Democrats aren't attacking Jill Stein because they think she is taking votes from Kamala Harris. No one I know who's voting Green would consider a vote for Harris at this point. They're attacking Jill Stein because they don't want voters to know that there can be a worker-centered party to the left of the Democrats that supports popular policies like Medicare for All, a $25 wage and federally guaranteed housing.

There are 80+ million eligible voters who don't vote at all because they don't see the point. Democrats are okay with this, in fact, they don't want any candidate to their left to appeal to those voters with popular policies.

The fact that the Green Party exists shows that the Democrats aren't pushing the most progressive policies. Jill Stein's candidacy shows that it's possible to support reproductive justice AND be against funding and arming a genocide. That we can end homelessness if we stopped funding endless wars around the globe.

Democrats don't want anyone to the left of them to exist because it's the only way they can convince Americans that Dem policies are "the best that we can do". To Dems, anything else is just "asking for a pony".

Don't fall for it. Despite Dem's desire to have you think otherwise, things don't have to be this way.

Another world is possible.

  • Rom [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Once the Republican party is thoroughly stomped into the ground and made completely unviable can we focus on a truly liberal third party

    The Democrats will never allow that to happen. Nancy Pelosi Says U.S. 'Needs a Strong Republican Party'

    but honestly we probably have a better chance of slowly moving the Dems left than we do a third party taking over

    Liberals said that shit in 2016 and again in 2020 and the Democrats have since only moved to the right. They've outflanked the GOP on the border and are actively supporting a genocide.

    • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ok, what is your strategy then? I don't disagree that some prominent Democrats aren't as liberal as we like, but Nancy Pelosi isn't a government official anymore. As the old guard gets replaced, the hope is that we bring in more and more liberal people over time. Voting third party is ineffective no matter how you look at it, at least not in the Presidential election. If third parties want any hope of taking over they need to start small and win local and state positions rather than just trying to start at the top. Another comment here said the Green Party has 200 elected positions of like 50000+. That's nowhere near enough influence on the ground to win a Presidential race.

      Voting third party - waste your vote. Your vote means nothing. There is no chance that a third party wins a Presidential election and to think otherwise is naive. If you're a young voter, voting for the first time, you may think this is a good option. I sure did, and if you vote third party I can't stop you, but in a few election cycles I hope you'll come to the same realization that it's a waste of time. Hopefully your wasted vote doesn't let something as evil as Trump's Presidency happen.

      Vote Republican - we definitely, actively, vocally, and happily continue to endorse Israel and genocide and probably stop supporting Ukraine at all and possibly even support Russia directly. We know what side Trump is on. Voting Trump doesn't help the genocide situation at all. Things in the US will go to shit, that's almost a given. Fascism gets worse on the global stage.

      Vote Democrat - we know that there is at least conflict among Dems regarding Israel and Palestine. We know that they strongly support Ukraine and oppose Russia. They probably won't stop supplying Israel, but at least there's a chance that something will change. There's also still the subject of control of the Senate, House, and Supreme Court - the President alone can't do everything. It's not a perfect situation, but few things in life are. We do know that things in the US will be much better under Dems.

      Unfortunately, it's going to be very very difficult to break the two-party paradigm without ranked choice voting here in the US. Do you see a serious path forward for the US that doesn't involve supporting Israel? I don't. At least not right now. Be serious. The US has too many interests (militarily and economically) in Israel. I'm open to suggestions as long as they are realistic.

      • Nakoichi [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        We are not fucking liberals and the problem is that they are and that historically liberals have allowed fascists to take power. You Ave no idea what you are talking about.

      • Rom [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Ok, what is your strategy then?

        Nothing less than the revolutionary overthrow of the corrupt, genocidal US state.

        As the old guard gets replaced, the hope is that we bring in more and more liberal people over time.

        Remind me of the last time that worked. football-lucy

        Voting third party - waste your vote. Your vote means nothing.

        Some democracy you've got there, huh?

        There is no chance that a third party wins a Presidential election and to think otherwise is naive.

        I'm under no illusions that my third party candidate is going to win. The point is to send a message to the Democrats that their unwavering support for genocide is going to cost them votes, maybe even the election. And if it does they have no one but their own genocidal asses to blame.

        Vote Republican - we definitely, actively, vocally, and happily continue to endorse Israel and genocide

        Who's arming Israel right now? Who has vowed to continue arming Israel?

        Grow a spine and stop supporting genocide.

        • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
          ·
          2 months ago

          Nothing less than the revolutionary overthrow of the corrupt, genocidal US state.

          There's a reason I asked for a serious answer. Good luck with that.

          • Rom [he/him]
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Good luck on voting your way out of fascism. That's really working out well for you, isn't it?

