewhere.

I don't see a situation where she is let to just campaign cause we can already see the response when she just gets her normal voters.

I don't think she's smart. She's been searching for something that makes her feel important ever since she realized she hated working and saying out loud the obvious broken stuff even though she doesn't have plans to fix it gets her attention and more money.

She got giddy that she was talked about in Russia because she thinks it's awesome people know her...
Don't assume malice where stupidity is an option first.

Yeah she's a sucky leader that stole the green party for herself and uses it as a piggy bank and self morality boost but she gets the people by being not the Democrats or Republicans. Do other people try to take advantage of that? Hell yeah. I bet one of her advisors probably embezzles funds to pay themselves more. Lots of people are shitty in different ways. This is hoping for an easy answer to the world being a mess. Same way people hope their is aliens secretly running things.

What?

When they talk about the 5% line, it's the national vote, not in each state...

Just 5 percent of the national vote for the Green Party Stein/Baraka ticket can be a true game-changer for American politics. It will qualify the Green Party for recognition as an official national party, and for federal funding in the 2020 presidential race proportional to the amount of votes received — at least $8 million to $10 million

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/27/why-5-for-the-green-party-is-a-win-for-america-jill-stein-commentary.html

Which is why it makes no sense to focus on battleground states.

I didn't read anything last your first sentence tho since it was built off a misunderstanding.

Do you still have other questions?

Yes you have to get 5% national so 5% of california is not 5% of the total populace and campaigning in places with low population is pointless since that would give a fraction of a percent for national level.

You pointed out your own flaw with her focusing on just California. Asking her to get 20 million votes in one state would absolutely make the DNC do everything to stop her.

And then you ignored conversation. So why even comment here at all? You don't want a conversation you just want to already be right. It's insanity.

Battleground states are that because it's where the big cities are, thus, you know the people she needs to vote for her. You have like non-concept of cause and effect and are operating entirely on random bad logic.

You pointed out your own flaw with her focusing on just California. Asking her to get 20 million votes in one state

Wow, yes. California has just under 40 million, so that would turn California Green!

would absolutely make the DNC do everything to stop her.

Which would include understanding her policies and why they were so effective in pulling voters away, and if any policies should be considered for DNC adoption.

So, a good thing.

Battleground states are that because it’s where the big cities are, thus, you know the people she needs to vote for her. You have like non-concept of cause and effect and are operating entirely on random bad logic.

To me this was sound logic. Getting all votes from California to hit the nationwide 5% doesn't make sense and would be very tough to achieve and could throw the race (in a new way - by denying the electoral votes of California to Harris).

However, it'd still be cheaper to campaign in such solid states like California, Texas, and New York. Assume Stein wins 5 million in NY and TX and 10 million in CA for a total of 20. It's a tough feat, but doesn't affect the election, but it's big enough that the two big parties have to pay attention and adopt her policies. Also, since these are not battleground states, it's cheaper to win over.

If anything, because battleground states tend to be smaller, it's even harder to make up the raw numbers by winning them over.

Just an aside, this person thinks that the green party should just get 5% of the national population to vote for them from a single state and that it wouldn't change anything or cause any ripples.

5% of the US population is about 18 million people.

17 million voted in the state of California in total in 2020.

Remember everyone. Basic math isn't just a thing your teacher thought would be important for no reason. It does have use in the real world.

6 more...

The GOP is the "drill baby drill" party though.

The Green Party is not going to win. The only message that voting for Jill Stein will send to the Democratic party is they need to move more to the center to get more reliable voters. It's already heppening. Harris doesn't like fracking but she's not going to ban it and she has to talk about increase US oil production to get votes from people she knows will turn up and won't flake out and vote green or be uncommitted or whatever.

If she wins she will be more inclined to fulfill promises made to the people who actually voted for her. Sure she'll need to represent everyone, but there'll be far more people that voted GOP she'll need to represent (and entice to maybe vote for her in the next election) than green party voters.

