One year later, we're still here. Thank you, Seattle, for your resilience and readership throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Contributions from our readers are a crucial lifeline for The Stranger as we write our new future. We're calling up legislators, breaking down what's going on at Seattle City Hall, and covering the region's enduring arts scenes thanks to assistance from readers like you. If The Stranger is an essential part of your life, please make a one-time or recurring contribution today to ensure we're here to serve you tomorrow.
We're so grateful for your support.
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
Sign up for the latest news and to win free tickets to events
Buy tickets to events around Seattle
Comprehensive calendar of Seattle events
The easiest way to find Seattle's best events
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Comments
Seriously though, Greens fucking suck. Win some elections and stop advocating health policy that will lead to children and the immunocompromised to suffer needlessly.
Even Rick fucking Perry stands heads and shoulders above the Green Party. That's pathetic.
For the time being, if you want to effect change, you must work within one of the two existing parties. That means supporting nominees, even when they are far less than ideal. It means voting in primaries-- and not just presidential ones. You can also become a delegate or run for office yourself. Supporting a third-party candidate (especially for the big offices) does next to nothing. You only convince the leadership in the party nearest your own ideology that you do not support them and are probably not worth their time.
Given that many federal agencies are subject to regulatory capture--meaning that they're actually servicing the businesses they're supposedly regulating (energy and finance especially), this doesn't come across as a over-the-top suggestion. She did not state that she is against vaccines.
Thank you for playing Slog.
Nothing more than bullshit you hear from evolution and climate change deniers. Sorry to hear that you're backing an anti-science candidate who is just "keeping an open mind" about an already solved issue whose reversal would lead to thousands of deaths and tens to hundreds of thousands of others becoming seriously ill, losing the ability to walk or have children, but that's your problem, not mine.
By the way, before you of Jill start screaming about "regulatory capture", you need to provide some evidence that counters the billions of doses administered all over the fucking world showing efficacy and safety. Since I know you're not going to be able to actually do that, why don't you just shut the fuck up about things you obviously don't understand? Then check your vaccination records, get your shots updated and maybe you won't kill someone with cancer.
Sound good? Awesome.
And officeholders: .00019 ratio means .019%.
Still miniscule. Get to work locally, Greens.
We're supposed to be believers in democracy, are we not? Surely the Greens have as much rights as, say, David Duke - who is running for office, quoting the Orange Dumpster!
While we're all entitled to our beliefs, you have quite a lot of influence and power to sway people; with power comes responsibility, don't you agree?
Fortunately for the Green Party, diluting something by a factor of 100 makes it stronger, right?
How's the Iraq War looking?
Also, I fast forwarded through that segment of the podcast because I figured you'd throw up a "I was bitankual" mea culpa (bullshit), and then go around insulting anybody who dared challenge the two party system.
It's a lot of boring old hat arguments that we hear time and again from those gullible enough to have supported the Iraq War (and then had to apologize for it). You're operating out of fear and you fucking know it.
I'm with her.
No wonder The Misanthrope relates so strongly.
Personally I think the effective road is the one where we take back the Democratic Party.
You are talking about a guy who started "It gets better" project, that was probably one of the best tools against a serious problem, gay teen suicides and teenage bullying against Gay Teens. I would show some respect, no matter if you are trolling or trying to give some constructive criticism..
Besides, Mr. Waving Your Hands in Impotent Fury, you can learn from Dan about writing.
You may not agree with Mr. Savage, but at least stop acting like you are recreating a role in "Idiocracy"
@6: what Solk512 said.
@16: I like how you managed to combine argumentum ad hominem, strawman-beating, and whataboutism into one big vacuous dismissal of an argument that you don't like. Nice dodge.
They are going to keep calling her a calculating, triangulating bitch unless someone like you stands up and asks them what's calculating and triangulating (or not "really progressive") about fighting for universal pre-k for 30 years?
(It's not as sexy as free college because it benefits fewer pasty white green party shits who bitch about student debt but live in a state with no income tax!)
What's calculating or cynical or not really progressive about supporting PrEP? Who do they think was beating down Hillary's door to get a pro-PrEP position on her website? What evil under handed game is she playing with that one?
If your answer is that you want to elect that person to office, that can be fine so long as it's plausible that the person will be elected, and Jill Stein is not a plausible candidate. Your mileage may vary on local elections, of course.
