She will once again campaign only in states where it is possible to flip to Trump. Instead of safer states where she could get 5% of the vote and thus qualify for matching funds for the green party.
That is how you know it's completely bullshit and she is being run as a spoiler candidate for Trump.
Well that and the picture of her and Michael Flynn sitting at Putins table at a Russian state dinner in December of 2015.
How tragic is it that there isn't even enough enthusiasm to maintain a genuine, non-astroturfed or political spoiler based environment first party and platform?
As pissed off as some are, anyone myself included not getting arrested trying to protest/sabotage oil lines aren't taking the destruction of our only shared habitat we all rely on literally from one breath to the next seriously enough.
I know I know, we don't need to breathe, we don't need crops or fresh water, we just need more jerbs and a stronger economy to drop dead in. Lol, humans, I'd say nothing of value will be lost, but we aren't just killing ourselves. And as projections continue to worsen, and our circumstances grow more dire, all the other species that had nothing to do with what we did will barely enter our collective minds as we languish in self-pity, as if the once bountiful Earth we raped, pillaged, and burned somehow betrayed us instead of the other way around.
Part of the problem is the First Past The Post system. Any third party will just bleed votes away from the closest major party. In the case of a party dedicated to protecting the environment, this means votes taken from the Democrats. If the third party grows too powerful, they will split too many votes with the Democrats and Republicans will take control. And once that happens, the environment will be trashed. (Well, trashed even more than it already has been.)
If we switched to Ranked Choice Voting or Approval Voting, you could vote for a third party and still pick a major party candidate as your fallback position. So you could theoretically vote for Jill Stein (ignoring all the other problems with her) and vote for Biden as your second pick (or third or fourth). When Stein failed to get enough votes, your vote won't be wasted, but would revert to a different choice.
why the downvotes?. SMH
Until we get ranked choice voting or similar the Green Party is a joke with zero chance of election. Voting for them only helps Republicans at this point in time.
If less enthusiastic Republican voters have a chance to vote for a neutral party instead of voting for a shitshow, then how is it helping Republicans?!
Lol it's not Republicans voting for the green party, the green party has only ever siphoned votes from the Democratic candidates.
the votes belong to the voters, not to the parties. democrats need to earn their votes just like everyone else.
The GOP is attempting to destroy democracy, the Dems are not. The GOP are trying to subjugate me as a queer/trans person and POC as well, the Dems are not. The GOP are removing human rights from us, the Dems are not. The Dems are trying to pass green energy legislation, gun control laws, and more while the GOP are blocking it.
Those are some pretty good god damn reasons.
under no pretext.
voting for Democrats facilitates fascism.
So you read all of that and you could only muster an emotional response.
I think that says all that needs to be said. You'd rather enable our democracy to be destroyed (and you know, make it harder to do anything about fascism later) and vote in a way that will make you feel a little better about yourself while it goes into the void.
I stated a fact. I don't know what you mean about emotion.
Stating a fact and making up a fact are 2 very different things.
what I said is true.
voting for fascist does make it harder to get fascist out of a power. that's why I don't vote for democrats.
we don't have a democracy and we never have.
Yeah see how that turns out if the republicans win next election. They facilitate fascism by being the only alternative to actual fascist politicians. They certainly aren't perfect, but seriously how do you think it plays out if enough morons like you vote for Putin apologist Stein? What do you think the end result will be?
do you think that you're going to win voters by calling them morons?
Stein isn't a Putin apologist.
She's at least a dinner guest.
she paid for her own ticket and transportation and lodging. she's less a guest and more a customer.
Keep carrying that water.
people advocate for politicians they like, it's true.
Neoliberalism was an attempt to save both the state and capitalism. Capitalism, however, cannot be rehabilitated. It will not save us from totalitarianism or state-sponsored genocide. Capital can absorb any product, service, or practice (including government practice) into itself and then reproduce itself. It is always primed for, always flirting with, the spectre of fascism. Source
if i would vote for jill stein or cornel west (i mean, i have to be honest, it's nice to have choices) or the libertarian or no candidate at all, how do any of those votes help republicans?
the only vote that helps republicans is a vote for a republican.
Wrong. Dead fucking wrong. Due to our current shitty system the only parties with any chance of winning are Dems or GOP, every vote that doesn't go to the Dems is another point the GOP has over them. If you don't vote for Dems you're facilitating fascism. Simple as.
I don't like our choices but we don't have the option to be fucking picky right now, there's fascists at the door and they're working hard to ruin our lives.
voting for the lesser evil will only serve to guarantee that you will forever be voting for the lesser evil and that you will reach the same evil that the alternative raced towards, but slower.
Thats really poetic but observe our choices in reality in relation to the systems we built to usher them in. You don't cut your parachute just because you're falling anyway.
My god, what a stupid take.
The lesser evil is by definition the better choice! If you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils, you are effectively choosing the greater evil. It does not get any stupider than that.
If you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils,
you are choosing not to vote for evil.
you are choosing not to vote for evil.
And allowing the greater evil to win.
in the trolley scenario, i don't touch the lever. you can choose to be a murderer, but i won't.
In the trolley scenario, you chose to let 6 people die. Neither choice makes you a murderer. But one choice causes much more harm than the other.
flipping the switch makes you a murderer.
