“Jill Stein is a useful idiot for Russia. After parroting Kremlin talking points and being propped up by bad actors in 2016 she’s at it again,” DNC spokesman Matt Corridoni said in a statement to The Bulwark. “Jill Stein won’t become president, but her spoiler candidacy—that both the GOP and Putin have previously shown interest in—can help decide who wins. A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump.”
Jill is here to collect some donations then disappear for 4 years. Again.
As someone in a state where my presidential vote is very much decided… I voted Gary Johnson in 2016. I know there are a lot of very real critiques of the libertarian party and/or platform, but it’s really sad the green party puts it to shame… it’s not a high bar.
My point being… wtf is she still doing doing this stuff? Libertarians push local candidates all the damn time, and make a push for the presidential seat when they can, but soundly rejected Trump, and hell, even in 2016 you had the VP libertarian cantidate saying “vote Hillary”. Like I am upset as anyone else, but if you’re still in the green party you’re just kidding yourself… and thats from a freaking libertarian that hates his party a good 50% of the time.
I absolutely despise libertarians. But I approve this message.
Lol. I get it. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it a million more times I’m sure: it’s got a lot of problems, but I like the framework the NAP provides. It’s explicit and provides a place to work from.
They’re not all crazy “public roads are theft” folks. And again, remember the party soundly rejected trump. IME a lot of libertarians are generally supportive of social programs, so long as they’re egalitarian.
But what really rustles jimmies is the cut and dry stuff. I will never be able to get over democrats being on the wrong side of gay marriage, even in the name of pragmatism. I’ll support them out of pragmatism, but I’m bitter about it.
But to the point of this thread: very little of that matters if there’s not a next election. I’ll take the party that fumbled gay marriage in the late 2000s VS. The one that wants to kill my friends 1000/10 times.
And again to the point of this thread: it’s telling, and gives me faith in my party, there is no “Garry Johnson” this year.
There’s photos of Shill Stein dining with Putin. How much more evidence do you need?
She wasn’t even the worst at the table, that “honor” goes to convicted felon Mike Flynn:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Flynn
More on Flynn and his connecting Trump to Russia here:
p.s. Trump’s “National Security Advisor”.
Lest anyone try to claim Stein isn’t running purely as a spoiler candidate.
Still can’t believe Flynn was the fucking head of the DIA
Provide links from the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation showing there was wrong doing with the event. They’ve investigated and found nothing. Implying guilt by association is dishonest and should be labeled misinformation.
Here’s the problem, legally, private citizens can’t engage in diplomatic actions like this:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/953
“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
You would think anyone who just announced their candidacy 6 months before this dinner would know that…
But then you’d also think anyone running for President would also know how many Congressmen there are…
https://www.salon.com/2024/09/12/jill-stein-schooled-on-in-brutal-breakfast-club-interview/
And yet the Senate intelligence committee found nothing wrong or nefarious.
you’d also think anyone running for President would also know how many Congressmen there are
One would think the former 2 term VP under the first black President would remember his name
Great point. I definitely won’t vote for Biden this year.
It was ok when your team was doing it but one error from someone else and it’s the end of the world and completely makes them ineligible.
It was OK when my team was doing what? Which “team” do I play for? You seem confused.
No, you see they just happened to put her at the same table as Putin and the other scumbags. She had no say in it! And she couldn’t do anything about it! She’s the victim here, don’t ya know!
…This is the common response you see from the Stein cultists when this photo is brought up. And it’s pure horseshit. If she had anywhere near the principles and ethics she claims to have she would have got up and left from that table immediately. But she didn’t. Because she’s a hypocritical con-artist, a charlatan.
Stein plays the morally-upright crusader, waltzing around casting sanctimonious judgements on others. But at the end of the day she’s a far right stooge who is only interested in stroking her own ego and discretely ingratiating herself to tyrants. She can say what she want and has no accountability held against her.
She had done so much damage to the Green movement over the past decade+. She only pops up at election time to try to make life easier for far right movements whose policies are often the antithesis of what she pretend to support.
The Democrats should be doing more on environmental issues and holding Israel accountable for what’s going on in Palestine. But at least they aren’t hiding behind their own self-righteousness to anywhere near the degree that Stein is.
The system is rigged and you are being play around, how much more evidence do you need?
Presidents are supposed to meet with other global leaders you Muppet
The choice to meet with a war criminal, shake hands and laugh is their own.
