276
Wouldn't a serious politician not being paid by the Russians actually, like, fucking know that?!
Especially as she’s actually run for President twice before! It’s like coming into the same job interview multiple times and giving worse answers each time.
load more comments
(37 replies)
Is not problem. She received excellent education from People’s University of Harvard, near the warm-water port city of Boston in Massachusetts oblast. Do not worry about these silly details.
/s because internet
If Jill Stein and The Green Party were serious, they would advocate for progressive policies from within the Democratic party, push for ranked choice voting in each state, and run for local elections.
There is a ton of work that needs to be done before a third party is a politically viable strategy, there is no way Jill Stein isn't aware of that.
Make sure our local Lemmy Green Party Propagandist sees this.
He blocked me, so doubt he’ll see it :P
Sinema+Gabbard vibes.
Stay far away.
"The one thing AOC has done that you haven’t is win some elections.”
Goddamn.
Any Lemmy Green Party shills trying to convince people to vote for Stein over Harris want to weigh in?
Anyone?
The most notorious of them blocked me, so they’re not even seeing this. :)
Ha, you know what... I think same here.
load more comments
(1 replies)
She appears incapable of recognizing reality, and we don’t need another candidate like that. By staying so obstinate her votes will likely go to Trump. If she doesn’t understand that political reality, she shouldn’t be anywhere near a general election.
A normal person would learn from their multiple failures, but not Stein.
Giving her the benefit of the doubt that she isn't a Russian agent, if she doesn't understand how the Electoral College works, then it makes sense she doesn't see herself as a spoiler and a waste of a vote. Clearly in the past 20ish years, she must have come across FiveThirtyEight and, so even a guess of 538 would be somewhat reasonable. 600 just shows lack of reasoning skills and/or knowledge of how the electoral college is made up.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Look she's a full of shit opportunist. A distraction for people who think they're too moral to vote for corporate dems.
I never read much about her but I’m really shocked at this level of ignorance.
The more you look for it the more you recognize that a lot of the people in charge of politics (and business for that matter) aren't smart or knowledgeable or even master strategists, they're just the sort of person who skirt through life through some combination of charisma and utter willingness to say whatever it takes to please the people who can advance their career.
Like you expect the dumb shit they say to be an act by a keen mind who understands politics deeply and is manipulating the public into advancing their interests, but they're often just fucking idiots with no principles who whenever they've been stymied due to their idiocy just let it slide off their back and move on to a new path with utmost confidence.
Jill Stein isn't going to slink away into the darkness after a public demonstration of political ignorance for a lady whose whole public persona is supposed to be about politics, she's just going to forget about it and keep the scam going. Not knowing the basics of government isn't going to stop her from saying she knows how to fix the problems with government. Not being on the ballot in states is unimportant for whether it sounds good to her in the moment to say they can win in all 50 states. They're all just unimportant "facts" and you can just keep talking and most people will forget or not know that you're an idiot.
Jill Stein may be an idiot politician with laughably unrealistic positions and a totally unworkable take on foreign policy (even dining with Putin) but she’s also a physician who practiced internal medicine for decades.
She’s not an idiot in general. I think she’s just unbelievably naive about people and their motivations.
Ben Carson was a (by all accounts excellent) brain surgeon.
I'm sorry, but that man is stupid.
Brains are weird, man. I work in a STEM field, but I had 3 or 4 semesters of University before declaring my major, and therefore I was able to get a much more well-rounded education than my colleagues, and I will tell you: It shows. Big time.
Lots of people who are great at what they do, and when it comes to their one very specific, silo'd, expertise, they're brilliant.
But in terms of general intelligence, rationality, ability to think critically in a novel situation, etc? Not bright.
Then there's the old (true) joke: What do you call someone who graduated at the bottom of their class in medical school? Doctor.
I have worked for a university for over 25 years so I have seen in all. My first wife, who also worked for the same university, worked in a computer lab in the psych dept and they would have the most domain specific intelligent people with no common sense whatsoever. Her and a colleague used to joke about the PhD students “I bet she runs with scissors”.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Did Ben Carson attempt to do surgery on himself? Otherwise I can’t explain at all how dumb he was. Wow! Thanks for the example.
load more comments
(1 replies)
A specialist in one field isn't necessarily adept in another, and particularly coming from STEM to humanities seems a particularly treacherous transition because so much about humans is based on premises that cold, logical STEM principles just aren't aware of. That doesn't mean we STEMs are stupid, we just don't know just how much there is that we don't know and would need to know before we can understand, let alone predict human behaviour.
I know I've found myself grossly misjudging human reactions in some case because humans are complex and there are so mamy premises and factors affecting individual behaviour and so many more for collective behaviour that they're effectively non-deterministic and even predicting the probabilities requires such familiarity with the people or demographics, respectively.
All that is to say: Yes, I think so too. She's well-educated, but not above tripping over the same, common stone that many smart people have stumbled on.
load more comments
(2 replies)
If they were serious, they would be building Party infrastructure down ballot. Taking over state houses and local government positions. Doing an every four Year presidential run doesn’t help in the slightest. The most progressive messaging that has actually made some semblance of an impact is Bernie.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Jill Stein on the Breakfast Club? Sounds like a must watch. I'm surprised she hasn't made more appearances like this.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's actually a harder question than it seems... If you're asking about the number of seats, that's easy. 435 in the House, 100 in the Senate.
But if you ask about the PEOPLE, suddenly a lot harder due to deaths, resignations, and vacancies.
I legit couldn't tell you the number of people right now without looking it up and I'd like to think I'm pretty plugged in.
I think you’re overthinking it. This was the actual reported exchange:
Later in the interview, Rye attempted to demonstrate the Green Party’s failure to build power from a grassroots level. She asked Stein how many members of the House of Representatives there were.
“How many total are there? What is it, 600, some number?” Stein said, before Rye set the record straight.
I don't think anyone would fault you for saying there are 435 members of the house, especially because that number is also wrong (there are six additional non-voting members).
If she had answered more correctly than the number of voting seats I wouldn't have a problem with it...
Blyat!
I would have had to guess too, but I'm not in politics where that's something I should know. What I do know and would have answered is "not the right proportion to the population".
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
276 points (94.8% liked)
politics
19248 readers
2674 users here now
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
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS