Home | About | Donate

Green Jill Stein Is Fighting for Open Debates and Real Democracy


#1

Green Jill Stein Is Fighting for Open Debates and Real Democracy

John Nichols

Dr. Jill Stein has some great ideas about how to create “deep system change, moving from the greed and exploitation of corporate capitalism to a human-centered economy that puts people, planet and peace over profit.”


#2

Open Debates and Real Democracy. It's been so long that we've had it in Amerika. I forgot what it means.


#3

The last debates worth watching were when third party candidate Ross Perot ran against Bill Clinton in 1992. Unlike Clinton and Bush 41, Perot actually answered the questions. Although I never voted for Perot, if I could hop in a time machine I would vote for him in 1992.


#4

I hope Ms. Stein and the other plaintiffs are successful with their lawsuits. As Mr. Nichols points out we need more democracy and more choices and more people empowered elections, not fewer. That's about the only way of getting a New Fair Deal put in place. I hope Mr. Nichols would also take the time to write a thorough analysis on why Wisconsin, the birthplace of the formal Progressive Party, is now such a Republican stronghold. And, why it has a crooked, race-baiting, dog whistling governor using his state as a launching pad for the Presidency. Mr. Nichols could you explain how Sen.. Sanders and Ms. Stein could help restore Wisconsin to its' rightful place in 2016? Russ will certainly help. of course, but maybe the progressive people of Wisconsin need to have an internal discussion on state policy and a new marketing strategy. Selling the same old native White Cheddar is progressively turning the bounty of The Dairyland State into some pretty stinky milk bi-product.


#5

Until the primaries are over, why doesn't Jill Stein support Bernie? And ask all Greens to vote for Bernie. If Bernie wins, he promises Stein the VP slot. Then if Bernie loses to the Clinton dynasty, Bernie runs as Stein's VP. A little smart fusion would go a long way towards sanity.


#6

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#7

Because Jill Stein is running for the Green Party nomination and that's all about movement building. What you suggest means throwing in the towel and supporting the two party system. Plus Stein is a true leftist, unlike Sanders, who supports paying for the Military Industrial Complex and always has and doesn't want to end American Imperialism but just do it in the more moderate way that was the norm before George W. Bush, ie trying to get others to do the fighting when possible. Finally Sanders is a staunch supporter of Israel in its oppression of Palestinians, including the horrid war against Gaza recently.


#8

I agree with you in almost all ways. Problem is we cannot get to where you (and I) want to go from where where are now. Be realistic. Be smart. Let's outwit the powers-that-be. If we do it your way we can stand tall and then fall flat on our face.


#10

Why doesn't Bernie support Stein? If he loses the primary, he has made it quite clear that he will support whoever the Dem nominee is - so Stein will be carrying a true prog "flag" while Bernie supports, say, Hillary ... See that's the problem ...

Any one who picks party over principle ain't gettin' my vote ... Kucinich did the same thing, and adding insult to injury, he did a 180 on Ocare ....


#11

Yes we can get there .... There is no "standing tall" in supporting a Dem - if we do it your way, we'll just be bending over ....

Forget about "outwitting" TPTB - time to just throw the bums out!


#12

We need to run at all levels - Congressman Stein would be about as useful as Congressman Kucinich - could make lotsa noise, get nowhere ....

We haven't time to think small ...


#13

Well finally, an article that mentions Stein is allowed - OK, CD did its duty, now time to get back to Sanders all the time - it will be interesting to see what happens if Sanders loses the primary and Stein is in the race - what then - revert to the LOTE routine? Of course! That has been the story for decades now ....

Oh yeah - if Bernie should win the nomination - ya think he will push to allow Stein in the debates? LOL! How come he is not supporting those efforts? Does he really want folks to have more choices, or is he happy to have the duopoly in control - isn't that why he ran as a Dem? Indy, my a** ...

And i note - CD runs the article on Bernie's "message" under "news" and the one on Steins candidacy and suit under "views" ..... no "news" here folks, just "move-on" ....


#15

Icotler said the problem is that we cannot get to where we want to go from where we are now.