The people who vote for her seem like the useful idiots to me, she herself more seems like a traitor to the old values of her country and the purported causes of her party. She loves foreign autocrat dictatorships and there’s nothing green about helping republicans win elections.
Narrator: the DNC is correct.
Forget debates. I would pay good money to see an episode of Jeopardy with Harris, Stein, and Trump.
The categories could be content from a high school civics class.
“This person won the popular vote for President in 2016.”
Prepare for rant about the show being BIASED AGAINST ME and spreading FAKE NEWS by not accepting alternative FACTS.
“I’ll take Jap Anus Relations for $200 Alex”
I’d much rather see them in a game show than a debate. Debates are pretty much boring game shows these days anyways.
How is this the first time me hearing this wonderful idea?
@LorneMichaels We need this stat!
Jill has ruined a lot of credibility.
Universalmonk bouta flip a table.
I doubt anyone dumb enough to vote for Stein are Harris voters anyway. So now than likely a vote for Stein will be one taken for Trump. So Trump and Putin can waste all the money they want on her campaign.
They’re probably trying to scoop up the Republican voters that are disillusioned with Trump and prevent them from going to Harris. It’s actually a decent strategy in that light.
You know, positioning the DNC “against” her might draw some of the people who won’t vote for Harris but really don’t want to vote for Trump away from voting GOP…
You don’t have to be “smart” to vote for a good candidate.
Stein is the nominally “more liberal than the Democrats are willing to be” candidate. So most likely if they were forced to vote and could only vote for Trump or Harris, then I’d wager they’d mostly go Harris.
A relative weakness is that on the left there are currently more people ready to discard strategic thinking and stand on what they consider their absolute principles. The right is currently a bit more unified, as they are more willing to yield on their differences to vote closest to their overall goal with a decent chance to win.
Or the left is fairly unified in practice but Internet manipulations present the illusion otherwise, I have no idea
Or you could just reserve your opinion for who you are going to vote for, and respect the fact everyone is free to come to their own conclusion.
I’m voting for Harris, but it wouldnt offend me If someone said they were voting third party. The same as I wouldnt expect it to offend them I’m voting for Harris.
Y’all need to get off this good and evil Netflix drama.
What they ultimately do with their vote is their business, but I’m just responding to the premise that would-be Stein voters would not vote for Harris anyway, because they are “too dumb” to vote for Harris, which is incorrect.
As to discussing the strategic situation, I think that is important to reiterate the consequence of their vote. Stein will not win, it’s very obvious, so a vote thrown that way is merely a message to try to break the self fulfilling prophecy of third parties being hopeless. If you truly feel either candidate is roughly equal, this is a fine and strategic move. I could understand that perspective in most presidential races I have seen. Given the happenings associated with Trump’s first term, I personally can not understand that perspective, but ultimately it is their business.
To be quiet on this would be to let what seems to be forces looking to weaken the Harris prospect prevail in swaying people to vote for Stein, despite those forces not actually wanting Stein, but just wanting a spoiler candidate to take some votes the way they want.
First of all, blown way out of proportion. People voting for the green party are a very small number. What the democrat party doesnt want is any valid criticism of their party. That is detrimental because it could cause people to pull away from the democrats.
So instead of just acknowledging any good points the green party has, or at least arguing them in good faith, they throw mud on the party calling them a Russian controlled political party, which is hypocritical at best when AIPAC runs the democratic party.
Personally, I think the democrats would be better off acting in good faith rather than avoiding the topic and slandering the speakers.
If out of proportion in scale, back in 2000, Nader voters going for Gore would have decided the nation for everyone. Ultimately the choices of a few hundred people overcame over half a million votes going the other way. The very small number of Stein voters in a certain place can decide the output. I don’t fault them for 2000, even if I disagree with them, because I don’t think folks could have reasonably foreseen the warmongering that was to come.
If out of proportion in severity, between November 2020 and January 2021, you had several attempts to undermine the election, and that was with very little planning/prep work. You had trying to get the states to “find enough votes”, you had fake electors, trying to get the VP to unilaterally refuse the election, inciting a crowd to storm the proceedings. In the aftermath you have certain people planning their whole political careers on promising to guarantee the elections for GOP, speculation that Vance was picked carefully as someone willing to do what Pence wouldn’t, and a whole carefully constructed plan to start getting things ready for 2028 election the moment 2025 starts, if they can. You have a supreme court that ruled that a president may be considered immune for crimes, unless of course the supreme court decides it’s not an “official act”, reserving the ability to selectively enforce law on the president themselves.
