So Stein is again working to get trump elected
Echoing this, if no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes, then the decision goes to the house of representatives, currently majority Republican. Actually voting for Stein or another third party is unlikely to get them elected to office, but introduces multiple potential ways to get Trump back in office.
The Bernie approach of getting into the primaries introduces the opportunity to debate the establishment and better advocate for change from the front runner.
EDIT: Each state gets one vote in the house of representatives when electing the president, so the existing Republican majority doesn’t apply. This probably would make it easier for Trump to get elected because populated Democrat states have the same number of votes as less populated Republican states.
Echoing this, if no candidate gets a majority of the electoral votes, then the decision goes to the house of representatives, currently majority Republican.
Then the Democrats should find a candidate that is strong enough to not have to worry about that. That’s what democracy and voting is all about. It’s not just about who YOU want to win.
I don’t like Harris enough to vote for her. So I am voting for Stein. As is my right.
Let’s be real. Votes for third parties in already decided states such as California or Missouri only help promote in some small way a diversity of parties that the US sorely needs.
I think it’s only in battleground states where it would benefit someone to think more tactically about the use of their vote versus participating in the system as intended, i.e. voting for their preferred candidate.
If your state is deeply in the hands of your closer-aligned party, then probably, though down-ballot races are always important to consider too. Even things like school boards.
If your state is deeply in the hands of your most-opposed party, though, you should be aware that flips can and do happen. Our “swing state” system is by no means stable, which states are “swing” changes pretty steadily, and broad waves are still very possible. Additionally, by making a state come closer to even, you can force your opposed party to devote some of their limited resources to defending it in the future. So, you can hurt a party by voting for their opponents even when they have a strong grip.
It’s useful to consider a historical context, where over the 2.5 centuries, the elections have shifted every which way. There really is no predicting what the future holds beyond the most immediate, short-term horizon. It is absolutely not stable, though, never has been. It’s not intended to be, after all, otherwise we wouldn’t have things like term limits.
help promote in some small way a diversity of parties that the US sorely needs.
I agree that the US sorely needs this. Having just two major parties who run (and WANT to run) everything, isn’t helping things at all.
While I agree with that sentiment, I think it’s more important push overwhelmingly for electoral process reform first - switching to approval, star, or even ranked choice voting is a step up from first passed the post and encourages more honest voting over strategic voting, at least a little bit.
I think entertaining individual third parties shouldn’t come until that’s a bigger issue that America starts talking about.
I understand the need for electoral reform, but waiting for the perfect system before voting for a candidate like Jill Stein ignores the current power of our vote.
By supporting a third party now, we’re signaling to the major parties that a significant portion of the electorate demands something different—whether it’s stronger environmental policies, healthcare reform, or campaign finance reform.
If everyone holds off on voting for who they truly believe in until the system changes, that change may never come.
Voting for Stein now isn’t just about winning this election; it’s about pushing the political conversation forward and showing that there’s real demand for the values she represents. It sends a clear message that voters are tired of the status quo and want real alternatives, even within the current system.
Hear hear. For what it’s worth, I live in a deep blue state and I often vote 3rd party. Not because I believe they are the best candidate, but because I’m assured the DNC will win regardless of my action or inaction at the polls and I want to promote a diversity of parties. Heck, I’ll vote for candidates I disagree with if the race is secure enough (that only really applies to local elections).
The Democratic systems in the USA are highly flawed and we must use them practically in the small ways we can in order to attempt to move the country forward in a positive way.
No, she’s working on her own campaign. For people who want Trump elected, they’ll vote for Trump.
I’m voting for Jill Stein, because I want Jill Stein to be elected.
We get to vote for who we want to win. It’s our right.
Day old account who made four posts shilling Stein the Russian asset
2 days old. Because I got banned from Reddit. lmao
And in these last 2 days, I’ve also started lemmy communites for a college, paraeducators, and the green party.
So how long do you think should I wait before I can start posting about stuff I feel strongly about?
And I’ve made over 80 comments and posts on various topics. Not just “four posts shilling Stein the Russian asset.”
