this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
529 points (93.3% liked)

politics

19143 readers
2611 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“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.”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] uberdroog@lemmy.world 141 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Green party has been dead since Nader.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 87 points 2 months ago (37 children)

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.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 49 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (8 children)

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.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 20 points 2 months ago (11 children)

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.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] socsa@piefed.social 22 points 2 months ago

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.

[–] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (3 children)

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (34 replies)
[–] DeadWorld@lemm.ee 100 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Ive been thinking more and more that the only way forward for the green party may just be to pic a few states and focus on local races. Get control over city councils and some mayoralships. Hell, a green caucus in state houses could actually do some good

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 147 points 2 months ago (5 children)

The fact that they're not doing that but just going straight for an unwinnable Presidential election tells you a lot.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 49 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, to be relevant they need to win some elections in large cities and state legislatures. That would be the base necessary to start winning congressional seats and then work up from there. Because the Jill Stein narcissism tour every four years is clearly doing more harm than good.

And it would be the best thing in the world for the Dems. They need cogent and real opposition and right now they’re just running against crazies - which is important, but doesn’t do much for establishing an agenda. A functional Green Party would actually help pull the Dems back more to the left.

[–] shitescalates@midwest.social 22 points 2 months ago (6 children)

The best part of running for a state legislature or congressional position is that they could team with democrats to block the GOP, so unlike the presidential election you aren't voting against your interest for electing a third party.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I remember in the late 90s the Green Party in my district was on a roll, culminating in the election of a member to the California State Assembly (one of the highest posts ever held by the Greens in the US). Then came Nader’s presidential bid and its perceived role in the election of Bush, which permanently crippled the legitimacy of the local party. They’re still doing great work with voter guides, legislative analysis, etc.; but they’ll never escape the shadow of Nader and Stein.

I think the only viable path for a third party now is to start a new one from scratch, and disavow presidential bids from the outset.

[–] isaaclw@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Sam Seder has been saying rhis for a decade at this point.

Its how you build a political movement.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

If they were a serious political party. But that would require you to believe that they are wildly incompetent and being supported for that incompetence. Rather than they're doing this intentionally. Not seriously running to win or improve anything. But being a divisive spectacle to destroy solidarity on the left.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 80 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Who needs party membership when you have unlimited money cheat code from daddy Putin?

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 58 points 2 months ago

What makes you think a politically irrelevant person like Stein would capture the attention of putin?

Oh hey wow who put that picture here.

[–] RalphFurley@lemmy.world 72 points 2 months ago (2 children)

They never organize, canvass, campaign.. they never put in the work. It's easy to sit on Twitter all day and disparage the Democratic Party (yes they have many flaws as well) and nothing else.

They're lazy grifters.

What exactly did Jill Stein do with that $7 million for the recount? She was interviewed by Mehdi Hassan and he kept asking her why she won't call out Putin when she has no problem calling out Bibi. Yes two things can be true at once. She just couldn't explain why she refused to call Putin out on his war mongering and genocide.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (2 children)

How does the Green Party suddenly get money around election time when they don’t do shit for the previous four years?

People are asking.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nickwitha_k@lemmy.sdf.org 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Maybe has something to do with the dinner she had with him.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 47 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 31 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

https://zeteo.com/p/exclusive-mehdi-interviews-jill-stein?utm_campaign=post

For those that don't want to give Elon fucking muskrat a click. Fuck Twitter.

Edit: never mind it's a preview... So fucking important but we need to pay him to see it.

[–] Coelacanth@feddit.nu 14 points 2 months ago

Is there a good article out there with highlights of the interview? I feel like this would merit its own post, it's an amazing watch and very important to see for those still considering Stein a legitimate option.

[–] Phegan@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Jill Stein is both a terrible candidate and possibly a Russian agent. Even if I do align with much of the green parties stances and I live in a solidly blue state, I would never vote for her out of principle

[–] Scirocco@lemm.ee 12 points 2 months ago

Indeed. I might vote for some Greens down-ballot, but Stein is a stain on the party and its cause

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] donescobar@lemmy.world 29 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I only hear about this candidate a month before the election for the last 50 years, how is this mummy still here?

[–] Badeendje@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because of foreign financing to draw votes away from the Democrats.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 23 points 2 months ago (73 children)

And Stein's answer every single time this comes up?

"What about Gaza?"

She is literally an operative for Russia and the Republicans. This isn't even a meme or conspiracy theory, it's simply a plain truth.

load more comments (73 replies)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 20 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Even if you assume she isn't a bad faith actor, she's still objectively failed to pass the one thing the world needs, the Green New Deal, and environmentalism is in the worst shape it's been in decades.

That's not all her fault, but her protest candidacy weirdness put Trump in office the first time instead of spending that time and effort on actual policy so...

Fuck off already?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] nednobbins@lemm.ee 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Is she really responsible for the problems of the US Green party?

As near as I can tell the EU Green parties had a different trajectory. They initially started winning seats in parliaments on purely environmental platforms. Those MPs actually started pushing green agendas in various parliaments. That, in turn led to more people voting for them. Eventually that had to adopt policy positions beyond the environment and they tended to be pretty left.

The US never had Green party members in a position where they could actually do anything useful about the environment. That means they could never fulfill their primary goal in the US. So when they tried to branch out the same way the EU Green parties did, they just turned into a vague hodgepodge of leftists ideas.

Is there any suggestion that Jill Stein's replacement would have any chance of saving the US Green party?

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (10 children)

The Green party is doing exactly what it was designed to do. It's siphoning off eco-conscious Democratic voters just significantly enough to affect voting margins but not enough to win. To be clear I'm not saying that Even a significant number of people in the green party have that as a goal, but top down, that's all it's about.

We are a two-party system and they are allowing the green party to exist to use it as a wedge.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 12 points 2 months ago (8 children)

The issue is she sucks all the oxygen out of the room with her pointless presidential runs and does nothing for the four years in between. There’s an inconsequential number of Greens who run and win elections in small cities and towns or less consequential elections, and none of them have won any federal elections. A real party leader would recruit and foster candidates in large cities and state legislatures— and then get folks to run for the US House, the Senate, state governorships, and then the presidency.

Stein is less a party leader and more a figurehead who basically seems to be in it for the grift. And so US Greens (especially in comparison to those in the EU) are less a party and more just a convenient label for those of a certain bent that want to run as something other than as a Democrat.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Fedizen@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago

please, she's such a fucking bobble-headed, putin-slopping dork.

load more comments
view more: next ›