With respect to Russian influence, this is specifically a Stein situation and plenty of evidence to support that Stein is being supported by and manipulated by Russia. It makes sense too, as Trump has shown himself to be awfully susceptible to Putin’s manipulation, so taking advantage of a naive Stein to foil the votes of naive voters in favor of Trump is a plain strategic path for them.
Yes, we can talk about her platform, particularly about her wish to dissolve NATO and stop support of Ukraine, but other parts of her platform are difficult to explain the nuance of the problems. Like “dump money on third world nations”, which sounds the decent thing to do, but historically trashes any semblance of local economy and frequently reinforces warlords instead of the people.
If your logic is that the green party is big enough to cover the difference between candidates votes, then I have bad news for you because so is my neighborhood, and yours, and the group of people at your local church, and the next one over, and so on. Thats the reason why I say its impact is overblown. If the democrats lose by a hundred thousand votes, its not the green parties fault even if they get a million votes.
The democrats need to appeal to voters, not throw shit. Apparently the democrat base right now likes when the campaign dives into the mud though, saying things like “its refreshing to hear” despite that being the exact same reason people were drawn to trump.
They’re not wrong, but they could stand to recognize that some of their own policy shortcomings opened the door to her challenge.
The whole point is that there is no challenge. It is sabotage funded by Republicans and Putin.
What challenges has she done when not running for POTUS?
Jill Stein wouldn’t say that Putin is a war criminal. You should really listen to how she dances stupid the interview with Medhi Hassan.
The fallout/optics from that blatant fear to speak clearly about Putin was bad enough it seems that she’s now made a follow-up statement to lightly say the phrase, with qualification (after checking with daddy) and associating it only with Syria and refusing to mention Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
in that interview she immediately says “yes”. framing it as though she isn’t saying it is just lying.
“Say it” means a specific thing. She’s given multiple opportunities to do so directly in that interview and she’s terrified of a sound bite of her acknowledging it directly. She readily says it (appropriately) about Netanyahu, she will not say or about Putin. You’re either an apologist yourself or you’re undereducated on the subject matter - either way, do better.
making a woman perform like that is one of the most misogynist things I think anybody’s ever proposed me.
We’re not discussing a woman, we’re discussing a person and one that wants to be president. It’s far past time you stop reducing the candidate to sex and engage on the level they are asking to be engaged with. Words matter. Unequivocal statements that can’t be re-justified after the fact, matter.
A presidential election is a 24/7 performance as rehearsal for a 24/7 performance job. Your words literally immediately become historical record in this position.
You don’t seem like a serious person.
she was unequivocal
The Bulwark - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Bulwark:
MBFC: Right-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/useful-idiot-for-putin-russia-dnc-jill-stein-green-party
P.S. can I just say how bad does it have to be that a Right-Center news source agrees and promotes the DNC?
All these articles attacking Stein my make people not vote for her, but they aren’t going to convince anyone to vote for Harris.
If you don’t want Trump, you only have one choice.
I don’t want any cheerleader for genocide.
In what world has Trump done anything to suggest he’d support or push a ceasefire?
Harris has both said and done more to push for a ceasefire than literally every other candidate on the ballot.
There is no third party candidate that has a hope of winning right now, thus every vote for third party is the same as not voting.
And not voting is effectively the same as voting Republican, so you’re either voting for Harris, or you’re supporting Trump.
Where the hell did you see me say I would ever vote for Trump? Harris has not done a fucking thing to “push for a ceasefire”. The strongest thing she has said, as far as I know, is that she " wouldn’t be silent about what is going on in Gaza". The very next day, she published a letter condemning the people who protested Netanyahu’s visit. The dem party is full of outright and de facto Zionists, who preferred to have conservatives speak at their convention rather than Palestinian Americans. I’m not voting for, or supporting either Trump or Harris. Harris does still have time to win the votes of people like me. I hope you’re calling your dem reps and demanding it.
If you don’t think Trump would be even worse
forthan Harris in regards to Palestine, you’re delusional. Contrary to popular edgelord opinion the lesser evil is still better than the greater evil.I agree that she should be more clear on demanding a ceasefire (although she did actually partly demand just that in March, at least for 6 weeks - and again during the debate), and that this war could probably be stopped if she made such demands. The current US administration is working to end the fighting, so not voting for the party that is actually working to end the war is at the detriment to the people of Gaza.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said two weeks ago that 90 percent of a ceasefire deal had been agreed upon.
