news 2024 US Election Megathread 🇺🇸🏛️

[Communion]

39 minutes ago, Sannie said:

B...bbb...bbbut muh Jill Stein is perfect and does no wrong. How could this be?!

 

If the Greens/third party voters knew what was best for them (they don't), they'd drop this woman like we dropped Biden. 

Example #455464 that 3rd party voters aren't just mythical numbers you can move from one column to another:

 

3rd Party Voters 2020 (Neither Biden or Trump voter) - Net Approval:

 

Jill Stein	+5
Cornel West	-4
RFK Jr.	-7
Tim Walz	-11
Kamala Harris	-15
JD Vance	-34
Joe Biden	-45
Donald Trump	-57

[Relampago.]

42 minutes ago, Sannie said:

B...bbb...bbbut muh Jill Stein is perfect and does no wrong. How could this be?!

 

If the Greens/third party voters knew what was best for them (they don't), they'd drop this woman like we dropped Biden. 

I don't think any Stein supporters feel she's perfect or without faults, only that she offers better policy and ideas than Kamala does. The thing is, I think most people in this thread would 100% get behind Stein if she was either a viable candidate to win the election or the nominee for the Democratic Party. 

 

That's why it's a bit of a shame to see how the discussions in here surrounding Stein go. People say she's unqualified for not knowing how many members are in the House… but people were ready to cast their votes for Biden who probably doesn't even know the color of the White House off the top of his head. People say she's unqualified because she wouldn't explicitly define why Putin is a war criminal despite her affirming her belief that she is… yet people won't call for Kamala to say Netanyahu is a war criminal. People say her favorability numbers are a problem now… yet we were all cheering Kamala becoming the nominee when she had some of the worst favorability numbers in history for a VP, which didn't increase until she raised her national profile and name. And who's to say Stein couldn't do the same if she were able to have an interview where people aren't just working to make her look like a Russian asset or mean lady who's just bitter and not concerned about serious issues.

 

And ultimately, I think it's fine to say Stein simply isn't a viable option for winning right now and so she doesn't align with our goals, but some of these arguments are based more in a team sport mentality, rather than having conversations about where Kamala could perhaps learn a few things from Stein/Green Party, just as AOC did with the Green New Deal. 

 

But yeah, so many of the arguments against Stein are easily taken down by just looking at the two Dem candidates we've had for president this election. I don't believe y'all hate Stein as much as you might hate to admit that she's simply right about some things. It's actually quite frightening to me that the Democratic Party and media have been so unfair and undemocratic to Stein/Green Party just because she disagrees with the worst parts of the Democratic Party. We all know the perils of a two party system, but we love to spit on those who have anything besides a D besides their name.

[Lightbringer007]

 

 

[Lightbringer007]

love this dude

 

 

 

[Bears01]

4 hours ago, ClashAndBurn said:

 

This is PEAK "2016 lib" to a T lololol

[Blade]

They need to send Walz to the small rural towns in GA NC WI MI and PA

14 minutes ago, Relampago. said:

I don't think any Stein supporters feel she's perfect or without faults, only that she offers better policy and ideas than Kamala does. The thing is, I think most people in this thread would 100% get behind Stein if she was either a viable candidate to win the election or the nominee for the Democratic Party. 

 

That's why it's a bit of a shame to see how the discussions in here surrounding Stein go. People say she's unqualified for not knowing how many members are in the House… but people were ready to cast their votes for Biden who probably doesn't even know the color of the White House off the top of his head. People say she's unqualified because she wouldn't explicitly define why Putin is a war criminal despite her affirming her belief that she is… yet people won't call for Kamala to say Netanyahu is a war criminal. People say her favorability numbers are a problem now… yet we were all cheering Kamala becoming the nominee when she had some of the worst favorability numbers in history for a VP, which didn't increase until she raised her national profile and name. And who's to say Stein couldn't do the same if she were able to have an interview where people aren't just working to make her look like a Russian asset or mean lady who's just bitter and not concerned about serious issues.