Do you have any proof that she is a Russian asset? Because that seems like that would be front page news on news sites across the US. Please post your links here and also email the major news organizations with this proof if you have it.
Plus that would be a good way to get rid of the Green Party. Then you wouldn’t have to worry about them anymore!
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/466594-jill-stein-i-am-not-a-russian-spy/
Meeting with Putin was not a particularly good look, when Russia is one of the largest hydrocarbon producers on the planet and has significant interests in thawing Arctic seaways.
Where Hilary meeting with Putin made a little more sense, as she was the country’s Secretary of State at the time, and talking with rival leaders is very much her job.
More recent stuff is largely about Russian propaganda supporting her, likely just to help Trump though, due to his more authoritarian-friendly positions.
What is your point about hydrocarbons?
You say Russia produces hydrocarbons, the United States is the worlds largest producer of hydrocarbons lol
Correct. So picking one of them to defend is very strange.
All this suggests is that the Russians tried to divert left leaning voters away from Clinton by boosting Stein’s candidacy.
There is zero evidence there that Stein was contacted by Russia or even aware of the way in which her campaign was being hijacked.
Yeah, you apparently did not read the article.
Dude, I’m voting for Jill Stein. And so are many of my friends. You should probably just accept it and let it go. If your candidate is strong enough, then you shouldn’t worry about who we vote for. :)
That’s nice and correct, and I would love for the Green party to succeed, break the bipartisan dominance, and finally get a foothold in the government. However, at the moment, Trump needs to lose at all costs. At the moment, I believe all Stein is going to do is draw votes away from Harris and boost Trump’s ratio.
Vote for who you want, by all means, but please, consider the impact in regard to the current political theatre.
You make a fair point, but I would argue that if Harris is such a great pick, then the Democrats shouldn’t have to worry. They should count on the strength of their candidate. My point is that if the candidate isn’t strong enough to win, regardless of “spoiler” votes, then they shouldn’t win.
Let’s face it, almost half of the country doesn’t want Harris to win. And if more of them vote for their candidate than those who vote for Harris, then she loses. That’s democracy in action.
That’s how democracy works in some countries, but not in the United States. We are currently stuck with the Electoral College, where the person who gets the most votes doesn’t necessarily win (see Hillary Clinton). So I’m not sure what you’re saying. I wish we lived in your world, but we don’t.
So I’m not sure what you’re saying.
I think you know exactly what I’m saying. We are able to vote for whoever we want to win. So I am.
And I totally agree we should get rid of the Electoral College.
I really don’t. You said:
almost half of the country doesn’t want Harris to win. And if more of them vote for their candidate than those who vote for Harris, then she loses
And based on how our system works, that’s simply not necessarily true. In this case it might be, but it also might not be. Here are a some examples:
If some of the people who don’t want Harris to win, but also don’t want Trump to win vote for Stein or RFK, then those votes are likely to help Harris, but depending on where those votes are cast, they might also help Trump. If Harris loses Pennsylvania, even if she wins the national popular vote, she still might lose the election. If Harris wins all or most of the swing states, but Trump gets more popular votes, Harris still wins.
See, “we are able to vote for whoever we want to win” is 100% true in theory, but depending on where you live, it’s a sad fact that your vote for the president counts less than someone else’s vote depending on where they live.
We have one vote per person, but each vote does not carry the same weight. Wanting our two party system to change is healthy, casting your vote by pretending it will do something it wont, is not.
casting your vote by pretending it will do something it wont, is not.
But voting for who I want to isn’t pretending at all. It’s one of the fundamental rights of being a US citizen.
Even of YOU don’t like my candidate, I can still vote for her. I don’t like your candidate either, but I’m not bullying you to change your mind. lol
I think you know exactly what I’m saying.
Let’s face it, almost half of the country doesn’t want Harris to win. And if more of them vote for their candidate than those who vote for Harris, then she loses. That’s democracy in action.
It sounds like you’re saying you want to see Harris lose more than you want Stein to win. More than half the country doesn’t want Trump to win, but he will if Democrats are divided or if no party gets a majority.