If your answer is that you want to stick it to the party you would otherwise vote for, had you not had ideological purist grievances, then you are not accomplishing much at all, unless you think that allowing people to suffer under the greater of two evils can satisfy some craving.
If your answer is that you want to send a message to the leadership of the party you would otherwise prefer, then you will fail outright. The leadership of large parties ignores the fringes that slip off when they have to balance the demands of large and diverse constituencies. You won't matter, except as a nuisance.
;-)
So you might as well say a vote for Stein is a vote for Clinton. But that wouldn't be true either. It's a vote against military aid to an apartheid state. It's a vote against allowing conflict minerals to fuel horrific conditions in the Congo. It's a vote against human rights injustices in Saudia Arabia. It's a vote against black sites. It's a vote against the President claiming and using an ability to kill anyone regardless of citizenship, regardless of whether they are on a battlefield or not, with no oversight or due process.
You seem pretty convinced Trump is SO much worse than Clinton. Good for you. I wish I had your blinders. And if Dr. Stein, respected medical doctor, WAS somehow impossibly an anti-vaxxer? How could it possibly matter compared to the institutionalized murder, rape and injustice fueled and enacted by our Presidents of both parties for far too long? I'd happily vote for an anti-vaxxer who was honestly against such evils. Wouldn't you?
This refrain from the Greens about the 2 party system being 'broken' is so unintentionally hilarious. They are going to fix the broken 'duopoly' by pushing an absolutely unbending fringe left agenda? How is that supposed to work exactly?
@34: Funny, then they should fucking put that in place instead of these shitty failures they've been running.
What a waste of money. I see nothing about IRV put on the ballot anywhere from the Greens. Their words mean nothing when they have no action, just impotent grandstanding (and anti-science platforms.)
But without doing anything locally, which should be their goals.
In the short term, we can't have what parliamentary systems have because alternative parties only appeal to fringe hardliners. That's partly because of culture, partly because alternative parties don't seem interested in building themselves up into a viable alternative because doing so will mean making compromises along the line. The idea is repellent to hard liners.
In the long term, maybe something will happen to make it work. But I wouldn't hold my breath. The only time a third party was successfully formed in America, it primarily rose from the ashes of the major party that crashed and burned when the coalition holding it together broke up. Americans on the whole seem comfortable with the two party system.
Stein is also an advocate of the repulsive Swedish model of sex work, BTW.
Yes it is. The Presidential Election is not a non binding referendum. It the core of our Constitution and how we govern this nation. It counts, we elect our leader. We don't elect leaders who get .9% of the vote. I am not going to get a bike riding, vegan animal loving President, who wants to ban Costco, double the tax on gasoline, get rid of all firearms, created community organic gardens, and promote hemp clothing.. no matter if I dream of that or not. There is no mulligan or do over vote. We have to elect a President that can at least identify with, no matter if we have some problems with the candidate.
A vote for Stein just makes Donald Trump reach closer to the 270 electoral votes finish line. If anyone who went through the 2000 election, knows that what Ralph Nader accomplished. He accomplished getting George W. Bush the Presidency, even though Al Gore got 500k more votes.. It was not only Florida that was close in 2000, but it was New Hampshire as well. Nader went out of his way to try to hurt Gore in the campaign.
I have my issues with Hillary Rodham Clinton, but I am an adult enough to know what is at stake if she is not elected President of the United States. If you have any Latino/Latina, LGBT friends, Non Grifter friends, you will also vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton as the 45th President of the United States.
I am not that interested in Ivanka Trump selling the same dress that she wore at the inaugural ball, as she is doing now with the dress she wore at the Convention on Macy's Department Store. Voting for a nutball like Gary Johnson or less of a nutball like Dr. Jill Stein just makes a characters from court of Pope Alexander VI running the US, a family of grifters. Your choice.. I don't need a repeat of the 2000 election.. Hillary is the only sane adult in the room,and the choice is between Hillary Rodham Clinton and Donald J. Trump.
The Green Party's minor successes to date have been isolated instances, because there's no real "party" of which to speak. It's just a name, it's not an organization (at least not at the state and local level). When county and state Democratic parties are functional (and they aren't always, for sure), they do much more than just recruiting candidates to run for local races -- they organize phone banks and canvasses; they train volunteers, candidates, and campaign staff; they actively recruit, manage and engage volunteers and supporters; they provide services to candidates (the most important of which is often access to a voter file with robust data and the technology to take advantage of it); they manage an office to serve as a hub of activity; they fundraise to support all of these activities (and it's much, much harder to fundraise at the local level for party infrastructure vs. for candidates -- it's like with nonprofits, everybody wants to fund the programs but no one wants to pay the electricity bill).
