Home | About | Donate

Under Green Party Banner, Jill Stein Officially Sets Sights on 2016


#1

Under Green Party Banner, Jill Stein Officially Sets Sights on 2016

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

Vowing to combat the "converging crises" of racism, militarism, climate change, and "extreme materialism," Dr. Jill Stein on Tuesday announced this week that she is running for president of the United States as a Green Party candidate.

In a campaign kick-off speech at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday, Stein laid out the major planks of her platform, excerpted below:


#3

I'm curious why she didn't mention the Green Shadow Cabinet:

http://greenshadowcabinet.us/

Maybe all candidates should have to declare their cabinet choices before the election as well.


#4

Don't expect any major changes from the Democrats and Republicans. Just the other day Congress rubber stamped TPP. The corporations only had to bribe Congress with 200 million. And no I'm so tired of this endless war. I'll be voting Green again this time around.


#5

Jill Stein sound like a very good candidate. There are other good third party candidates. The third parties I don't like are the Reform & Constitution Parties. The Reform Party was good with Jesse Ventura.


#6

Bernie/Jill 2016! ?


#7

Bernie, please take this lady as your VP!


#8

I would back Jill Stein in a minute if she ran with Bernie. Otherwise, she is taking votes away from him.


#9

In other words, you're voting Republican this time around.


#11

Any candidate declaring him or her self a contender for the Democratic Party nomination who has not been pre-selected for that role by the Party bosses (Bernie, for example) is not going to be competing with a Green Party candidate in the general election. Voting for Jill will therefore not take one vote away from Bernie.


#12

I really think people need to stop supporting this corrupt one party war system. Otherwise things will never change. And maybe the pendulum might have to swing to the right before it can go back further to the left.


#13

natureboy,

Stein is not taking votes away from Sanders in the Democratic primary, unless you assume that H.C. will win the primary, absent a huge number of voters switching to the Ds. As attractive a candidate as Bernie Sanders is, I will not change my registration back to the "lesser" (?) evil party. Perhaps someone else will emerge within the GP, and I do wish to have a voice in selecting the Green candidate.

The major value of the Sanders/Clinton contest is the amusement one can derive from considering HRC's pre-primary rhetoric against everything she will say after she scurries back into the DLC's right-wing nest.

I have best wishes for Bernie, and I would love to see him win the nomination; but the Democratic Party has betrayed its members so many times, it owes a burden of restitution it may never be able to pay.

Mike


#16

Yes! Jill Stein has no competition for my vote. How long will it take the Bernie crowd to notice his devout support for the F-35 DoD boondoggle? That is billions over budget, doesn't fly, cannot shoot for three more years, and there is no end in sight to costs or missing intelligence all along the way to even make one fly. And Bernie loves it with all his heart, and will not take a penny from it no matter how much it costs, no matter how long.

But the Ds who love feeling like lefties love him. Ugh.

No, Jill will not attract those votes. They are not courageous enough to vote for her.


#18

That sounds like having to die to get to heaven.

.


#19

Yes, to Bernie and Jill.


#20

I was a registered Green but had to re-register Democrat to vote for Bernie in the primary.

I voted Green for Nader, but now I vote strategically. I want to win this thing for progressives, not make a statement for politicians to ignore or "vote my conscience" to make me feel self-righteous.

I still vote for Greens, Progressive Democrats or liberals every chance I get, but always to win.


#21

Ms. Stein called for a 50% cut in military expenditure. I would of liked to hear her say 35-40% in cuts for the security state, including the military expenditures mentioned. That would free some $400 Billion a year. When the gov't spends $1 Billion about 40K jobs are created. Any way you cut it, even subtracting a 1.2-1.4 million job loss from the military cuts, somewhere around 12-14 million new jobs could be created. Which would drive A6 down to 6.5%, maybe slightly less. Sounds like Bernie and Jill should be reading Sen. George McGovern's old position papers from 1972. Ya know, the one's where his policy team called for a Full Employment Act and A6 to be around 5%, for all who wanted and could labor. As THE target we, as the people in a representative democracy, should always aim for. Of course, he lost to Richard Nixon who gave away, with help of course, 20 million jobs to the rest of the world. And, the rest is history, as they say. " Everybody's gone away Since they're moving to LA There ain't a soul I know around Everybody's leavin' town Some caught a freight some caught a plane Find the sunshine leave the rain They say this town'll waste your mind Must be right cause it wasted mine Some got to win, some got to lose Good time Charlie's got the blues " Danny O'Keefe Ah yes, 1972. The year real American patriots picked a real American for President. s/


#22

Nice to see someone running as an alternative to the fraternal evil twins who'll get their parties respective nominations.

It's not even the lesser of two evils anymore.

It's just the evil mouthing platitudes you like versus the evil mouthing platitudes you don't like.

I already ordered my Bernie 2016 bumper sticker but I'll be shocked if he actually gets the nomination.

So there's a good chance I'll be voting for Jill - unless Nader runs again.


#23

Let's hope Ms. Stein rejiggers her pitch to at least get us to 5% unemployment, under A6, or she's running as a 1970's Democratic liberal, like Ted Kennedy, George McGovern and Mo Udall. Nothing wrong with that from Jill, but we were a hell of a lot bolder, then, than now. To create a progressive economic revival requires that you sound revolutionary. And, it's really just old school revolutionary Economics 101 for Progressives. But, I'll take anyone, man or woman, that sounds like a true American statesman, minister, war hero and peacemaker. You know, a guy who got 40% of the vote and who's platform and planks were along the same lines as Bernie's and Jill's; just more " radical ".


#25

Ms. Stein, no pacifist here, would spend about $284 Billion a fiscal year on The DoD, alone. And, she said nothing about the budgets of the NSA, CIA, FBI, Homeland Security, etc. As for Sen. Sanders, he's said that a 15% DoD cut was, " doable ". Which is about $84 Billion and, unless Bernie is ready to " get the monkeys off our back " is not trying hard enough here on the Alphabets, either. My point is that until we create a buyer's market for the actual laborers, instead of sellers market for labor needed, we can't put enough pressure on the PTB to recreate a vibrant middle class. Hillary is selling " fear of loss " economics and Bernie and Jill must come up with a " hope for gain " economics. And, that means cutting into the bone of the MIC, PIC, the Tax Code and the Big Medicine Boys. Willie Sutton robbed banks because that's where the money was. Bernie and Jill need to walk the walk here, methinks.


#26

Why not Jill/Bernie, if he fails to unseat Clinton as Democratic nominee?