I also agree we should get rid of the Electoral College and have ranked choice voting, but that’s not the reality we live in. Voting as if the system is ideal will just result in Trump a Trump presidency like 2016.
It sounds like you’re saying you want to see Harris lose more than you want Stein to win.
Not at all. I’m voting for who I want to win. As is my right.
More than half the country doesn’t want Trump to win
Then you shouldn’t be worried, then. Right?
I also agree we should get rid of the Electoral College and have ranked choice voting, but that’s not the reality we live in.
So maybe we should vote for people who want to change that. That’s what I’m doing.
Voting as if the system is ideal will just result in Trump a Trump presidency like 2016.
I don’t care. The world won’t end if Trump is president. You all said the same thing in 2016. And society is still here. And society will still be here in 4 years. I promise.
I don’t think there’s any issue with voting for Jill Stein, RFK or Mickey Mouse as long as you’re doing so with the full understanding that they will not win. As long as you’ve fully incorporated that into your mental calculus and it still seems to be the best course of action, do as ya like.
While I agree it’s the right of every member of a democracy to vote for the candidate they think best, it’s also important to not be blinded by naive ideology and participate in these incredibly flawed systems pragmatically and practically, as they do not work in the way they advertise and must be manipulated in order to achieve the most positive possible outcome.
Jill Stein winning a single vote in the electoral college is not a possible outcome.
as long as you’re doing so with the full understanding that they will not win.
So should people only vote for who they think will win? Don’t you think that who you WANT to win is pretty important as a voter?
Jill Stein winning a single vote in the electoral college is not a possible outcome.
Because of the line of thinking that people should only vote for who they think will win.
I personally vote for who I think would be best choice to be president. It’s now about who has the best chance of winning, or who I am afraid of winning. It’s who I would prefer to win. And for me, that’s Jill Stein.
That is ideological naivety. You are operating with a belief in the way the world should work but not with an understanding of the way it currently works.
Practically, this is almost a non-issue because as a single person you have so little impact on politics that your naivety is irrelevant. But it means that your actions may be counterproductive to your goals.
You are operating with a belief in the way the world should work
I agree with you. I know I have plenty of ideological naivety, but I believe the only way to change the system is for people to keep pushing for what they believe in. That’s why I’m voting for her.
It’s a “be the change you want to see” situation.
It’s also why, as a 55-year-old man, I decided to switch careers and move into education. I work in an elementary school now, making very little money, because I want to help better prepare our children for the future. Instead of just complaining, I chose to take action.
Yes, I have a lot of ideological naivety, and I’m proud of it.
I, too, wish America worked the way you think it should and admire your passion.
Good luck to you and may we all see a better tomorrow.
People have been complaining about 3rd party spoilers forever. None of it changes my mind.
Ah the age ol’ ignore reality. No worries!
I’m not ignoring reality at all.
The “reality” is that here in the US, we have a right to vote for who we want. You can keep bullying and trying to get me to change my mind, but I am voting for who I want. And this year, it’s Jill Stein.
Im not bullying you. You can vote for whoever you please, like you say.
But the reality is, in the current broken election system, a vote for 3rd party is the same as putting your vote in the bin, or spoiling it
But the reality is, in the current broken election system,
Very true. And the ONLY way to fix that election system is by voting for who we think will fix that, and not just who we think may win. When do we finally make this move?
Everyone says, “Oh not THIS election. THIS election is too important to try to change things now!”
Guess what? They have been fucking saying that for the last 50 years. lmao
A 1% candidate isn’t haunting anyone.
Awesome. Then you have no reason to be concerned, afraid, or angry that I am voting for Jill Stein then. Right?
I’m concerned and angry you’re throwing away your vote, but in the end, your state isn’t likely to be close enough to matter anyway, it will either go Trump or Harris.
But you literally said, “A 1% candidate isn’t haunting anyone.”
Implying that there is nothing to worry about.
Yet you are concerned and angry that I’m “throwing away” my vote.