This is exactly the kind of situation the trolley problem was invented to illustrate... and I've never seen anyone fail at it so badly with such a weird take.
You'll allow the greater evil to happen because you don't want to have any part or any responsibility in helping a lesser evil happen. But you do have responsibility, because you do have a choice. In the trolley problem, f you never knew about the lever, you couldn't be asked to pull it or not. In the election problem, if you can't vote you have no responsibility. But the trolley problem states you know about the lever, and in the election scenario, you do have a vote. So you are involved no matter what. And that means you're just as guilty as the person who acted; only your action resulted in more deaths than the person who acted either way. Yours was the worst possible choice.
Try flipping the words from evil to good. The greater evil is worse, and the lesser evil is better. Therefore, you are choosing the worse scenario rather than the better one. It's ridiculously absurd.
The trolley problem is a litmus test for finding your ethical system. I've long tended toward deontology. More recently I'm looking at virtue ethics but I still at the moment identify as a deontologist. just because you let the trolley problem mislead you into some form of ontological ethics doesn't mean that you got the right answer. it means that it taught you about yourself.
I'm going to vote for who I want to win. I'm not going to vote for someone I think is evil to any degree.
Dictionaries are often treated as the final arbiter in arguments over a word's meaning, but they are not always well suited for settling disputes. The lexicographer's role is to explain how words are (or have been) actually used, not how some may feel that they should be used, and they say nothing about the intrinsic nature of the thing named or described by a word, much less the significance it may have for individuals. When discussing concepts like racism, therefore, it is prudent to recognize that quoting from a dictionary is unlikely to either mollify or persuade the person with whom one is arguing.
Basic math. The stuff most of us learned as children.
these aren't magic phrases that change my vote for one person into a vote for another person.
No shit, it's quite obvious no one is going to change your mind and I'm not trying to. I answered the posed question in a public forum. Turns out other people also read these comments.
your response isn't actually an answer, though. it's just rhetoric.
No, it just seems that way because you don't understand basic math.
more rhetoric.
You don't know what that is either
Content Policy
5.0: Lemmy.World consists of a large number of communities from all around the world, leading our federated network.
5.0.1: Before using the website, remember you will be interacting with actual, real people and communities. Lemmy.World is not a place for you to attack other groups of people. Every one of our users has a right to browse and interact with the website and all of its contents free of treatment such as harassment ... and bullying...
Do you have a point? Preferably expressed in words that you know the definitions of
ranked choice voting because i'd choose a chupacabra's cloaca over trump. but jill stein is just here to talk and distract. she has a platform, she can use it, she doesn't have to make shit worse.
Chupacabra's cloaca.
There are at least three truly cursed combinations of words out there in the world that most only see a handful of times throughout their lifespan. They are both forbidden and beautiful in their execution.
lmao i'm glad you had such a visceral response. all i did was say trump was less worthy of my vote than the evacuation port of a cryptid vampire coyote, and i think we could solve this kind of obvious dilemma with ranked choice voting
Is this the first election in American history with more Russian candidates than American ones?
Hexbear has assured me that RussiaGate was a hoax, so, no.
Let's see:
Fascism is calling from inside the house
All of the Republican candidates are fascists
The Supreme Court is stacked with Federalist Society-bred Christian Originalists.
Trump is likely going to be the Republican nominee
And here's Jill, like, "Mmm, yeah. Now's a good time to try to split the vote."
i think she's thinking "now's a good time for a green president" or maybe "now is a good time for an antiwar president" or "now is a good time for a woman president". but what do i know? i'm just gonna vote for her.
now is a good time for an antiwar president
Then maybe pick someone who doesn't support Russia's war of imperial conquest against Ukraine.
jill stein doesn't support any war.
I mean, her tweet on it is as close as you can get to supporting it without saying you support it.
she's not the guest of honor. she's just a RT contributor who got invited and paid her own way. this isn't the OWN that Rachel maddow thinks it is.
She's literally sitting at the same table as Vladimir Putin. You think that have open seating at these events? Fucking Gorbachev was at that dinner and wasn't even at that table. And yes, this all took place after Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014.
If you're gonna advocate for Stein you're going to have to come up with something a little bit more convincing.
do you think she got to choose her table partner?
There's a very easy way to not end up sitting a dinner table with murderous dictator war criminals and traitors: don't go to dinner with them in the first place.
Are you fucking stupid or just full on tankie? What she said is the equivalent to when someone starts a statement with "I'm not racist but..."
She says it was a mild response? A response to what? What forced Russia to invade? Did Ukraine start pointing nukes at Russia? Fuck no. That was Russian apologist propaganda.
you're robbing it of context. she's talking about Western foreign policy.
Oh. Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. The west made Russia invade Ukraine. They had to do it. Because of the west. Fucking idiot. Do you realize how stupid you sound?
you're constructing a straw man. that's not what I said. that's not what she said.
She literally said they only invaded because they had a gun to their head and the response was relatively moderate. You said she is talking about western foreign policy. I built no straw man. You both just said that shit. No one pointed shit at Russia. Russia didn't like the new government in Ukraine. Took over crimea. Trump was in office so the response was meh. So then Putin went for round 2. And she said it was in response to being threatened. And was a moderate response.