It's possible to build that kind of operation without paid staff at the state/local level, in isolated instances. But, it would be difficult to rely on all-volunteer operations to actually build a party from the ground up in a systemic and organized (and durable) way. If the Greens truly want to build a viable third party in the way that Dan describes, they probably need a benefactor billionaire, who might be interested in investing $100 million to make it work. That investment would go to staff to build the infrastructure (some of it would go to contributions to candidates, although I think that's trickier for a variety of reasons). Bare minimum, to build a truly grassroots operation, you'd want an organizer in every metro area with a population >200k that's likely to be attractive to potential Green party demographics (maybe 150 or so), a management structure to support that (20 regional directors), national level operations (policy director, communications, fundraising, etc.), money for offices & other costs, etc. So, that's something like $15-20 million a year.
One of the reasons you need staff is that many people really like to talk about politics (especially national level politics), but few people like to actually do the work associated with electing candidates and even fewer like to do the work associated with managing an active local political party. You eventually need someone whose job it is to manage volunteers, raise money, deal with all the logistics of keeping the lights on. And, honestly, it's also really difficult to get qualified candidates willing to actually run for many local offices -- they're not as sexy as state/national offices, they're often unpaid, and it can involve a huge amount of work to win them. The Democratic Party has an operation that's willing to find politically-minded people and cajole, motivate, and/or excite them into actually doing the work (running, volunteering, donating) -- it's a constant battle, but we have staff (and committed super-volunteers) to help us get there. The Green Party might have politically-minded people who are willing to do the work, but they don't seem to have an organization to make it happen. And so it appears like they are all talk and no work.
@18 If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
@22 *high fives*
@32 Dr. Jill Stein is a woman who ignores the mountains of evidence for the efficacy and safety of vaccinations in favor of appropriating the language and methods of anti-vaxxers to cast doubt on one of the greatest medical inventions in human history. She also supports homoeopathy and other similarly bullshit scams.
Perhaps it's time for her to hand that degree back.
@34 [citation required] Why haven't we seen an initiative for this here in Washington State? If some shithead from Mukilteo can get initiatives on the ballot here year after year, why can't a whole political party?
I have to admit that the organization is not great with our party (GPUSA). I also think that Trump is an extinction level event for Western Democracy. It is the shift to a purely corporate, fascist state (consider Ivanka Trump's speech that was the "best" last night - it was all business jargon) where conspiracy nuts will rise to the mainstream - albeit that has more to do with the Internet than anything.
But repeating the same crap that progressivism outside of the mainstream is a product of white privilege (a riff on criticisms of the hippies in the 60's), particularly when the antipathy of the DNC toward its own progressive candidate has been revealed in the Wasserman Schultz emails, is deeply irresponsible. It is reminiscent of the Scottish Independence referendum in the UK, where the non-representation of the Scottish in UK politics (in their view) was paternalistically dismissed in London. If it is so obvious that the DNC wants the same things as the Greens and that it is ridiculous for us to vote otherwise (the view uniformly expressed to me person-to-person when I say I'm voting as a Green), then maybe it can be pointed out more clearly in the DNC platform and BACKED UP.
Progressive challenges force the party to the Left. When the DNC refuses to prosecute white collar crime (see the Matt Taibbi article on Chuck Schumer and the lack of Wall Street prosecutions), no serious agenda to end the war on drugs beyond changing sentences (rather than decriminalization), continues to align with human rights abusers around the globe for the sake of stabilizing the price of oil (apparently, only Iran is the only Middle Eastern country with human rights abusers), and receives millions in corporate money from energy and other financial interests like PayDay lenders (Wasserman Schultz), people will have a problem with it.
It would be a mistake for the DNC not to view this election cycle as a major wakeup call, in the same manner it wants the Green Party to "wake up."