 

And ultimately, I think it's fine to say Stein simply isn't a viable option for winning right now and so she doesn't align with our goals, but some of these arguments are based more in a team sport mentality, rather than having conversations about where Kamala could perhaps learn a few things from Stein/Green Party, just as AOC did with the Green New Deal. 

 

But yeah, so many of the arguments against Stein are easily taken down by just looking at the two Dem candidates we've had for president this election. I don't believe y'all hate Stein as much as you might hate to admit that she's simply right about some things. It's actually quite frightening to me that the Democratic Party and media have been so unfair and undemocratic to Stein/Green Party just because she disagrees with the worst parts of the Democratic Party. We all know the perils of a two party system, but we love to spit on those who have anything besides a D besides their name.

Oh, I'll 100% admit that I dislike Jill Stein (and any Green *presidential* candidate) even though we probably agree on a lot of major issues. The reason I dislike them is because they can't win the presidency so they serve no purpose other than being a nuisance in my humble opinion. Now I'm not gonna go full 2016 **** lib and call her a Russian operative. That's ridiculous. While I agree that all 3rd party voters simply cannot be moved in the way we simply view right and left in this country (Green votes to Dems and Libertarian votes to Republicans), I do think a not insignificant amount of low info voters end up in their bloc.

 

Do I have any anger towards the Muslim-American woman in her late 20's who is voting Green because she views Dems as too pro-Israel for her? No of course not.

 

Do I have any anger towards the first time GenZ who discovered the Green party from a TikTok who told him Kamala locks up Black men for fun? A little. And even more if there are others like them in a tight swing state that could have decided the election.

[ClashAndBurn]

3 hours ago, State of Grace. said:

She won't be giving any clear answers to any of these questions I fear  

 

Even during the debate she dodged many questions. She's lucky her opponent was that megalomaniac orange clown.

Yeah, I think we have to be realistic about the fact that Donald Trump is the only Republican who'd be in a position to lose to Kamala Harris in the same way that Hillary was the one Democrat who could've lost to him 2016. And even still it'll be a toss up. It shouldn't remotely be this close.

[Lightbringer007]

 

 

[nadiamendell]

 

Nnnnnn what is this? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Relampago.]

15 minutes ago, Blade said:

Oh, I'll 100% admit that I dislike Jill Stein (and any Green *presidential* candidate) even though we probably agree on a lot of major issues. The reason I dislike them is because they can't win the presidency so they serve no purpose other than being a nuisance in my humble opinion. Now I'm not gonna go full 2016 **** lib and call her a Russian operative. That's ridiculous. While I agree that all 3rd party voters simply cannot be moved in the way we simply view right and left in this country (Green votes to Dems and Libertarian votes to Republicans), I do think a not insignificant amount of low info voters end up in their bloc.

 

Do I have any anger towards the Muslim-American woman in her late 20's who is voting Green because she views Dems as too pro-Israel for her? No of course not.

 

Do I have any anger towards the first time GenZ who discovered the Green party from a TikTok who told him Kamala locks up Black men for fun? A little. And even more if there are others like them in a tight swing state that could have decided the election.

I have trouble with this train of thought even though it's very close to mine. The only thing that holds me back from voting Green is their inability to win a presidential election as of now. An environment created by a Harris presidency makes organizing and mobilizing far easier than a Trump one.. but then I remember how Biden handled the college campus Palestine protests and I remember that even if its "better", it's hardly pro-organizing if not for the Democratic Party.

 

I also understand where you're coming from with the Muslim voter vs. Young voter… but is this not the coalition building that people have been calling for Palestinian protestors and the Green Party to build? If the Democratic Party cannot hold onto a voter, whether they be young and uninformed or a Muslim person concerned about their value as a human in the eyes of the party, the fault lies with the party for being unable to bring these people into the fold, especially when they're willing to compromise with Republicans but haven't shown any desire to compromise with the Green Party and voters who turn to them.

 

Besides, it's unlikely that the 2nd voter you describe even exists for the most part. 3rd party voters are pretty much always more informed than the average voter and make their decisions based on research, which is why they even see the Green Party as a choice in the first place.