Why don't you take your tankie ass to Ukraine and see the moderate response first hand.
I mean you apparently can't read one full tweet from a Russian asset, so why don't we just hold off on that educated claim. Wouldn't want you to get in trouble for false advertising.
I mean, in the primaries, I'll vote for whomever I personally like. But when Biden inevitably wins the nomination, I'll be voting for him, because it's either him or fascism. That's not a hard choice to make.
since he is a fascist it's no choice at all.
How is Biden a fascist? What do you think that word means?
fascism is a reactionary ideology the arose in response to leftist ideology like libertarian socialism or communism. a fascist society is strictly stratified and forces every institution to serve the interests of the state. liberal democracies are breeding grounds for fascism. look at the war on drugs or the cias war on communism. then look at every opportunity Biden had to endorse them or hinder them over the last 50 years.
That's not what fascism is (or at least, it's too broad of a definition). I think you're responding in good faith, so:
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.
Being reactionary is a facet of Conservatism, and being on the political right itself, can have considerable overlap with fascism, but fascism itself need not be reactionary.
But Biden supporting the war on drugs, for example, doesn't make him a fascist. It makes him a supporter of a partial police state, sure, but that's still not the same thing. Additionally, he's made considerable effort to promote democracy, something a fascist wouldn't do. And if he was a fascist, he would be a darling of the extreme right politicians and media, the "Democrat they always wished for." Instead, they are doing everything they can to invent evidence to impeach him.
Biden is a self-avowed Zionist, and part of old-guard-Democrats who support(ed) some awful policies. But there is no way you can honestly construe him as being cut from the same cloth as Hitler or Trump.
I don't see him as Hitler or trump. I see him as mussolini.
he never made any effort to promote democracy.
He most definitely has. Practically every major national address, he's promoted going out and voting. He literally made an executive order to promote access to voting. Encouraging voting for everyone equally is not the hallmark of a fascist. Ensuring only your own people get to vote is (see Republican efforts to suppress voters, Trump and crew's efforts to overturn the election, etc.)
I'm not sure where you've been, but Biden is far from being a fascist. You don't have to like him, but calling him a fascist is simply untrue.
Democrats have done nothing to earn our votes, they are not entitled to them. Democrats have enabled every one of your bullet points. 'Splitting the vote' is liberal myth.
Yeah because why let facts get in the way of your alternative reality, tankie. I'm a very lefty guy and not a fan of the Dems. But splitting votes is real and a real strategy. Say something when she doesn't focus only on battleground states and her funding is all grass roots.
If you use the word “tankie” unironically, you are not a leftist. Vaush would be proud.
There is a fucking chasm wider than the grand canyon between being left on the political spectrum and being a stalin apologist. And pretending that third parties in the US elections format don't act as spoilers and that is a liberal myth is either (a) just being really fucking stupid or (b) some tankie bullshit made by a person living in lala land.
See, I'm complex enough to acknowledge that the democrats kind of suck overall, having multiple parties would be better, but also accepting that given how the current system functions things can absolutely be worse if Trump wins again. Let us not forget that last time Stein implicitly supported Trump saying she like he won't be able to get anything done but Hillary is efficient and will likely make things worse. Stein is fully capable of pulling just enough votes that Trump could win. And last time that ended Roe v Wade. This time, say buh bye to assistance for Ukraine. He wanted to fuck up NATO before. I'm sure that'd be real high priority now.
The perfect is the enemy of the good. This is not how I'd like the world to be. But there is no magic wand and you can't just pretend things are totally different and think that has an effect.
Can I ask, do you consider yourself a Social Democrat? Do you want to reform capitalism? Or, do you consider yourself a socialist? Do you want to supplant capitalism?
Democrats have done nothing to earn our votes, they are not entitled to them
Jill Stein and the Green Party have achieved literally nothing in their 22 years of existence.
They haven't elected anyone significant at any level of government, haven't authored any significant legislation, and have done the bare minimum to shift political discourse. They also have to earn our votes, and so far they have done very little to earn mine.
Even discounting the obvious statistical reality of the spoiler effect, is Jill Stein really the best candidate the Green Party has to offer? How on Earth can a party with so little to lose be so obviously out of fresh ideas already?
Say what you will about the libertarian ideology, but at least I can give the Libertarian Party credit for putting a couple asses in seats at various levels of government. The Green Party, in comparison, has had no such success, and the fact that they're going back to Jill Stein (a weak candidate who's buddies with Putin and didn't perform well) shows that they have very little intention of improving.
‘Splitting the vote’ is liberal myth.
I'm sorry but you are absolutely delusional if you really believe this.
Whether you like it or not, vote splitting and the spoiler effect are well-documented statistical realities based on the flaws of our current first-past-the-post voting systems. This is 100% a math problem, and it's one that's been written about a lot by many different people.