How am I throwing it away? I’m voting for who I want to win. And as you said, such a minor candidate has no hope.
So you shouldn’t be worried.
I get to vote for who I want.
Are you saying we should only vote for people have have a certain percentage to win?
Is that really democracy?
So what percentage counts as valid for someone before I should be able to vote for them, in your eyes?
Not anything for Harris to worry about, no.
I am worried that voters will take their own choices off the table by voting for a non-entity.
Sure, there’s nothing preventing you from burning your vote by writing in “Superman”, it’s just an awful idea when every vote counts and fascism is on the line.
Not anything for Harris to worry about, no.
Good, then nothing to worry about, like I said.
I am worried that voters will take their own choices off the table by voting for a non-entity.
But why would that worry you if it doesn’t affect the Harris campaign?
Sure, there’s nothing preventing you from burning your vote by writing in “Superman”, it’s just an awful idea when every vote counts and fascism is on the line.
But I’m not burning my vote. I’ve voting for who I want, which is Jill Stein. Also, how is “fascism” on the line, if Harris has nothing worry about?
You tried to downplay and belittle the Green Party, and implying that it doesn’t mean anything, but then you turn around and say fascism is on the line. How so?
By voting for a non-candidate, who can’t win, you may as well write in Superman.
Hey, if you don’t want to have a voice in an important election, that’s entirely up to you.
However if Trump wins, you have nobody to blame but yourself and other voters like you. Voters who could have chosen to make a difference but chose not to.
By voting for a non-candidate, who can’t win, you may as well write in Superman.
So are you implying that we should ONLY vote for people who will win? That we shouldn’t vote for who we want to win?! That doesn’t sound very democratic.
Hey, if you don’t want to have a voice in an important election, that’s entirely up to you.
I do have a voice. I’m voting for who I want to vote for. As is my right.
However if Trump wins, you have nobody to blame but yourself and other voters like you. Voters who could have chosen to make a difference but chose not to.
Well wouldn’t that be your party for not having a strong enough candidate. I mean, if you have a strong enough candidate, you don’t have to worry about losing, right?
You realize part of democracy means that your fav candidate may lose sometimes, right?
The US isn’t a good democracy, and unfortunately our system is not only unfair but makes third party votes very stupid
The US isn’t a good democracy, and unfortunately our system is not only unfair but makes third party votes very stupid
And as long as people think that voting 3rd party is “stupid,” that won’t change. Be the change you wanna see. I am and that’s why I’m voting for Jill Stein for president. And the first time I voted Green Party was when I voted for Ralph Nader. No regrets.
No one gives a shit how you vote.
Are you seriously expecting a green wave? I’d be shocked if she breaks 1%
No one gives a shit how you vote.
Well you seem pretty mad about it.
Are you seriously expecting a green wave? I’d be shocked if she breaks 1%
Then you have nothing to worry about, right? So y u mad?
I’m not mad lol. I’m amused. You also picked the most boring third party candidate. Why don’t you vote for someone cool like Cornel West or Vermin Supreme? Hell even RFK jr. is at least funny.
Lmao fr it’s hilarious.
‘Aren’t you so angry I’m voting for Jill Stein??’
Nah I don’t give a shit how you vote
‘You’re SOOOO angry, why are you sooo mad?’
You also picked the most boring third party candidate.
According to YOU. Do you think I should vote only for people who YOU find interesting?
Why don’t you vote for someone cool like Cornel West or Vermin Supreme?
Because they don’t align with the values that I want my president to have. If you like them, I totally respect and support your right to vote for them.
You should vote for who you want to win. And for me, it’s Jill Stein.
Cool man 👍
Jill Stein is completely irrelevant.
Oh, ok, cool. Then the Democratic and Republican parties have nothing to fear from her.
So they should be fine with debating her and having her on the ballot. I mean, hey she’s “completely irrelevant,” right?
Being completely irrelevant, there’s no reason to waste time debating her, but if she meets the criteria for either I don’t think anybody cares.
Being completely irrelevant, there’s no reason to waste time debating her, but if she meets the criteria for either I don’t think anybody cares.