 

Its just a weird stance to say that you must be personally affected by an issue (in this case, Palestine) but then we're calling on Republican voters to switch sides, when they may not be affected by most of Trump's policies. Is that not what we call upon allies for when it comes to LGBTQ+ issues? Are straight white men justified for voting for Trump because they are unaffected by the Dobbs decision or mass deportations? I would think not, so I can't see why that same sentiment wouldn't extend to the voters who are not personally affected by genocide, but feel that is something they cannot align with.

 

In the end, I don't really encourage people to vote 3rd party specifically, but instead encourage them to research and vote for the party that best matches their beliefs and values, because the more people educate themselves and the more we encourage them to become informed and engaged, the better results will come. But the immediate dismissal of 3rd party candidates simply because they're not viable winners doesn't aid anyone in pushing either party in the right direction and basically just leaves us in the same Groundhog's Day situation every 4 years. 

Edited yesterday at 03:43 AM by Relampago.

[Sannie]

31 minutes ago, Relampago. said:

I don't think any Stein supporters feel she's perfect or without faults, only that she offers better policy and ideas than Kamala does. The thing is, I think most people in this thread would 100% get behind Stein if she was either a viable candidate to win the election or the nominee for the Democratic Party. 

 

That's why it's a bit of a shame to see how the discussions in here surrounding Stein go. People say she's unqualified for not knowing how many members are in the House… but people were ready to cast their votes for Biden who probably doesn't even know the color of the White House off the top of his head. People say she's unqualified because she wouldn't explicitly define why Putin is a war criminal despite her affirming her belief that she is… yet people won't call for Kamala to say Netanyahu is a war criminal. People say her favorability numbers are a problem now… yet we were all cheering Kamala becoming the nominee when she had some of the worst favorability numbers in history for a VP, which didn't increase until she raised her national profile and name. And who's to say Stein couldn't do the same if she were able to have an interview where people aren't just working to make her look like a Russian asset or mean lady who's just bitter and not concerned about serious issues.

 

And ultimately, I think it's fine to say Stein simply isn't a viable option for winning right now and so she doesn't align with our goals, but some of these arguments are based more in a team sport mentality, rather than having conversations about where Kamala could perhaps learn a few things from Stein/Green Party, just as AOC did with the Green New Deal. 

 

But yeah, so many of the arguments against Stein are easily taken down by just looking at the two Dem candidates we've had for president this election. I don't believe y'all hate Stein as much as you might hate to admit that she's simply right about some things. It's actually quite frightening to me that the Democratic Party and media have been so unfair and undemocratic to Stein/Green Party just because she disagrees with the worst parts of the Democratic Party. We all know the perils of a two party system, but we love to spit on those who have anything besides a D besides their name.

Sorry, sis. I'm not buying it. I have no problem with the Green Party or logical third-party voters (not selfish, white leftists in deep blue states) who just want representation outside the current duopoly, my problem is with Stein herself. She serves as nothing more than a spoiler for the Dems and her actions this year so far has proven it with things like liking social media posts about how Trump winning is a better option and exploiting the Palestinian plight by pathetically trying to shoehorn a Palestinian into her campaign solely for attention (and then refusing one of those Palestinian candidates' request to step down if Kamala calls for a ceasefire). If your goal isn't to take down the objectively "worse evil" in the race, you yourself are just as evil. She will hop on any popular movement to get attention, donations, and votes, and then just disappear when the election is over. She's been running for President how many years now and has helped her party zero. And she does nothing to quell her followers' destructive ideology that the entire country can burn down if they don't get what they want. She's not a team player, she thinks about herself, and if she had it her way, we would all die under the hands of Trump just so she can say "I told you so".

 

Maybe I'll feel different in a few election cycles when/if we're not dealing with life or death for many of us, but for right now she's reckless and murderous with her aspirations.

[Relampago.]