If that bothers you (and it should) then I encourage you to read up on alternative, more democratic voting systems like Ranked-Choice (aka Instant Runoff) and STAR voting systems, which are generally more fair and far less susceptible to problems like spoiling and wasted votes.
democratic voting systems like Ranked-Choice
You mean like the ones that the DNC is suing to keep off the 2024 ballots? Democrats have this crazy idea that even with rank choice voting we would check off any of your shitty candidates. This is not about compromise, rank choice voting is based on compromise. Trying to work within the systems that created the situation we are in, will never fix the situations that we are in. There is no reforming the party, there is no pushing them left after the election, there is no lesser evil. The entire system needs to be upended and then changed
Don’t believe history, modern political theory, basic math, or your eyes, instead believe me! My area just managed to out a fascist through splitting the vote so it’s very actionable.
Earn my vote
I don't think you were going to vote either way if your head is in the ground like that.
Avoid lying on the internet for a few years and they might.
this and the fact biden was so un-apologetically banking on homophobic, sexist and classicist issues until well after it became politically convenient to change is exactly why i stopped voting democrat and i love that i've been able to convince other who i have a relationship with to stop as well.
thanks for saying
Maybe you should learn to string a sentence together before you try to "convince other" of anything.
"thanks for saying"!
Ah, yes. Because as we all know, taking away from Democrats to vote for a third party will also diminish the Republican voting bloc. Oh wait...
There's a difference between an ill-advised third party run and collusion with Russia. Stein is mentioned once in this article with zero evidence of a connection.
Did Russia try to unilaterally boost Stein's campaign (along with all third party candidates)? Likely.
Should Stein have dropped out if she knew this? No.
Should Stein have dropped out because she was contributing to Trump's win? Yes.
She’s putin’s bitch whether she realizes it or not. She’s actively eroding democracy in the US because of her idiotic, quixotic aspirations.
Fools never recognize a zero sum game.
Because of course she does.
Ouch, that is some of Russia's top brass, what the hell is she doing in the middle of all that?
I just went from.... maybe.... to nope in one picture.
Will she be funded by Donald Trump again like in 2016?
Hillary supported Trump in the primary.
This old donkey needs to ride off into the sunset. This is a spoiler campaign.
Russian pawns gonna pawn
How 'bout No?
No thanks. I'll vote who is likely to win based on mathematics with weighs on preference on top and those I prefer on the downballot. Do this enough time, and there will be a split between progressives and moderates when conservatives eventually become ineffective minority.
Wasn't she the dividing vote for democrats in the 2016 election?
Hillary being a shitty candidate is what caused 2016
Found the third party voter
You make it sound like this discovery was found with extensive investigation.
She sounds good on paper, but not much else. Needs to stay off the stage.
I cast a Jill Stein protest vote in 2012 because Obama had a lock on my state, and I felt like Obama and the Dems in general had strayed too far to the right. Obviously, Obama won my state and the presidency, which is what I actually wanted. I just felt like we could move the Dems to the left by showing them they were leaving votes on the table. That does not work. I can get into why, but the basics are that third parties only act as spoilers.
In any case, Jill Stein is a terrible candidate on paper. All she does is mouth the dream set of policies a lot of us would love, but has no program to achieve them, she has no experience picking staff or running a large organization, she has all the charisma of a rotten banana, and she refused to throw down against anti-vax because it’d alienate half her base.
I’m for a serious Green Party in the US - one that is actually oriented towards governing. The Greens internationally are a real party, not the party equivalent of Vermin Supreme.
Honestly, most of the US agrees with the Greens on a lot of issues, and they could make enough of a big tent that a seriously (constructed and funded) Green Party could probably take multiple seats in the House, at the very least. They could caucus with the Dems, but try to pull things left. They’d work like the Squad, or Bernie and Warren. Between the coasts and the big cities, they could probably swing ten or more seats.
But instead we get Jill, yet again. Honestly, I’d like to see an investigation of her Trump-like election challenging fundraising.
They rarely even run in down ticket elections.
Isn't she the one who publicly claimed 911 was an inside job?
Well it's certainly better than Howie again. Cornel West should've stuck with the party. Him on greens would have had an unprecedented shot.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Stein, a physician who ran against Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in 2016 as the Green Party’s nominee, previewed her latest run for the White House on social media and unveiled an accompanying website.
Stein wrote on her website that she is entering the presidential race “to offer people a choice outside the failed two-party system, so we can put a pro-worker, anti-war, climate emergency agenda front and center in this election and on the ballot in November.”
Stein’s last national bid in 2016 sparked considerable anger from Democrats, who argued she contributed to the election of Trump by taking away votes from Clinton in close swing states including Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
She has promoted early support of the progressive platform, including a Green New Deal, the sweeping environmental reform agenda favored by climate activists.
The 73-year-old doctor and environmental advocate joins a chorus of outsiders competing for the Oval Office as discontent with Biden reaches new levels a year from Election Day.
In addition to West, fellow progressives Marianne Williamson and Cenk Uygur have launched long-shot bids, as well as independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), who is running against Biden as a Democrat.
The original article contains 411 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 51%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
She will once again campaign only in states where it is possible to flip to Trump. Instead of safer states where she could get 5% of the vote and thus qualify for matching funds for the green party.
That is how you know it's completely bullshit and she is being run as a spoiler candidate for Trump.
Well that and the picture of her and Michael Flynn sitting at Putins table at a Russian state dinner in December of 2015.