So what is threshold do you think she, or ANY 3rd party candidate, needs to meet to be considered worthy of a debate? Serious question. Because her party is the 4th biggest political party in the US. Behind Libertarians.
I don’t care about this. Until FPTP is eliminated, third parties are irrelevant.
third parties are irrelevant.
Then you have nothing to fear, nor do you have anything to be annoyed about, when it comes to the existence of 3rd parties and the voting for 3rd parties.
Yes, hence the “I don’t care about this.”
Yet, you do seem to care enough to have a conversation about it, and interact in this community thread about it. So I guess you care a little bit.
Do y’all in the Green Party have anything to show for yourselves past this person? I’ve never seen a local showing. It seems like y’all do nothing except run for president every four years, then vanish. I mean I know Republicans who do more for local conservation and green initiatives than y’all. Really.
Do y’all in the Green Party have anything to show for yourselves past this person?
The party has been around since the 1980’s, friend. Maybe you need to look up Ralph Nader. I know you are young and don’t know your political history, but maybe do some research before you engage in a debate about it. I mean, come on man, did you even Wikipedia?
The Green Party’s membership encompasses the fourth-highest percentage of registered voters in the United States, with a total membership of 234,120.
I’ve never seen a local showing.
Californians have elected 55 of the 226 office-holding Greens nationwide. Other states with high numbers of Green elected officials include Pennsylvania (31), Wisconsin (23), Massachusetts (18) and Maine (17). Maine has the highest per capita number of Green elected officials in the country and the largest Green registration percentage with more than 29,273 Greens comprising 2.95% of the electorate as of November 2006.[68] Madison, Wisconsin is the city with the most Green elected officials (8), followed by Portland, Maine (7).
As of February 2024, there are 144 elected officials who identify as Green Party.
So yes, there are Green Party members in local politics.
It seems like y’all do nothing except run for president every four years, then vanish.
We haven’t vanished. There are 144 elected officials who identify as Green Party in the USA. And the European Green Party one several prominent elections in Europe.
Feel free to look it up on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_of_the_United_States
And their website: https://www.gp.org/
You don’t have to like them. But they do exist. And according to Lemmy, they are really good at “spoiling” elections. lol
Uh huh.
I’m not “debating” you, I’m asking if you have anything to show for your party.
I know the supposed platform, and I know the presidential candidates. What I don’t know is why your candidate thinks anyone should give a shit about her when she’s nowhere to be found except when she’s deciding to run for president.
Either y’all aren’t doing anything worth celebrating or you’re bad at communicating your successes and both of those are pretty firm indictments of your ability to follow through on the national level with any of your stated goals. But that presumes any conviction in those stated goals, and again: I’m not sure I can think of any reason to think y’all have any such conviction.
I’m not “debating” you, I’m asking if you have anything to show for your party.
And I gave examples.
What I don’t know is why your candidate thinks anyone should give a shit about her when she’s nowhere to be found except when she’s deciding to run for president.
Well, I don’t have that issue with her. Nor do my friends who are voting for her.
Either y’all aren’t doing anything worth celebrating
there is not “y’all,” I don’t represent the party. I am simply voting for her. I can’t answer for the problems you seem to have with the party.
That’s outside my scope of expertise. They are the 4th largest political party in the US. I don’t have any control over their PR.
Brah, if you don’t like her, then don’t vote for her.
I do, so I am.
I think they were asking for actual green wins, policy or otherwise, not candidates who have run. I voted for Nader, fwiw, but I won’t be voting for stein
Yeah. That’s basically it. Demonstration of ground level impact and commitment. It’s difficult to imagine trusting a group with a national bureaucracy when they haven’t shown that they’re capable of that scale of operation. Unfortunately that capability matters more than the ideals.
Edit: but also it matters because it demonstrates the ideals in action in a tangible way.
I guess it’s hard to do that when you don’t have enough power to do that?
Well I totally respect your choice to not vote Green Party based on your values.
But I’m voting for them, based on mine.