20 minutes ago, Sannie said:

Sorry, sis. I'm not buying it. I have no problem with the Green Party or logical third-party voters (not selfish, white leftists in deep blue states) who just want representation outside the current duopoly, my problem is with Stein herself. She serves as nothing more than a spoiler for the Dems and her actions this year so far has proven it with things like liking social media posts about how Trump winning is a better option and exploiting the Palestinian plight by pathetically trying to shoehorn a Palestinian into her campaign solely for attention (and then refusing one of those Palestinian candidates' request to step down if Kamala calls for a ceasefire). If your goal isn't to take down the objectively "worse evil" in the race, you yourself are just as evil. She will hop on any popular movement to get attention, donations, and votes, and then just disappear when the election is over. She's been running for President how many years now and has helped her party zero. And she does nothing to quell her followers' destructive ideology that the entire country can burn down if they don't get what they want. She's not a team player, she thinks about herself, and if she had it her way, we would all die under the hands of Trump just so she can say "I told you so".

 

Maybe I'll feel different in a few election cycles when/if we're not dealing with life or death for many of us, but for right now she's reckless and murderous with her aspirations.

See, it's things like this that we just need to have some honesty in order to even get anywhere. 

 

She did not like anything of the sort, that comment was referring to voting Green, and the Trump mention within that comment was besides the point. Stein hates both the Republican and Democratic Party's, she does not favor one above the other. And maybe you may see that as a problem, but on key issues Dems are "better" in that they will help kill Palestinians a bit more slowly and feel really bad while doing it, but ultimately the result is not really helpful for them at all. It's also a bit ironic that Dems are entitled to Stein's support as the "lesser evil" when the Democratic Party has been caught sabotaging the Green Party and progressives within their own party (see: 2020 meetings to oust Bernie/AOC). Why extend support to a party that doesn't align with your beliefs and actively works against you and people most similar to you?

 

Stein is running a campaign, and both Republicans and Democrats are opponents. Stein has no cards to play to bring Dems to her side besides taking voters that would possibly vote Democratic anyways (that wasn't really true in 2016/2020 though). Dems could open their hearts and minds and at least show some compassion for what Greens are standing for and what their voters would like to see, but instead they shift to the right. Maybe that's a winning strategy, maybe it's just a moot point to have Adam Kinzinger vouch for dems, who knows. But what we do know is that they make no attempts to try and bring Greens into the fold at all, despite being the big tent party. 

 

And not to harp on Harris more, but having problems with Stein being an opportunist and touting certain issues as her main issue for attention or good press is quite ironic considering who we'll vote for in November. Harris has… quite literally done this several times. Running as a faux-progressive who allegedly supported M4A in 2020 until it wasn't a viable path to victory anymore because Bernie and Liz were so obviously more genuine in their belief in M4A and actually had a plan to enact it (something Harris struggles with to this day).

 

It's like, alright, I can usually see where girls like you and @Blade are coming from because I too have similar issues with Stein, but where I get lost is the lack of application of those same criticisms to the woman who is actually looking like she will be president, or at least much closer to it than Stein will ever be. It makes the entire basis of critiquing Stein moot since it doesn't really seem that we care about getting these party leaders to act on smart/good policy, but rather just to point fingers in case Harris doesn't win. And I don't see the point of that when Harris has many of the same flaws that people feel Stein has, except without the more progressive policy and a D by her name. 

 

I'll be voting for Harris and will encourage others to do the same, but ultimately these critiques levied against Stein really are a waste of time when they should be aimed at Harris since she is the one we are allegedly trying to push to be better.

Edited yesterday at 04:08 AM by Relampago.

[Communion]

30 minutes ago, Sannie said:

If your goal isn't to take down the objectively "worse evil" in the race, you yourself are just as evil.

 

30 minutes ago, Sannie said:

if we're not dealing with life or death for many of us

It surely must come down to an inherent, supremacist view of Arabs as non-human and deserving to be raped and killed when saying these things without a hint of irony while defending the people quite literally personally responsible for this, no?

You are not a victim to the inconvenience of others' slaughter. You are a privileged benefactor to genocide.

