As Noah Berlatsky reports, Green Party voters have long pretended that they really believe their candidate can win.

[damkina@mas.to]

@wdlindsy You mean like the $6 million she fleeced from her followers??? True!

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@damkina Yep.

[murodegrizeco@toad.social]

@wdlindsy

Jill Stein was not running to win in 2016.

She was there as a spoiler.

That. was. her. job.

[jupito@mastodontti.fi]

@wdlindsy @tntneedham
Are the Democrats committed to trying to change the parliamentary system so that other parties could have a chance?
Or are they just blatantly abusing their position in the two-party cartel?
If so, are there any alternative but to threaten them with "punishment" or "burn down" the whole system?
I think as long as they abuse the cartel, they are basically collaborating with the Repbulicans, *against* the very people who vote for them. They're keeping you hostage.

[grayrabbit@toad.social]

@wdlindsy
I have family members who voted for her in the past. Not this year.

404 Not Found

(files.toad.social)

[templetongate@mastodon.social]

@wdlindsy A lot of Democrats are centrist and stuck in the past, but that is better than electing fascists.

[thetechtutor@me.dm]

@wdlindsy Jill stein is a fucking sham and a puppet for #russia and #putin

She is a disgrace to her party and to her nation.

Attention Required! | Cloudflare

(www.thirdway.org)

[msbellows@c.im]

@wdlindsy
"In 2016, Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin to Trump by 22,748 votes; Stein carried 31,072 votes. In Michigan the story was similar: Clinton lost to Trump by 10,704 votes while Stein carried 51,463. Ditto for Pennsylvania, where Trump won by 44,292 votes and Stein pulled in 49,941 votes.

"Had Clinton carried those three states she would have become president."

[mloxton@med-mastodon.com]

@wdlindsy
Yah, the performative cruelty and indifference to the detrimental effects of their actions turn my stomach

[maieramsden@mastodon.social]

@wdlindsy Some people draw a hard line at horrific war crimes and ethnic cleansing. I can't hate them for it. I don't think a Kamala loss does anything to help the situation in the Middle East. I don't think a Kamala loss will bring a reckoning in the DNC. They'll just blame Stein with their standard entitled upside-down causality. But some people simply will not endorse what this administration has done, and they shouldn't have to.

[maieramsden@mastodon.social]

@Stone1glo @wdlindsy I think you're stealing the agency of Stein's VOTERS. Democrats are not entitled to progressive votes. They earn them or they don't.

[doomsdayscw@kolektiva.social]

@wdlindsy I don't think every Green is thinking this, however, if Harris had taken a stand against Israel and other issues, the Greens wouldn't be so against her. I understand why they want to vote their conscience, but I understand that a Trump presidency would be awful. Even if I didn't have the RCV option, I would vote for Harris this year.

[cam@hachyderm.io]

@wdlindsy having read your thread and the article, I’m surprised you’re glossing over the fact that with the location of the rally, those voters do want to see Harris lose because she’s actively murdering their families asa member of the White House right at this moment in Lebanon and Palestine.

Stein reflecting that is just normal politicking. You can say you’re disgusted but try imagining that Harris is committing to the massacre of YOUR family LOUDLY and JOYFULLY.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@cam If you think that by electing Donald Trump via your support for Jill Stein, you'll create a better situation for the Palestinians, then you should cast your vote and own the consequences when Trump's back in power. And no one is glossing over the fact that they're deploying this strategy and seeking to harvest Palestinian-American votes. As to my own position about the situation in Israel and Gaza, I've posted extensively about that here and have made clear my position on those matters.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@DoomsdaysCW I suspect many of us know that the Israel-Gaza issue is the ostensible reason the Greens are attacking Harris. I'm not persuaded that they wouldn't be attacking her even if that issue weren't front and center. I've seen for months now on social media feeds of people leaning in the direction of the Greens attacking Harris for being a centrist Democrat, for ignoring (as they see it) climate change, and on and on. This is about a politics of purism that is designed to tear things up.

[phaedral@mastodon.social]

@wdlindsy @DoomsdaysCW Remember when notorious berniecrat Dammit-Janet said a Trump win would bring the revolution? Freekin' morons.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@MaierAmsden I understand people drawing hard lines about issues they consider non-negotiable. "Pro-life" people have done that for years. I also think that in the context of a two-party system in which undermining or attacking one party inevitably helps the other, that kind of puristic politics serves badly the moral concerns of those who claim to be voting on grounds of moral purism. Whether there should be a different system is beside the point here.
/1

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@MaierAmsden I personally am in favor of some system beyond a two-party system. But a two-party system is what we have, like it or not. Tearing away at the Democrats while claiming to serve progressive ends is obviously nonsensical. It's dishonest. Politics is not a matter of choosing the best of all worlds. It's a matter of choosing between imperfect options and imperfect people. If Greens want to choose Trump by voting Green, they need to be honest about the fact that they're doing that.
/2

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@mloxton You're saying that about the Greens, right? I'm not totally sure I'm reading you aright.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@msbellows Yes.