Californians have elected 55 of the 226 office-holding Greens nationwide. Other states with high numbers of Green elected officials include Pennsylvania (31), Wisconsin (23), Massachusetts (18) and Maine (17). Maine has the highest per capita number of Green elected officials in the country and the largest Green registration percentage with more than 29,273 Greens comprising 2.95% of the electorate as of November 2006.[68] Madison, Wisconsin is the city with the most Green elected officials (8), followed by Portland, Maine (7).
You act like there has never been a Green politician that has won. Also, globally several Green Party members won some important elections in Europe.
The question is not about elected NUMBERS.
I’ve not been acting at all, I’ve just been trying to clarify the question. Don’t confuse the two, I’m not attacking you, I’m trying to help clarify the disconnect that is here.
I’m regularly struck by the literal insanity of politics, but this whole deal with Israel is a particularly notable example.
The fact of the matter is that we have no idea what Harris’s actual opinion of the situation is. Regardless of what it might actually be, she has to support Israel, which at this point means supporting a government of literal murderous psychopaths who are simultaneously carrying out a genocide in Gaza and a violent incremental illegal land grab in the West Bank while also brazenly trying to provoke, and drag the US into, a war with Lebanon or Syria or Yemen or Iran. And why does she have to support all of that patent evil? Because if she doesn’t, AIPAC will spend millions and millions of dollars trying to destroy her, like they already destroyed Jamaal Bowman and Cori Bush, for daring to have principles.
And what’s the likely net result of that? To elect a Republican, which is to say, a member of the party of actual antisemites.
They accuse Democrats of being antisemites merely for calling genocide genocide, and meanwhile, the actual antisemites - the people who comtinue to hold to the notion of Jews as evil, money-grubbing vermin who are conspiring to take over the world, are Republicans, even including Republicans in high office, like “Jewish space lasers” Marjorie Taylor Greene.
Think about how insane that is - a politician has to publicly support a genocidal regime or face being called an antisemite and having an Israeli advocacy group spend millions and millions of dollars to destroy her and instead elect the candidate from the party of actual Jew-hating antisemites.
And as if that isn’t enough, we have Jill Stein in the middle of it all, who, with zero chance of actually winning, is free to take the position that any rational person should take, and the position that the majority of the Democratic base takes - that genocide is genocide and is rightly condemned. And that then introduces the risk that she’ll draw off enough Democratic voters, merely by taking the position held by the majority, so the position that the Democratic candidate should take, that it will hand the election to the Republican - the candidate of the party of actual antisemites.
The whole thing is bludgeoningly insane. I don’t think anyone could’ve created such a grotesquely dysfunctional and actuslly counter-productive system if they’d deliberately set out to do it.
And yet that’s the world we live in - the world we’re forced to live in - a world warped by the literal insanity of a wealthy and powerful few.
It boggles my mind.
Two words: Citizen’s United
I mean, should money be speech, and thus campaign contributions protected by the first amendment? It’s kinda pants-on-head stupid, unless you want money to run things. Which some folks do, of course.
I support Citizen’s United!
Good points. And I’m tired of it. So that’s why I vote for who I want to win, and not just the candidate of Reddit/Lemmy member’s opinions of who they want to win.
“She could have said, ‘I hear you, we’re going to address this, and if you want it to get better, elect me instead of Donald Trump,’” Zahr told NBC. “But instead she suggested we want to help get Trump elected … as if we owe her something and she doesn’t owe us.”
This is the attitude of Dems. Vote for our candidate because if you don’t you’ll be sorry.
To be clear, I’m voting for Harris because the threat of another orange shitbag presidency is too great to ignore, but I’ll do so irritated that I don’t really have a choice.
This is the attitude of Dems. Vote for our candidate because if you don’t you’ll be sorry.
Yep. And the personal attacks I have gotten from posting this article here, have shown many Lemmy users to have the same attitude.