            • CalcProgrammer1@lemmy.ml
              ·
              2 months ago

              Hell of a lot better than "overthrowing the US regime" would that's for damn sure, especially if Harris wins. Just remember the Jan 6th people wanted to do the same thing, if for different reasons. Look at how well that's going for them. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

              • TC_209 [he/him, comrade/them]
                ·
                2 months ago

                You are a German in 1932, casting a ballot for Hindenburg while smugly thinking "I just saved the Weimar Republic!"

              • Rom [he/him]
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Just vote even harder this time, surely that will stop the genocide [that accelerated under and is actively enabled by the very Democratic administration for which you are trying to shame people into voting].

                Just remember the Jan 6th people wanted to do the same thing, if for different reasons

                Communists and fascists are exactly the same. Look out everyone, the true Politics Understander has arrived!

              • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]
                ·
                2 months ago

                How's the US regime looking to you? Healthy?

                How's the genocidal Democratic party looking to you? Push-leftable?

                Lol idiot

          • Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml
            ·
            2 months ago

            Sooner or later the us regime is going to collapse. It's fundamental tally unsustainable and just a good few crises away from imploding. And the best part is, you're looking right at the face of pretty much every kind of crisis imaginable. We've got climate crises, disastrous weather events, fascist coups, exploding inequality, de-dollarisation, the defeat of american imperialism in west and east Asia, mass immigration and so on.

            So the violent overthrow of the American government is actually more realistic than trying to improve the Democrat party from the inside. Certainly the former will happen way before the latter.

          • REgon [they/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            We've got a very serious person over here jagoff

            Yes what's serious is definitely putting your faith in a system with two options and if you don't vote for the one then the other one wins and the system is destroyed (half the population doesn't vote, the half that does votes for the destruction option). Sometimes even if you vote for the one the other gets to win because we don't really care about votes. BTW we've been doing this song and dance about "keeping [villain of the week] out of the white house!" since the 70's. Ask yourself this: If Trump truly was a threat to democracy, why have the dems done absolutely fuck all? Why are they completely unwilling to budge on any of their far-right genocidal policies? If Trump is truly this existential threat, why has he been allowed to exist for four years? Why did they try to run Biden, a man with obvious dementia, if Trump was truly this unique evil that will tear America apart? Doesn't seem like the dems are very serious.

            What's super duper serious is going to argue with people who won't vote for genocide that they should vote for genocide. The most serious people in the room do this thing where they for some reason decide to focus on third party voters (who these serious people also say is of such an insignificant size that they do not matter at all) instead of going outside and knocking on doors talking to the more than 50% that doesn't vote
            Online arguments are totally the sign of being a Serious Person (TM)

          • frauddogg [null/void, undecided]
            ·
            2 months ago

            Shut your klansman ass up, techbro. You wanna talk about "serious answers" thinking supporting the genocide your plantation owners orchestrate is "a serious answer". Here's my serious answer, you want a serious answer: the Black nation coalesces and sacks everything from Compton to Portland on the North/South axis, then everything from Frisco to Vegas on the East/West; then when you stool-pigeon-assed crackers start getting huffy about it? We'll start drone striking and rocket-launching cracker cities til you stop talking.

            Clearly, it's absolutely within the moral fabric of Amerika, since you cosign Israel doing it to Palestine, so we'll do it to you and you don't get to fuckin complain about it. How's that for 'serious', klansman?

          • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            It's sad to see people like you who, despite considering yourself old and wise,know so little about history and the world that you've convinced yourself that apathy is the same thing as seriousness. It's cope. You're coping. Every revolution that has ever happened has "seemed" impossible until suddenly it wasn't, and there were always good little subjects like you to stand uselessly on the sidelines wailing and gnashing their teeth at the changing tides of history. Meanwhile, your very serious political ideology is doing genocide, cooking the oceans and pumping the planet full of PFAS. Very Serious, very sustainable, not childish at all to kill everyone over funko pops.

            You think you've become mature, when you've really just become housebroken.

            "The one who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the one doing it"

      • Barabas [he/him]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        As the old guard gets replaced, the hope is that we bring in more and more liberal people over time.

        We just today had the poster child of the "new guard" of the democrats coming out and talking about how great it is that nothing happens now. While we are one year into a genocide. While we are further building the wall and enforcing all the border policies that she went down to the border to have a photo op crying at.

        Do you think AOC will save anyone? She'll just go back to brunch while the world burns.

        Voting third party is ineffective no matter how you look at it, at least not in the Presidential election.

        If you can't see further than a single election cycle ahead I guess. Consistently voting for the "lesser evil" will only make the "lesser evil" more evil. If there is a voting bloc that is strong enough to apparently scupper the democrats maybe they should try to appeal to them in any way rather than court the people voting for the "greater evil"?

        • WanderingVentra@lemm.ee
          ·
          2 months ago

          Thought you were talking about Pete. He pretty clearly seems like the one the blues are grooming to take over next. He's well-spoken and probably a much safer pick for liberals than AOC.