I think that Hillary Clinton showed us the opposite. If the Democratic candidate goes too close to the center, they risk losing the left, and they deserve to lose the left at that point. If the Democrats had tried to put a halfway decent strategy together about Israel, there would be zero worry about a third party. And I don't like single issue voters, but if I had to pick a single issue, genocide would be at the top of the list.

"Genocide is a single issue" is basically "I've tuned out the screaming so how can you hear it?"

Back in 2004 when we bombed countries it was considered murder and bad. Bush then normalized it with "You just love 9/11, commie!", Obama continued it, Trump expanded it, and now Biden helped to normalize it.

If the Democrats conform to Iranian disinformation campaigns about Israel, how would they be any different from Republicans that conform to Russian disinformation campaigns about Ukraine?

Voting isn't public so how the hell does everyone keep assuming we know who voted for her at the election?

The people that didn't vote for her didn't vote for her.
You can't claim she didn't get the trump republican voters so it's an indicator she needs to move to the left, right? Or Libertarian party?

Its weird false logic based on feelings about justifying a truly tiny group of people voting green as villians. the main base of Kamalas voters should also be Democrats who shouldn't pander and frack just cause she needed an extra 2% at the polls. We are gonna shift further right for that and more Republicans instead of going for any undecided first?

I don't get it. Make the logic make sense.

I'm not saying people that vote green are villains. They're just ignorant of how things work and act irrationally because of their ignorance.

Without 3rd party options we still wouldn't vote for people that don't represent us.

The only person who would represent me is myself, and I wouldn't vote for myself because I don't want that shitty job

So you're saying that Jill Stein, the Russian asset who is actively working to get Donald Trump elected president, represents you and your group?

They need to earn votes.

The Senate investigated that dinner and found nothing. Everything you don't like isnt always Russian

Online trolls from the Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency used social media to promote Stein’s candidacy during the 2016 campaign, according to an indictment brought by special counsel Robert Mueller against the Russian organization and 13 of its employees. The Russians’ pro-Stein efforts included paid advertisements on Facebook that explicitly encouraged Americans to vote for Stein, according to the indictment.

A summation of the report’s findings on “comprehensive anti-Hillary Clinton operations” said while the group’s assumed Twitter personas had some pro-Clinton content, “the developed Left-wing Twitter personas were still largely anti-Clinton and expressed pro-Bernie Sanders and pro-Jill Stein sentiments.”

Likewise, the report said “pro-Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein content” were among the group’s go-to themes across other platforms.

The tactics and strategies that the Kremlin directed included every major social media platform you can think of — Facebook, Instagram, Twitter — and a few you’d never suspect, including Pinterest, LinkedIn and 4Chan. The hashtags alone tell the story— #MAGA #TrumpTrain #Hillary4Prison #ZombieHillary #SickHillary. Along with anti-Clinton stories, they also pushed out messages against Trump’s primary rivals like Sen. Ted Cruz and former Gov. Jeb Bush. Once in the general election, they pumped up third-party candidates to siphon support away from Clinton with posts including, “A vote for Jill Stein is not a wasted vote.”

Not everything I don't like is Russian. But some Russian things, I don't like.

lol, what a stupid way to say "yes, Jill Stein and her active campaign to get Donald Trump elected does support my values"

Third parties wouldn't be a threat to their power if they weren't shit parties.

Why don't liberals vote for Trump and push him left after the election, since that worked out so well with Biden.

Do you actually read comments, or do you just pull your bull shit out of a hat?

1 more...
1 more...

The Senate investigation found nothing illegal. That doesn't mean Stein isn't trying to help russian interests.

And Trump is in Russias pocket, and Biden and Harris are in Israels.

And trump is in Israel's too. He's in every pocket with a pocket book. You know he'll give israel everything they want and then some. I wouldn't be surprised at another Kent state over this if he gets elected.

1 more...
1 more...
3 more...
9 more...