politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Can you imagine if you campaigned against trump half as much as you campaign against progressive parties?
Jill Stein is a lot of things, but "progressive" ain't one of 'em. I'd love for Harris and the Dems to be more progressive, but they're going to need a better example than Stein.
https://www.jillstein2024.com/platform
Same request for you, which parts of the platform arent progressive
Ah yes, the platform of a candidate that does not have a chance at win ing, even by mistake, and can say whatever the fuck they want because of it.
Lets elect them so we can see who's right
That's a long list of progressive ideas. Too bad she can't possibly win in a two party system. I like the assumption that if she did get the office all that would immediately take effect. That's not how it works. Unfortunate for many of the ideas she lists, but also as a protective measure in case people like Trump get in and sweep what's left away to put in place a dictatorship. Like he's promised to do.
So putting away the policy comparisons and party names, and just looking at the math. Can a third party win in an established two party system in a FPTP election? The answer is a simple no. I'd love to see a ranking system in place to allow diversity of opinions have a chance in elections, and there's a bill right now to do that nationally, by Democrats because they're the ones that would do well in such a system. Let's fix the real problem and stop this decades-long third party dream to do the impossible.
And until there's a grassroots movement and support at the local levels, the Green Party is always going to look like and be the spoiler party, no matter how many nice ideas they have bullet points for.
Here's a question for you: How many of those Green policies are similar to Harris policies? I saw a few, I just wonder if you realize that you could get some of that stuff done easily with Democrats in all three seats of power. Which we have a chance to do.
Well if youre just gonna flat out lie
No one is going to read that, let alone answer you. See, this is a Stein hate thread, you've already lost the game.
(I know nothing about her.)
And while your first point is sound, the buried lede, (the part in parenthesis) is the real point, isn't it?
dems itt maybe knew her name before the party started smearing her. wonder how many will ever bother to look her up?
Can you imagine if Jill Stein was progressive? Yeah me neither..
https://www.jillstein2024.com/platform
Can you point what parts of the platform arent progressive?
Man the anti-stein crowd cant tolerate the most basic of questions
OP pointed a big red arrow at Stein's stated beliefs, there's your answer. Anything to say except, "Nuh uh!"?
I dont believe there is a single stated belief from Stein in the entire article
What bills has Stein passed?
Ah its that darn work experience required but how do you get work experience paradox.
By this logic we should never elect new politicians.
Has she held any positions at all? What does she do between running for president?
22 years of campaigning, and never once held any office whatsoever. Truly a great leader!
How do you expect someone to get elected if being elected is a prerequisite.
She continues political work. Talks, events, promoting other green party people. Stuff that doesnt make headlines.
So, nothing. Got it.
The democratic senate nominee for my state also has never held a political office.
Does that person only run for president and nothing else?
You just try to grab onto any difference you can see, starting with a conclusion that she's bad and then working backwards trying to find a reason. She runs for president because that office is responsible for the bulk of issues she wants to address. To start, theyre called the green party for a reason, the president appoints the head of the EPA and Department of Energy. And foremost the president is head of the military, and she's had a long outspoken position against the US's absurd military. The expenses, the wars, the invasions, the abuse of human rights domestically. Throw in the departments of labor and homeland security and its a huge converging point for progressive goals.
Goals are useless if you're not actually trying to achieve them.
She's trying to achieve goals in the face of you, and democrats, and the democrats massive legal team, and the democrats massive amounts of money and wealthy members, all doing everything they can to fight against those goals.
Tired of this impossible standard that candidates that you are actively opposing succeeding need to succeed for your approval.
22 years and hasn't done anything.
Actually, I'm incorrect. She became useful to Putin. So, she's got that going for her.
And youll make sure they never do anything. Never cut back on military spending, or stop climate change acceleration, or raise minimum wage, or stop genocides, or empower unions, or fix healthcare
Don't you have another Jill Stein post to clown in?
Same can be said about those promoting Jill Stein and other spoiler parties.
I imagine that most of it is going there, at least if one were to follow the money trail. It's just that the Green party is so much smaller, so a few bits of afterthought saber rattling hurt them a lot worse than a much larger spend (by the Dems) against the GOP hurts the GOP.
Or if for policies popular with a wide swath of America? Naw. I believe what MSNBC and all the real adults in the room agree with:
Our party should ebrace moderate Republicans! Smear the greens! Keep ~~leftist~~ spoiler parties off the ballot! Dismiss Dem party dissidents as traitors and foreign assets! This is what real leftists do. All leftists to the left of me are actually to the right.
I would know, i'm a Democrat, and I'm as left as they come
Oh, yeah, me too, I am a very far left lefty. That's why when it comes to elections I ignore groups like Uncommitted and instead vote how the furthest right group wants lefties to vote.
Haha! I see and appreciate what you're doing here. Well-crafted.
A party that might get 1% of the vote represents a “wide swath of America” more than a party that gets >50% ?
Let’s talk about the issue at hand. Do you think pulling support for Israel to appease 1-5% of the voter base would have no consequences when it comes to voters who want to support Israel?
Your argument, so you go first: Which widely popular policy is the Democratic Party not endorsing, and can you cite a measurement of how popular it is?
Ahhhhhhhh so your claim isnt real.
You're not gonna back your claims up... And i don't care to speak with somebody who won't.
Your argument is spurious. without a link. I already told you before, there is a minimum QoC i expect in my discussions, a minimum you refuse to reach.
So flip me off (pretty much what you've been up to this whole time) and get gone