 

Like.. god. Vote for Harris if you want, but show some self-awareness. Genuinely disturbing to see therapy-speak and the lexicon of social justice be deployed by those in the richest nation in the world complaining about the realities of genocide putting a dampening on their enthusiasm to vote.

 

You are not facing an election of existential proportions if your preferred outcome literally results in the continued attempt to wipe another people literally out of existence. Your taunts in how the suffering of the Palestinian people is somehow unfairly inconveniencing you literally represents the destructive force of American exceptionalism. 

 

It's saccharine. So overtly put-on and forced in its attempt to seem earnest. "THINK OF THE OPPRESSED. THINK OF THE STRUGGLING. OUR BLEEDING HEARTS HAVE A RIGHT TO PROUDLY VOTE FOR KAMALA TO SAVE AMERICA!!!".

 

Demanding Palestinians must be tortured and killed so you can have cheaper groceries is literally privilege. 

Edited yesterday at 04:16 AM by Communion

[Lightbringer007]

 

 

[Communion]

39 minutes ago, Relampago. said:

See, it's things like this that we just need to have some honesty in order to even get anywhere. 

 

She did not like anything of the sort, that comment was referring to voting Green, and the Trump mention within that comment was besides the point. Stein hates both the Republican and Democratic Party's, she does not favor one above the other. And maybe you may see that as a problem, but on key issues Dems are "better" in that they will help kill Palestinians a bit more slowly and feel really bad while doing it, but ultimately the result is not really helpful for them at all. It's also a bit ironic that Dems are entitled to Stein's support as the "lesser evil" when the Democratic Party has been caught sabotaging the Green Party and progressives within their own party (see: 2020 meetings to oust Bernie/AOC). Why extend support to a party that doesn't align with your beliefs and actively works against you and people most similar to you?

 

Stein is running a campaign, and both Republicans and Democrats are opponents. Stein has no cards to play to bring Dems to her side besides taking voters that would possibly vote Democratic anyways (that wasn't really true in 2016/2020 though). Dems could open their hearts and minds and at least show some compassion for what Greens are standing for and what their voters would like to see, but instead they shift to the right. Maybe that's a winning strategy, maybe it's just a moot point to have Adam Kinzinger vouch for dems, who knows. But what we do know is that they make no attempts to try and bring Greens into the fold at all, despite being the big tent party. 

 

And not to harp on Harris more, but having problems with Stein being an opportunist and touting certain issues as her main issue for attention or good press is quite ironic considering who we'll vote for in November. Harris has… quite literally done this several times. Running as a faux-progressive who allegedly supported M4A in 2020 until it wasn't a viable path to victory anymore because Bernie and Liz were so obviously more genuine in their belief in M4A and actually had a plan to enact it (something Harris struggles with to this day).

 

It's like, alright, I can usually see where girls like you and @Blade are coming from because I too have similar issues with Stein, but where I get lost is the lack of application of those same criticisms to the woman who is actually looking like she will be president, or at least much closer to it than Stein will ever be. It makes the entire basis of critiquing Stein moot since it doesn't really seem that we care about getting these party leaders to act on smart/good policy, but rather just to point fingers in case Harris doesn't win. And I don't see the point of that when Harris has many of the same flaws that people feel Stein has, except without the more progressive policy and a D by her name. 

 

I'll be voting for Harris and will encourage others to do the same, but ultimately these critiques levied against Stein really are a waste of time when they should be aimed at Harris since she is the one we are allegedly trying to push to be better.

The main issue is just, as well, when the attempted rhetoric is just not believable.

 

Politicians like Kamala aren't the only ones who can appear inauthentic. Even if the normie voter is not ideological, it's very easy to spot the difference between when a person has incongruent political leanings versus partisans inauthentically attempting to gaslight and weaponize rhetoric they see used to try & neutralize criticisms.

 

It's insulting to invoke the issue of genocide yet clearly not understand what genocide is all to defend those acting as active collaborators in genocide.

It's insulting to involve issues of things like anti-blackness yet appear to not know what states have large black populations and running this interference in support of policies that harm black Americans.