How tragic is it that there isn't even enough enthusiasm to maintain a genuine, non-astroturfed or political spoiler based environment first party and platform?
As pissed off as some are, anyone myself included not getting arrested trying to protest/sabotage oil lines aren't taking the destruction of our only shared habitat we all rely on literally from one breath to the next seriously enough.
I know I know, we don't need to breathe, we don't need crops or fresh water, we just need more jerbs and a stronger economy to drop dead in. Lol, humans, I'd say nothing of value will be lost, but we aren't just killing ourselves. And as projections continue to worsen, and our circumstances grow more dire, all the other species that had nothing to do with what we did will barely enter our collective minds as we languish in self-pity, as if the once bountiful Earth we raped, pillaged, and burned somehow betrayed us instead of the other way around.
Part of the problem is the First Past The Post system. Any third party will just bleed votes away from the closest major party. In the case of a party dedicated to protecting the environment, this means votes taken from the Democrats. If the third party grows too powerful, they will split too many votes with the Democrats and Republicans will take control. And once that happens, the environment will be trashed. (Well, trashed even more than it already has been.)
If we switched to Ranked Choice Voting or Approval Voting, you could vote for a third party and still pick a major party candidate as your fallback position. So you could theoretically vote for Jill Stein (ignoring all the other problems with her) and vote for Biden as your second pick (or third or fourth). When Stein failed to get enough votes, your vote won't be wasted, but would revert to a different choice.
why the downvotes?. SMH
Until we get ranked choice voting or similar the Green Party is a joke with zero chance of election. Voting for them only helps Republicans at this point in time.
If less enthusiastic Republican voters have a chance to vote for a neutral party instead of voting for a shitshow, then how is it helping Republicans?!
Lol it's not Republicans voting for the green party, the green party has only ever siphoned votes from the Democratic candidates.
the votes belong to the voters, not to the parties. democrats need to earn their votes just like everyone else.
The GOP is attempting to destroy democracy, the Dems are not. The GOP are trying to subjugate me as a queer/trans person and POC as well, the Dems are not. The GOP are removing human rights from us, the Dems are not. The Dems are trying to pass green energy legislation, gun control laws, and more while the GOP are blocking it.
Those are some pretty good god damn reasons.
under no pretext.
voting for Democrats facilitates fascism.
So you read all of that and you could only muster an emotional response.
I think that says all that needs to be said. You'd rather enable our democracy to be destroyed (and you know, make it harder to do anything about fascism later) and vote in a way that will make you feel a little better about yourself while it goes into the void.
I stated a fact. I don't know what you mean about emotion.
Stating a fact and making up a fact are 2 very different things.
what I said is true.
voting for fascist does make it harder to get fascist out of a power. that's why I don't vote for democrats.
we don't have a democracy and we never have.
Yeah see how that turns out if the republicans win next election. They facilitate fascism by being the only alternative to actual fascist politicians. They certainly aren't perfect, but seriously how do you think it plays out if enough morons like you vote for Putin apologist Stein? What do you think the end result will be?
do you think that you're going to win voters by calling them morons?
Stein isn't a Putin apologist.
She's at least a dinner guest.
she paid for her own ticket and transportation and lodging. she's less a guest and more a customer.
Keep carrying that water.
people advocate for politicians they like, it's true.
Democrats are full fascist. they don't just facilitated by being fascism light.
Just trying to help:
No idea why your being down voted. This is 100% correct.
I'm not blue no matter who. it's a cardinal sin
Genocide Joe isn’t earning your vote? /s
You're thinking of the "libertarian" party.
She's a democrat choice not a republican choice.
Source: voted for her in 2016
if i would vote for jill stein or cornel west (i mean, i have to be honest, it's nice to have choices) or the libertarian or no candidate at all, how do any of those votes help republicans?
the only vote that helps republicans is a vote for a republican.
Wrong. Dead fucking wrong. Due to our current shitty system the only parties with any chance of winning are Dems or GOP, every vote that doesn't go to the Dems is another point the GOP has over them. If you don't vote for Dems you're facilitating fascism. Simple as.
I don't like our choices but we don't have the option to be fucking picky right now, there's fascists at the door and they're working hard to ruin our lives.
voting for the lesser evil will only serve to guarantee that you will forever be voting for the lesser evil and that you will reach the same evil that the alternative raced towards, but slower.
Thats really poetic but observe our choices in reality in relation to the systems we built to usher them in. You don't cut your parachute just because you're falling anyway.
My god, what a stupid take.
The lesser evil is by definition the better choice! If you refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils, you are effectively choosing the greater evil. It does not get any stupider than that.
you are choosing not to vote for evil.
And allowing the greater evil to win.
in the trolley scenario, i don't touch the lever. you can choose to be a murderer, but i won't.
In the trolley scenario, you chose to let 6 people die. Neither choice makes you a murderer. But one choice causes much more harm than the other.
flipping the switch makes you a murderer.
This is exactly the kind of situation the trolley problem was invented to illustrate... and I've never seen anyone fail at it so badly with such a weird take.
