President Biden’s poor polling numbers have raised questions about the possibility of a blowout victory by former President Trump in November, even as he grapples with his own political challenges …
am i a lib because i do believe in voting just not for shitty corporate parties? i was all in for cornel west when he announced but the bernie movement didn't show up to get hin the ballot access needed so i'm going stein. She'll be on the ballot in at least 48 states.
why do you think voting is futile in the U.S. when it has been successfully used by "populist" aka "democratic" movements in other countries? Specifically, I'm thinking Brazil or Mexico most recently. Not being combative but really just trying to learn more about why you think that's true. Definitely open to the possibility that I'm wrong about this and just want to hear more.
I hadn't heard the bad takes myself from West, but happy to be enlightened on it. He has seemed pretty morally consistent as far as I've seen, but like I said just because of ballot access I'm thinking Stein could be the strategic move to try to effect change on the electoral front.
Yes love PSL, voted PSL in 2020 but if they're not even on the ballot in 270 EC worth of states then I'm not sure I see the value in it. Open to hear the case for though.
Our goal is 270 worth of ballot access and by my understanding we are on track. But it's really not about the vote - the purpose of our presidential campaign is to bring a Marxist Leninist party with anti-imperialist politics to an audience of people who think of politics in an electoral frame. We then use that platform to grow the vanguard party and build working class militancy and radicalization. The vote is to show the capitalist class that their position is not secure and the communist politics they thought had been crushed and co-opted are returning.
I don't know what the point of voting for Jill Stein is - the Green Party is a party in the same sense as the Democrats and Republicans: just a box that shows up on your ballot every few years and otherwise doesn't exist. They are a known quantity politically who are neither insufficiently organized not radical to scare anyone but hapless MSNBC libs. There is nowhere for the Green Party to go.
is a political party in the classic sense: a membership organization, following democratic centralism, responsive to its members and acting as the dynamic instrument of their collective will on all political and economic fronts. Growth of the PSL is growth of an organization that is unabashedly communist, with excellent on the ground organization, unapologetic support for the Palestinian resistance, and a firm declaration that the number one role of America's working class is to bring down the empire from within the belly of the beast. It's the only politics that have ever really threatened capital: Marxism-Leninism.
Ill probably tic her box too but she's allowed on the ballot (and i know you know this) cuz the green party poses no threat to the caps. No positive sustained MSM coverage on a candidate erases that candidate from the public consciousness. It's quite amazing how well it works, the 2 party mindset. Theres no harm in voting for her, increased 3rd party turnout might pave the way for even stronger future showings, yeah. To say you believe in voting when it is so thoroughly corrupted in the us, and when there's no chance she'll win raises the question: what is it that you believe still works?
Tonal check, i am honestly curious not fighting with you.
Organized labour. Organize unionize and strike. That is literally the only tool the proletariat has to effect change. (Well that and violence but you can't have a revolution unless you have an organized working class)
Perhaps it's the legacy of my lib-dem upbringing but I can't help but think electoralism could be another effective front in the greater struggle. But like I've been saying I'm open to the idea that I'm wrong about that so happy to learn more if you think voting truly can't be used to take power. I guess I'm just looking at the successes in Mexico and Brazil recently and thinking: why not here?
Yes, I appreciate the good faith discussion about this. I really just want to figure out strategically the best way forward, because I have to admit after Bernie's run in 16, I thought we'd be further along by now building up something new. As far as the Green Party goes, Stein's positions on Palestine and Ukraine alone, not to mention the rest of her platform in general, I can't help but seriously consider if this is the best strategic move for the next 5 months. The platform certainly doesn't seem any worse than Bernie's. They've been chugging along, putting in the hard yards to maintain ballot access. It seems now is as good a time as any to try to use that.
When I say I believe in voting I guess I mean in the abstract, that it can be used by democractic movements to achieve tangible things, like in Mexico and Brazil. So then I'm wondering if it is possible there then why not here? If there is something unique about the US system that makes it "impossible", I just want to learn more about that and why people feel that way. I guess at the minute I am not convinced it's completely hopeless outside the existing dominant corporate parties. But if people are convinced then I am open to hear why. Really trying to come at this with an open mind.