In fact, Lemmy’s are so mad that I am voting Green, they have being going into my communities and downvoting everything I post, even if not political. They’re even voting down my posts supporting elementary teachers who teach Special Education students. I mean, if Lemmy users wanna spend their day doing downvoting every post I write, it’s fine, but it’s really weird to me and just makes me laugh. BUT it does make me feel kinda important! lol
I totally respect and support your right to vote for Harris. But I just can’t, so that’s why I’m going Green.
It’s a binary choice, unfortunately. Splitting the vote is fun when the stakes aren’t so high, though.
It’s NOT binary choice tho. I’m voting 3rd party. Happily so.
Lemmy’s
We don’t pluralize with an apostrophe.
Sorry, autocorrect. I’ll stay on top. Thank you!
Yeah apparently on Lemmy if you criticize Biden or Kamala you want trump to win. There’s no nuance of “hey maybe we should force a better choice than a genocide enabler who will stick to the status quo as it has been for the past 40 years and change nothing, or an orange more evil genocide enabler”
Like I absolutely don’t want trump as a president. I also absolutely don’t want my taxes and money going to kill innocent people. These are not two contradictory viewpoints but people don’t seem to understand that. Hell, even Kamala doesn’t seem to understand that based on her rhetoric.
I’m tired of the white house being concerned or disappointed by Israel. If your child concerned or disappointed you so much and didn’t change his or her behavior, you would put in some consequences. Otherwise you would be a shitty parent. That simple.
Whether or not it’s on Lemmy is irrelevant. If you’re going to pretend not to know the outcome of every election for 50+ years, don’t also pretend that only people on Lemmy are the only ones who do know.
What are you even talking about?
Yes this is what I’m pointing out. You’re playing dumb.
Nah what you said just doesn’t make sense so I asked you to explain but you didn’t you just tried to insult me
Please explain what you mean
Removed by mod
Yeah apparently on Lemmy if you criticize Biden or Kamala you want trump to win.
Right? I legit just responded to yet another poster who accused me of that! lolol
Prepare for your downvotes, friend. We can be downvoted to oblivion together!! lol
I’m tired of the white house being concerned or disappointed by Israel. If your child concerned or disappointed you so much and didn’t change his or her behavior, you would put in some consequences. Otherwise you would be a shitty parent. That simple.
Great analogy! And yes, I agree.
The MAGA cult of Democrats is becoming just as toxic as the MAGA cult of Republicans. As this thread proves. lol
No one believes you really think Jill “9/11 was an inside job” Stein could get even 5% of the vote. Everyone here knows you’re completely full of shit
I hope she gets 5% of the vote. Then this community can stop crying that she doesn’t matter. But hey guys, if she doesn’t matter, then why are you all so mad if I vote for her?! lol
5% would be a miracle and yet still isn’t nearly enough to justify helping Trump, hell even if it wasn’t someone as bad as trump I doubt it would be
She’s not helping Trump though. She is running for president. She doesn’t like Trump.
I’m voting for her, not “against” anyone. I’m voting for who I want to win. And that person is Jill Stein.
I don’t care about the odds, or the Trump or whoever.
I’m voting for how I like. And the party I like. Which is the Green Party.
Lemmy is one of the most intense echo chambers out there. It’s very funny that a self-professed anti-hierarchical, decentralized message board site like this falls in line so neatly behind whatever candidates the corporate media tells them to and then browbeats anyone who dares to consider alternatives. Americans’ refusal to vote third party plays a big role in why the two major parties are so completely unresponsive to the public’s interests and desires. They won’t win, of course, thanks to FPTP, but voting for them pressures the two parties to change their platform to win over their voters.
This is precisely why the corporate media is so invested in vilifying third party voters. Every election from now until the end of recorded history will be “the most important election ever” (or “the last election ever,” as they’ve been painting it recently) and anyone who refuses to vote for the lesser-of-two-evils candidate is a willful apostate who’s worse than a Trump voter. And the masses buy into it, and then it’s naked tribalism and hysteria from there.
100 percent agree with you! And you said it way better than I have been saying it!
New Republic - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for New Republic:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://newrepublic.com/post/184751/jill-stein-vp-pick-palestinian-kamala-harris-michigan