Well, maybe we can't get there in the next election. But I'm convinced we'll NEVER get there until we break away from the Democratic Party and the idea that the solution is electing the right person as President.

It will take time. We need to do two things. The first is the most important- we need to organzie, mobilize, and act for the issues that matter. The second is we need to build third parties so we have other voices.


#16

Matt, the purpose of a presidential run for the Greens is to gain ballot access. If we can get enough percentage points that will help us in the future to actually run candidates at all levels.


#18

I didn't say we were, i said we oughta be -

As for running locally - well they have been doing that for years as well - with no better results - the same forces that try to squash larger campaigns squash local ones as well - if your strategy is such a good one, why don't we see more Green Congressional candidates? Our failures, IMO, have more to do with organizational issues and approach than the stage we run on ...

If you note, progs are rather schizo about elections altogether - many don't think they are worth more than :"the 20 minutes" it takes to vote - they'd rather march and sit and petition to "pressure" the schmucks in office than put any real effort into replacing them - the only "movement" they don't seem interested in is one at the polls ....

You rather make that point yourself - "We are not even running for President, Jill Stein is, and has been for 3 years straight already." - Precisely - where ARE all the Green troops that ought to be supporting her - yeah, they will take the 20 minutes it takes to vote for her, and that's about it ...

A Green would be a Green at any level - we don't have time to start small and work our way up .... As for "realistic goals" - how "realistic" is that Green platform - it is grand thinking, thinking large - and our goals for office ought to match it, IMO ....


#19

I think the purpose of any run for office ought to be to win - running to win, IMO, is a different campaign than one just to get ballot access - Stein was on enough ballots in '12 to get enough EC votes to win - what's the point in getting on the ballot if nobody votes for you? If all the folks who say they want a 3rd party actually voted for that party ... So why don't they? THAT is the hurdle we have to jump - we have to openly, loudly and frequently give the lie to all that "can't win" and "spoiler" nonsense that keeps folks who say they want stuff from voting for the folks who would actually pursue it ...


#20

So, you allow legitimacy to that "spoiler" BS? The only folks who are "spoiling" our politics, our economy, our civil rights, etc. are the duopoly - IMO, it is the chicken s**t "safe state" strategies that screw us - when we back down in the face of those "spoiler" and "can't win" menes that have been so successfully planted by TPTB to keep 3rd parties in their "place" - at the bottom. We have to convince folks we CAN win - anybody with enough votes can win - Do you think Syriza and Podemos play it safe? Our own timidity is what gets us in the way - and, i maintain, it might actually be counterproductive to focus on places where Dems predominate - we concentrate on urban areas and neglect the "suburbs" and rural areas assuming they are Rep territory. You might be amazed at how many dissident Reps and Indies would respond if they were merely earnestly approached; in my neck of the woods, a Congressional Green candidate actually got a greater % of the vote in a notoriously Rep county than in a more Dem one, with not much effort ... We gotta think outside the box ...

You speak of the "compromised goals" of Nader 2000 - was the compromise just running "to give folks a choice"? - to get ballot access? I am so tired of hearing how folks say they vote 3rd party as a "conscience vote" or a "protest vote" - i vote that way because i want them to win - we need them to win, not just "get on the ballot" and until we start thinking along that line, "getting on the ballot" may be all we'll ever achieve ....


#21

Thanks. Finally, someone here thinking about strategy.

Running a presidential candidate may give Green organizers a good feeling, but all the effort (like the up to 70,000 signatures we need to gather here in PA) could be far better spent on selected "safe" US House districts where Democrats run unopposed. Now, to be sure, that has been tried a few times in my safe-Democrat urban district - but the Green candidate would still only get 15% or so - the Greens non-existent relationship with the high-turnout black USAn communities being a problem. But there must be districts where the Greens are better organized and have higher visibility - so focus should be put there. Just a couple Greens in congress would greatly increase their visibility just as they are more visible in Canada through their two seats in parliament.

It will be a long hard road and there are no shortcuts.


#25

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#26

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.