Washington has been working for months with mediators Qatar and Egypt to try and bring Israel and Hamas to a final agreement.
Biden laid out a three-phase ceasefire proposal on May 31 saying that Israel had agreed to it.
Now compare that to Trump:
“From the start, Harris has worked to tie Israel’s hand behind its back, demanding an immediate ceasefire, always demanding ceasefire,” Trump said, adding it “would only give Hamas time to regroup and launch a new October 7 style attack.” Trump added: “I will give Israel the support that it needs to win but I do want them to win fast.”
So he would basically allow a full scale genocide, no holds barred.
That being said though, this is likely not going to end anytime soon due to the massive pager/radio attack on Hezbollah that’s likely going to make this whole quagmire even worse. And I 100% agree with you that the US/Kamala/Biden should put Israel in it’s place before this whole powder keg turns into WWIII, which is not outside the realm of possibilities to anyone who has studied history and the role multiple global conflicts played in the past to lead to world war.
They arent going to convince anyone to vote for Trump either, so what’s your point, comrade?
My point, comrade, is that all this desperate energy spent tearing down Jill Stein would be better spent changing the policies that are turning off potential dem voters.
Methinks perhaps you overstate the intensity and desperation of the energy, but your point is absolutely valid, and they should do that outside of election season too!
Going to add as well that the only party that might actually change those policies will be the dems, since the GOP SUPER won’t, and the green party has zero chance of gaining any power.
Well since you’ve said it - yeah the Dems have more political power. Which is why it would show leadership and political finesse for Dems to focus their messaging around policy changes that would enable a fairer and safer voting system that eliminates spoiler candidates, like approval choice voting. THAT would attract 3rd party voters. Because it includes them. Instead the messaging above alienates and divides people. It’s bad.
I actually don’t understand how we all collectively watched Whose Line? in the 90s and somehow still don’t understand the concept of “yes, and,” and including people’s concerns. If Dems want 3rd party voters, they will have to respect their concerns and not try to verbally abuse them, or use fear, obligation, guilt, or shame to emotionally abuse them.
And btw yes I’m voting for Kamala. But man watching Dems fumble EVERY ELECTION because they can’t let go of emotional manipulation and abuse rhetoric is so cringy.
Yeah watching the Dems is painful AF. They get real close to GETTING it and then fall back into their political safe zone. The 3rd party voters might not have the numbers, but they have good ideas for the future of the country that need to be considered.
We need more Bernies & AOCs on the inside to pull dems back (at least) toward centre and make them understand that 3rd party voters have some great ideas for bringing positive change and equity. Even if the Dems can’t fully embrace them, let’s nudge the needle back toward progress by paying attention to them. The Dems might do. The GOP won’t. So if there are only two viable parties in the presidential (and congressional) race there’s a clear choice if anyone really wants the opportunity to (frustratingly slowly) change anything for the better.
I always say it’s easier to shame dems into doing the right thing. The GOP have no shame to leverage.
I agree. This feels the similar to gerrymandering or restricting access to vote for minorities. They should be able to win without having to walk through a gutter.
Trump doesn’t care about Ukraine at all. What do you think of that?
Is the DNC actually trying to woo Stein voters? They could shift swing states into Blue States, but for some reason they think bashing her will get her voters?
Has the DNC learned nothing from 2016?
What has Stein learned over the years, pray tell?
a vote for Stein is a vote for Trump
It’s also… not a vote for Trump.
If Stein has 50% of Trump’s votes, Harris still wins, by a knockout.
It’s not conservative voters who are going to be voting for her.
There is next to a zero chance that MAGA is gonna vote for Stein. If that ain’t true, then prove me wrong. I’d love to see the analysis.
Again. This is not how this works.
Stein isn’t taking Trump voters. She’s a Left-Wing distraction candidate. In some systems, like RCV or Proportional Representation, her candidacy wouldn’t hurt the Dem as long as voters were thoughtful with their votes. But in FPTP, which we have here, she’s definitely a threat. We’re bitterly divided here, to the tune of close to 51% wanting lefties and 49% wanting righties. All she needs to do to throw this election to the Right is poach 3% plus whatever Right-Wing third party candidates there are. Since the Right is unifying behind the Shitgibbon, it’s real easy for her to spoil the election and get all 51% who want progressive and/or liberal policies to get conservative policies instead. This is even worse when you realise Conservatives have gone Fascist.
If all you have is “Russia” lol