I know there are anti-democratic structural obstacles to winning here. The Electoral College is certainly less democratic than a popular vote. As far as I understand you need just a plurality, not majority, of votes in a state to win all of that state's electoral votes in the EC. And then it's 270 to win I guess which is the majority of total available. I could be wrong especially about the first part. Still, it doesn't seem insurmountable?
The MSM problem is real, even if it continues to undermine itself in the eyes of more and more people as the contraditions become too obvious. Still, I feel like those other countries also have shameless corporate media, so I'm wondering how AMLO and Lula overcame them. I don't know how they did it I wish I did. But again, if they did it, maybe we can?
I think there's also value in forcing them to steal it from you, like Bernie did in 16 and 20. Having the undemocratic, top-down nature of the regime forced to reveal itself is useful, at least for the future. But really I'm thinking we should just try to spend the next 5 months and try to win. I know it seems impossible but Mandela said "it always seems impossible until it's done" and that's something I really believe. But if you're not going to win, I guess making them steal it from you is the next best thing.
So basically let's say a conservative estimate is that in a three way race we'd need 70 mil votes to actually win it. Bernie had 1 million volunteers, so that'd be like 70 votes turned per volunteer on average. Obviously we don't have 1 million volunteers at the minute, but I don't know it still seems possible and more importantly worth trying. Again, this is just how I see it. If I'm wrong about something, I'm open to hear people's thoughts. I feel like this is as good a place as any that I know about to be having these discussions.
Damn that ended up being a lot my bad and thanks to anyone who read it all lol.
Cornel West is a grifting joke. Pathetic and hypocritical loser. Does a lot of both sides crap about Israel-Hamas, lots of empty rhetoric that obviously will go nowhere or misses the point
Oh is that true? From what I had seen I thought he had been pretty clear in his solidarity with Palestinians, and that the root cause of the conflict is the occupation. Disagreed with Bernie and called him out for opposing BDS, even when he was stumping for him. I hadn't seen him do both sidesism myself, but if you had examples of that I'd def check it out.
am i a lib because i do believe in voting just not for shitty corporate parties? i was all in for cornel west when he announced but the bernie movement didn't show up to get hin the ballot access needed so i'm going stein. She'll be on the ballot in at least 48 states.
deleted by creator
Damn I hope he sits down and listens.
I feel like you are making a point here but I am not sure what it is?
why do you think voting is futile in the U.S. when it has been successfully used by "populist" aka "democratic" movements in other countries? Specifically, I'm thinking Brazil or Mexico most recently. Not being combative but really just trying to learn more about why you think that's true. Definitely open to the possibility that I'm wrong about this and just want to hear more.
I hadn't heard the bad takes myself from West, but happy to be enlightened on it. He has seemed pretty morally consistent as far as I've seen, but like I said just because of ballot access I'm thinking Stein could be the strategic move to try to effect change on the electoral front.
deleted by creator
It she's on the ballot in your state you should vote for de la Cruz
Yes love PSL, voted PSL in 2020 but if they're not even on the ballot in 270 EC worth of states then I'm not sure I see the value in it. Open to hear the case for though.
Our goal is 270 worth of ballot access and by my understanding we are on track. But it's really not about the vote - the purpose of our presidential campaign is to bring a Marxist Leninist party with anti-imperialist politics to an audience of people who think of politics in an electoral frame. We then use that platform to grow the vanguard party and build working class militancy and radicalization. The vote is to show the capitalist class that their position is not secure and the communist politics they thought had been crushed and co-opted are returning.
I don't know what the point of voting for Jill Stein is - the Green Party is a party in the same sense as the Democrats and Republicans: just a box that shows up on your ballot every few years and otherwise doesn't exist. They are a known quantity politically who are neither insufficiently organized not radical to scare anyone but hapless MSNBC libs. There is nowhere for the Green Party to go.