 

It'd be whatever if not for the attempted co-opting clearly representing something far more ideologically sinister by right-wing liberals appropriating progressivism.

 

Like none of this conversation would even be happening if Kamala wasn't running away from progressivism and towards a right-wing candidacy, but because she is, there's not even an attempt to make persuasive policy arguments. People writing heartfelt prose and waxing poetic over how not voting for the pro-cop, pro-ICE, pro-genocide candidate is an affront to American's most vulnerable minorities and those in the deepest fringes of society like kjnkjnk just post the healthcare policy / some progressive policy that'll be convincing or shut up, tying one's self in rhetorical knots. 

Edited yesterday at 04:45 AM by Communion

[Communion]

33 minutes ago, Lightbringer007 said:

 

 

Progressivism is popular! 

 

 

[Chemist]

Interesting. Maybe young men are not hopeless yet

 

[Mordecai]

1 hour ago, nadiamendell said:

 

Nnnnnn what is this? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The lip synching

Singing in Spanish to a bunch of people who probably hate the language and those associated with it 

The hint of an ass crack when he lifts up his arms 

[Blade]

 

[Blankspace2010]

6 hours ago, Gaia said:

Not everyone voting for Kamala is a far left liberal

If you think meeting basic human rights of refugees under UN convention, not committing genocide and keeping your policy promises you made on the election trail are far left policies - then you're MAGA I'm afraid. 

[Blankspace2010]

Can we stop with the Stein essay arguments back and forth when she's polling at 0% nearly everywhere. 
 

Here's the objective tea; 

 

Americans - it's not a new concept that most democracies have more than 2 choices. You're the only country that condemn it people voting 3rd party - ITS WEIRD.

 

Jill Stein fans - vote for her - it's great - but she's deeply flawed and has showcased that many times. It's obvious she's a Putin apologist, it's obvious she runs for clout rather than actually wanting to make any real change, and she's misinformed about the running of many factions of government and is being schooled on it. So please stop thinking supporting her is some kind of high morale ground. Shes a trash candidate just like Trump and Harris. 
 

Can we conclude on that please and focus on what's actually happening and not these hypotheticals and arguments of who is better - dems or greens. They're both ****! 

[Harriser]

I'd take Stein essays any day over edgy anti-politics nihilist takes about how every political party and candidate is trash. What's even the point of following politics if you think everyone is a disaster and there's no hope. Are we just here to moan about our collective doom then?

 

[FameFatale]

 

[FameFatale]

Good, hardworking people 

 

 

[Virgos Groove]

6 hours ago, Communion said:

Like none of this conversation would even be happening if Kamala wasn't running away from progressivism and towards a right-wing candidacy, but because she is, there's not even an attempt to make persuasive policy arguments.

This needs to be shouted from the rooftops.

 

Can members here even name the 2020 Green candidate? I can, but that's only because I'm a nerd and because I remember your posts about him. Nobody cared about the Green 2020 candidacy because, in between other reasons (like getting Trump tf outta there), Biden ran on some progressive policies.

 

Third parties aren't popular in America. They don't have high budgets, don't get a lot of coverage and you get mocked if you vote for them. If, despite that, Stein (who has good policies but lacks media training) is capable of reaching non-negligible polling with certain demographics, surely that's an indictment of the Dems and how right-wing their policies have become.

 

There's a reason no one here was even talking about Stein a month ago when we still had hope Kamala would run as a progressive and would be tougher on Israel than Biden. Dems only have themselves to blame for Stein's rise.
 

Spoiler

Also, slightly off-topic, but I just wanna point out I remember Stein's 2016 run pretty well and how her proposal of eliminating student debt was absolutely laughed at by Dems. "Pfft, you can't just eliminate student debt! That's not how government works, kooky old lady!"

 

...And then Biden ran on that exact policy. I'm not really sure what point I'm getting at, but this has been at the back of my mind for a while now (since I was rewatching some old John Oliver shows) and just feel like pointing it out.