You'll allow the greater evil to happen because you don't want to have any part or any responsibility in helping a lesser evil happen. But you do have responsibility, because you do have a choice. In the trolley problem, f you never knew about the lever, you couldn't be asked to pull it or not. In the election problem, if you can't vote you have no responsibility. But the trolley problem states you know about the lever, and in the election scenario, you do have a vote. So you are involved no matter what. And that means you're just as guilty as the person who acted; only your action resulted in more deaths than the person who acted either way. Yours was the worst possible choice.
Try flipping the words from evil to good. The greater evil is worse, and the lesser evil is better. Therefore, you are choosing the worse scenario rather than the better one. It's ridiculously absurd.
The trolley problem is a litmus test for finding your ethical system. I've long tended toward deontology. More recently I'm looking at virtue ethics but I still at the moment identify as a deontologist. just because you let the trolley problem mislead you into some form of ontological ethics doesn't mean that you got the right answer. it means that it taught you about yourself.
I'm going to vote for who I want to win. I'm not going to vote for someone I think is evil to any degree.
The fascists at the door were invited in by democrat enablers
voting for Democrats facilitates fascism.
Fascism is, by it's definition, a right wing ideology, not a left wing ideology.
It's OK to admit when you don't know something. We can help!
https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095811414
"An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization."
Democrats are right wing. it's okay to admit when you don't know something.
Democrats, at worst, are centrist, not right wing. If you can't comprehend basic terminology then perhaps this is not the community for you.
if you threaten to ban people who know what fascism is and what lexicographers' jobs are. maybe this isn't the right community for me
Tried to give you an honest chance, banned for argumentative trolling.
dictionaries are not the arbiters of a word's meaning.
They LITERALLY are.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
Basic math. The stuff most of us learned as children.
these aren't magic phrases that change my vote for one person into a vote for another person.
No shit, it's quite obvious no one is going to change your mind and I'm not trying to. I answered the posed question in a public forum. Turns out other people also read these comments.
your response isn't actually an answer, though. it's just rhetoric.
No, it just seems that way because you don't understand basic math.
more rhetoric.
You don't know what that is either
Content Policy
5.0: Lemmy.World consists of a large number of communities from all around the world, leading our federated network.
Do you have a point? Preferably expressed in words that you know the definitions of
ranked choice voting because i'd choose a chupacabra's cloaca over trump. but jill stein is just here to talk and distract. she has a platform, she can use it, she doesn't have to make shit worse.
Chupacabra's cloaca.
There are at least three truly cursed combinations of words out there in the world that most only see a handful of times throughout their lifespan. They are both forbidden and beautiful in their execution.
lmao i'm glad you had such a visceral response. all i did was say trump was less worthy of my vote than the evacuation port of a cryptid vampire coyote, and i think we could solve this kind of obvious dilemma with ranked choice voting
Is this the first election in American history with more Russian candidates than American ones?
Hexbear has assured me that RussiaGate was a hoax, so, no.
Let's see:
And here's Jill, like, "Mmm, yeah. Now's a good time to try to split the vote."
i think she's thinking "now's a good time for a green president" or maybe "now is a good time for an antiwar president" or "now is a good time for a woman president". but what do i know? i'm just gonna vote for her.
Then maybe pick someone who doesn't support Russia's war of imperial conquest against Ukraine.
jill stein doesn't support any war.
I mean, her tweet on it is as close as you can get to supporting it without saying you support it.
https://x.com/DrJillStein/status/1629226431006875651?s=20
she called it an illegal invasion.
Here's a picture of Jill Stein sitting as the guest of honor with Vladimir Putin and disgraced US General Michael Flynn in 2015, one year after the Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea (Ukraine).
You were saying?
she's not the guest of honor. she's just a RT contributor who got invited and paid her own way. this isn't the OWN that Rachel maddow thinks it is.
She's literally sitting at the same table as Vladimir Putin. You think that have open seating at these events? Fucking Gorbachev was at that dinner and wasn't even at that table. And yes, this all took place after Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014.
If you're gonna advocate for Stein you're going to have to come up with something a little bit more convincing.
do you think she got to choose her table partner?
There's a very easy way to not end up sitting a dinner table with murderous dictator war criminals and traitors: don't go to dinner with them in the first place.
This isn't exactly rocket science.
do you think that they gave her the guest list?
Are you fucking stupid or just full on tankie? What she said is the equivalent to when someone starts a statement with "I'm not racist but..."
She says it was a mild response? A response to what? What forced Russia to invade? Did Ukraine start pointing nukes at Russia? Fuck no. That was Russian apologist propaganda.
you're robbing it of context. she's talking about Western foreign policy.
Oh. Oh. Thanks for clearing that up. The west made Russia invade Ukraine. They had to do it. Because of the west. Fucking idiot. Do you realize how stupid you sound?
you're constructing a straw man. that's not what I said. that's not what she said.
She literally said they only invaded because they had a gun to their head and the response was relatively moderate. You said she is talking about western foreign policy. I built no straw man. You both just said that shit. No one pointed shit at Russia. Russia didn't like the new government in Ukraine. Took over crimea. Trump was in office so the response was meh. So then Putin went for round 2. And she said it was in response to being threatened. And was a moderate response.
Why don't you take your tankie ass to Ukraine and see the moderate response first hand.
Putin took crimea under obama
baby, I'm an anarchist
false dichotomy: I'm an educated anti fascist.
