view the rest of the comments
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.
- 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.
- 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
She is correct on AOC. AOC's point about Greens needing to reach a wider audience is fair. That is also hard to do when you get no coverage and don't have a donor class of billionaires behind you. I have no issue with Greens running for Presidency, since there is no real overlap with Dem and Green voters. If Green options weren't there, you still wouldn't be getting the vote for Dems. They just wouldn't vote at all.
Oh so that's why she dines with traitors. Does she want that audience, or is she colluding?
Seems she needed to collude before getting their support.
She has been cleared of that by The Senate Intelligence Committee Investigated and exonerated Stein. It is an old talking point.
Cleared? There's pictures and you can see where she gets her funding from...
Nice propaganda
Good points!
I do think there should be a bigger effort for local efforts for third parties. But I get it fundraising and funding doesn't appear of thin air.
I live in a state that Trump is projected to win. I don't see how me voting for Harris a person I can't influence at all and Liberals won't push left and is hostile towards protesters is not considered a waste. But If I were to vote for Jill Stein that is considered a waste. When it would lead to possibly being closer to 5% for funding for the party. Liberals see groups as expendable and there is never any plans post Trump. It is just back to brunch.
I absolutely agree with you! And you’re spot on about the hypocrisy—voting for Harris in a state that’s already leaning towards Trump is seen as "responsible," but a vote for Stein is dismissed as "wasted." Like, what?! Once the election is over, the democratic party seems to just head back to their comfortable lives without following through on any real plans for lasting change.