Ill probably tic her box too but she's allowed on the ballot (and i know you know this) cuz the green party poses no threat to the caps. No positive sustained MSM coverage on a candidate erases that candidate from the public consciousness. It's quite amazing how well it works, the 2 party mindset. Theres no harm in voting for her, increased 3rd party turnout might pave the way for even stronger future showings, yeah. To say you believe in voting when it is so thoroughly corrupted in the us, and when there's no chance she'll win raises the question: what is it that you believe still works?
Tonal check, i am honestly curious not fighting with you.
Organized labour. Organize unionize and strike. That is literally the only tool the proletariat has to effect change. (Well that and violence but you can't have a revolution unless you have an organized working class)
....ONLY?
Perhaps it's the legacy of my lib-dem upbringing but I can't help but think electoralism could be another effective front in the greater struggle. But like I've been saying I'm open to the idea that I'm wrong about that so happy to learn more if you think voting truly can't be used to take power. I guess I'm just looking at the successes in Mexico and Brazil recently and thinking: why not here?
Yes, I appreciate the good faith discussion about this. I really just want to figure out strategically the best way forward, because I have to admit after Bernie's run in 16, I thought we'd be further along by now building up something new. As far as the Green Party goes, Stein's positions on Palestine and Ukraine alone, not to mention the rest of her platform in general, I can't help but seriously consider if this is the best strategic move for the next 5 months. The platform certainly doesn't seem any worse than Bernie's. They've been chugging along, putting in the hard yards to maintain ballot access. It seems now is as good a time as any to try to use that.
When I say I believe in voting I guess I mean in the abstract, that it can be used by democractic movements to achieve tangible things, like in Mexico and Brazil. So then I'm wondering if it is possible there then why not here? If there is something unique about the US system that makes it "impossible", I just want to learn more about that and why people feel that way. I guess at the minute I am not convinced it's completely hopeless outside the existing dominant corporate parties. But if people are convinced then I am open to hear why. Really trying to come at this with an open mind.
I know there are anti-democratic structural obstacles to winning here. The Electoral College is certainly less democratic than a popular vote. As far as I understand you need just a plurality, not majority, of votes in a state to win all of that state's electoral votes in the EC. And then it's 270 to win I guess which is the majority of total available. I could be wrong especially about the first part. Still, it doesn't seem insurmountable?
The MSM problem is real, even if it continues to undermine itself in the eyes of more and more people as the contraditions become too obvious. Still, I feel like those other countries also have shameless corporate media, so I'm wondering how AMLO and Lula overcame them. I don't know how they did it I wish I did. But again, if they did it, maybe we can?
I think there's also value in forcing them to steal it from you, like Bernie did in 16 and 20. Having the undemocratic, top-down nature of the regime forced to reveal itself is useful, at least for the future. But really I'm thinking we should just try to spend the next 5 months and try to win. I know it seems impossible but Mandela said "it always seems impossible until it's done" and that's something I really believe. But if you're not going to win, I guess making them steal it from you is the next best thing.
So basically let's say a conservative estimate is that in a three way race we'd need 70 mil votes to actually win it. Bernie had 1 million volunteers, so that'd be like 70 votes turned per volunteer on average. Obviously we don't have 1 million volunteers at the minute, but I don't know it still seems possible and more importantly worth trying. Again, this is just how I see it. If I'm wrong about something, I'm open to hear people's thoughts. I feel like this is as good a place as any that I know about to be having these discussions.
Damn that ended up being a lot my bad and thanks to anyone who read it all lol.
Cornel West is a grifting joke. Pathetic and hypocritical loser. Does a lot of both sides crap about Israel-Hamas, lots of empty rhetoric that obviously will go nowhere or misses the point
Oh is that true? From what I had seen I thought he had been pretty clear in his solidarity with Palestinians, and that the root cause of the conflict is the occupation. Disagreed with Bernie and called him out for opposing BDS, even when he was stumping for him. I hadn't seen him do both sidesism myself, but if you had examples of that I'd def check it out.
He says free Palestine right before he condemns Hamas.