I mean you apparently can't read one full tweet from a Russian asset, so why don't we just hold off on that educated claim. Wouldn't want you to get in trouble for false advertising.
Jill stein isn't a Russian asset.
Her: "Yeah, weed is illegal, but everyone does it, it should be legal, it has great health benefits, I take it daily."
You: "She's against weed. She said weed is illegal."
she didn't say it should be legal.
I mean, in the primaries, I'll vote for whomever I personally like. But when Biden inevitably wins the nomination, I'll be voting for him, because it's either him or fascism. That's not a hard choice to make.
since he is a fascist it's no choice at all.
How is Biden a fascist? What do you think that word means?
fascism is a reactionary ideology the arose in response to leftist ideology like libertarian socialism or communism. a fascist society is strictly stratified and forces every institution to serve the interests of the state. liberal democracies are breeding grounds for fascism. look at the war on drugs or the cias war on communism. then look at every opportunity Biden had to endorse them or hinder them over the last 50 years.
That's not what fascism is (or at least, it's too broad of a definition). I think you're responding in good faith, so:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism
Being reactionary is a facet of Conservatism, and being on the political right itself, can have considerable overlap with fascism, but fascism itself need not be reactionary.
But Biden supporting the war on drugs, for example, doesn't make him a fascist. It makes him a supporter of a partial police state, sure, but that's still not the same thing. Additionally, he's made considerable effort to promote democracy, something a fascist wouldn't do. And if he was a fascist, he would be a darling of the extreme right politicians and media, the "Democrat they always wished for." Instead, they are doing everything they can to invent evidence to impeach him.
Biden is a self-avowed Zionist, and part of old-guard-Democrats who support(ed) some awful policies. But there is no way you can honestly construe him as being cut from the same cloth as Hitler or Trump.
I don't see him as Hitler or trump. I see him as mussolini.
he never made any effort to promote democracy.
He most definitely has. Practically every major national address, he's promoted going out and voting. He literally made an executive order to promote access to voting. Encouraging voting for everyone equally is not the hallmark of a fascist. Ensuring only your own people get to vote is (see Republican efforts to suppress voters, Trump and crew's efforts to overturn the election, etc.)
I'm not sure where you've been, but Biden is far from being a fascist. You don't have to like him, but calling him a fascist is simply untrue.
Democrats have done nothing to earn our votes, they are not entitled to them. Democrats have enabled every one of your bullet points. 'Splitting the vote' is liberal myth.
Yeah because why let facts get in the way of your alternative reality, tankie. I'm a very lefty guy and not a fan of the Dems. But splitting votes is real and a real strategy. Say something when she doesn't focus only on battleground states and her funding is all grass roots.
If you use the word “tankie” unironically, you are not a leftist. Vaush would be proud.
There is a fucking chasm wider than the grand canyon between being left on the political spectrum and being a stalin apologist. And pretending that third parties in the US elections format don't act as spoilers and that is a liberal myth is either (a) just being really fucking stupid or (b) some tankie bullshit made by a person living in lala land.
See, I'm complex enough to acknowledge that the democrats kind of suck overall, having multiple parties would be better, but also accepting that given how the current system functions things can absolutely be worse if Trump wins again. Let us not forget that last time Stein implicitly supported Trump saying she like he won't be able to get anything done but Hillary is efficient and will likely make things worse. Stein is fully capable of pulling just enough votes that Trump could win. And last time that ended Roe v Wade. This time, say buh bye to assistance for Ukraine. He wanted to fuck up NATO before. I'm sure that'd be real high priority now.
The perfect is the enemy of the good. This is not how I'd like the world to be. But there is no magic wand and you can't just pretend things are totally different and think that has an effect.
Can I ask, do you consider yourself a Social Democrat? Do you want to reform capitalism? Or, do you consider yourself a socialist? Do you want to supplant capitalism?
Jill Stein and the Green Party have achieved literally nothing in their 22 years of existence.
They haven't elected anyone significant at any level of government, haven't authored any significant legislation, and have done the bare minimum to shift political discourse. They also have to earn our votes, and so far they have done very little to earn mine.
Even discounting the obvious statistical reality of the spoiler effect, is Jill Stein really the best candidate the Green Party has to offer? How on Earth can a party with so little to lose be so obviously out of fresh ideas already?
Say what you will about the libertarian ideology, but at least I can give the Libertarian Party credit for putting a couple asses in seats at various levels of government. The Green Party, in comparison, has had no such success, and the fact that they're going back to Jill Stein (a weak candidate who's buddies with Putin and didn't perform well) shows that they have very little intention of improving.
I'm sorry but you are absolutely delusional if you really believe this.
Whether you like it or not, vote splitting and the spoiler effect are well-documented statistical realities based on the flaws of our current first-past-the-post voting systems. This is 100% a math problem, and it's one that's been written about a lot by many different people.
If that bothers you (and it should) then I encourage you to read up on alternative, more democratic voting systems like Ranked-Choice (aka Instant Runoff) and STAR voting systems, which are generally more fair and far less susceptible to problems like spoiling and wasted votes.
You mean like the ones that the DNC is suing to keep off the 2024 ballots? Democrats have this crazy idea that even with rank choice voting we would check off any of your shitty candidates. This is not about compromise, rank choice voting is based on compromise. Trying to work within the systems that created the situation we are in, will never fix the situations that we are in. There is no reforming the party, there is no pushing them left after the election, there is no lesser evil. The entire system needs to be upended and then changed
Don’t believe history, modern political theory, basic math, or your eyes, instead believe me! My area just managed to out a fascist through splitting the vote so it’s very actionable.
Earn my vote
I don't think you were going to vote either way if your head is in the ground like that.
Avoid lying on the internet for a few years and they might.
this and the fact biden was so un-apologetically banking on homophobic, sexist and classicist issues until well after it became politically convenient to change is exactly why i stopped voting democrat and i love that i've been able to convince other who i have a relationship with to stop as well.
thanks for saying
Maybe you should learn to string a sentence together before you try to "convince other" of anything.
"thanks for saying"!
Ah, yes. Because as we all know, taking away from Democrats to vote for a third party will also diminish the Republican voting bloc. Oh wait...
Your ability to choose is an illusion.
thank you
lol, Putin’s bitch.
Putin"s other bitch
Come on... You can hate Stein all you want for being a spoiler, but there is zero evidence she has any connection to Putin.
She’s a useful idiot. She’s too stupid to see it, as you seem to be.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/09/20/us/politics/russia-interference-election-trump-clinton.html
There's a difference between an ill-advised third party run and collusion with Russia. Stein is mentioned once in this article with zero evidence of a connection.
Did Russia try to unilaterally boost Stein's campaign (along with all third party candidates)? Likely.
Should Stein have dropped out if she knew this? No.
Should Stein have dropped out because she was contributing to Trump's win? Yes.
She’s putin’s bitch whether she realizes it or not. She’s actively eroding democracy in the US because of her idiotic, quixotic aspirations.
Fools never recognize a zero sum game.
Because of course she does.
Ouch, that is some of Russia's top brass, what the hell is she doing in the middle of all that?
I just went from.... maybe.... to nope in one picture.
Will she be funded by Donald Trump again like in 2016?
Hillary supported Trump in the primary.
This old donkey needs to ride off into the sunset. This is a spoiler campaign.
Russian pawns gonna pawn
How 'bout No?
No thanks. I'll vote who is likely to win based on mathematics with weighs on preference on top and those I prefer on the downballot. Do this enough time, and there will be a split between progressives and moderates when conservatives eventually become ineffective minority.
Wasn't she the dividing vote for democrats in the 2016 election?
Hillary being a shitty candidate is what caused 2016
Found the third party voter
You make it sound like this discovery was found with extensive investigation.
She sounds good on paper, but not much else. Needs to stay off the stage.
I cast a Jill Stein protest vote in 2012 because Obama had a lock on my state, and I felt like Obama and the Dems in general had strayed too far to the right. Obviously, Obama won my state and the presidency, which is what I actually wanted. I just felt like we could move the Dems to the left by showing them they were leaving votes on the table. That does not work. I can get into why, but the basics are that third parties only act as spoilers.
In any case, Jill Stein is a terrible candidate on paper. All she does is mouth the dream set of policies a lot of us would love, but has no program to achieve them, she has no experience picking staff or running a large organization, she has all the charisma of a rotten banana, and she refused to throw down against anti-vax because it’d alienate half her base.
I’m for a serious Green Party in the US - one that is actually oriented towards governing. The Greens internationally are a real party, not the party equivalent of Vermin Supreme.
Honestly, most of the US agrees with the Greens on a lot of issues, and they could make enough of a big tent that a seriously (constructed and funded) Green Party could probably take multiple seats in the House, at the very least. They could caucus with the Dems, but try to pull things left. They’d work like the Squad, or Bernie and Warren. Between the coasts and the big cities, they could probably swing ten or more seats.
But instead we get Jill, yet again. Honestly, I’d like to see an investigation of her Trump-like election challenging fundraising.
They rarely even run in down ticket elections.
Isn't she the one who publicly claimed 911 was an inside job?
Well it's certainly better than Howie again. Cornel West should've stuck with the party. Him on greens would have had an unprecedented shot.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Stein, a physician who ran against Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in 2016 as the Green Party’s nominee, previewed her latest run for the White House on social media and unveiled an accompanying website.
Stein wrote on her website that she is entering the presidential race “to offer people a choice outside the failed two-party system, so we can put a pro-worker, anti-war, climate emergency agenda front and center in this election and on the ballot in November.”
Stein’s last national bid in 2016 sparked considerable anger from Democrats, who argued she contributed to the election of Trump by taking away votes from Clinton in close swing states including Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
She has promoted early support of the progressive platform, including a Green New Deal, the sweeping environmental reform agenda favored by climate activists.
The 73-year-old doctor and environmental advocate joins a chorus of outsiders competing for the Oval Office as discontent with Biden reaches new levels a year from Election Day.
In addition to West, fellow progressives Marianne Williamson and Cenk Uygur have launched long-shot bids, as well as independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Rep. Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), who is running against Biden as a Democrat.
The original article contains 411 words, the summary contains 200 words. Saved 51%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Lol
*swoon*