Republicans are not right about much, but they are right about one thing and that's that Democrats are fucking assholes to people who disagree with them. "But I'd like to see a breakdown of Green Party membership by race." Really? You want a list of the races of party members? Did that just fucking happen? How about a list of who is a Communist or a homosexual, too? That bring back any memories? Let's drive that point home, maybe the non whites can wear some insignia, I don't know, like a star maybe, so we can be sure they are really of the race they say they are. Shame on that shit, shame.
Yes, that's literally how running for national office works.
You can throw tantrums about fairness all you want, but the entitlement without groundwork is still infantile.
This is why your preferred party is a failure, and while I supported Bernie, why some of his fans are fucking terrible.
The Progressive Party emerged 120 years ago as part of the 19th century Republican coalition was peeling off. They got some people elected, ran some folks for president and eventually folded into the Democratic party because they wanted to actually get something done. If the Greens were to actually start seeing some success, they'd end up doing the same thing.
But their relentless failure gives them the luxury of being able to live without compromising their principles. Good for them, I guess.
Stick to sex advice Dan, your politics are shite.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/why-…
I'm just not treating him with kid gloves because I respect him and thinks he deserves to hear it point blank.
The meat of your argument still relies on the premise of lesser evilism, the idea that everyone must submit to Hillary for fear of Trump. Your rant was just another iteration of this over used argument w/accusations of privilege and pasty whiteness added for maximum insult.
As a gay latino talking to a pasty white man, let's dial it back to issues that actually matter to racial minorities. Under Obama, a democrat you may have heard of, the prison population and # of undocumented deportations have broken all deplorable records previously held by republican administrations. Thanks largely to the 92 Crime Bill signed by Clinton, our for-profit prisons are bursting at the seams.
What's most ironic about your blanket accusations of privilege is that you don't know what it's like to have a family member shipped away before you even have a chance to say good bye. Your child does not have a 1 in 4 chance of incarceration for the mere color of his skin.
These issues will obviously suffer under a Trump presidency, but demanding that we people of color kneel to a Clinton dynasty that has already worsened our condition is the epitome of privilege.
We know where Jill Stein polls and we support her all the same because she has spent her entire life at the picket line fighting for our causes tooth and nail. Minus Bernie, she's the only candidate providing acceptable solutions, not least of which is a jobs program inspired by FDR's new deal that would employ millions. Those are the kind of structural reforms a neoliberal like Hillary will never deliver. Even a broken family of first generation americans can take the time to learn the nuances of Citizens United, Glass-Steagall, Dodd Frank, and the need for meaningful campaign finance reform.
Corporate money floods our political system. Across the board--prog taxation, tuition free college, single payer, climate change, our bloated military industrial complex--we understand the reforms most crucial to americans will only be made possible when you take money out of politics. This was the cornerstone of Bernie's campaign for a reason. The 5 billion dollars MSM is earning this election cycle from political ads alone affecting the way they frame the political discussion.
As we speak, wikileaks is in the middle of a huge +9,000 email leak proving the DNC colluded w/mainstream media to smear bernie's campaign, push completely unfounded narratives, and shame progressives to fall in line, much like you've been doing. I suggest you put your instinctual need for rebuttal on pause, look up the twitter account @wikileaks, and take a good hard look at the party you're really defending.
The "anti-vaxxer" thing seems a bit off too. Here's a link to her remarks (quoted by a hostile source I might add). She seems to be bringing up the point about regulatory capture, which is a valid one.
Again, both of these issues point to her being a really bad politician (in the sense of being able to get a clear and coherent point across). "Sexist shitbag" and "anti-vaxxer" seems rather over-the-top.
If you're going to accuse someone of lying, it's probably best if you get your own facts straight first. The last thing we need is another Donald Trump.
Well said Dan, all of it. You are a brave man and I salute you.
After hearing bits of The Great Lunatic's speech, how can any US voter not see the utter danger your country and by implication the world is in.
The fault is your's, Mr. Savage. You use this forum to shit on the people who most want change in our society. Of course, now that you've got marriage and weed, there's not much you personally need anymore, is there?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duverger…
Locally, Greens have worked well in at-large elected bodies where it isn't a first-past-the-post system (like some city councils, school boards, etc.), where coalition politics can work better. But nationally, I think within our current system, it would make more sense to operate within one of the existing two parties, like the Progressive Caucus operates within the Democratic Party and the Tea Party operates within the Republican Party rather than trying to create a separate party.
And if he gets in, and you know, hell rains down.. this will often be a question to see if someone if friend or foe.
Did you vote green in '16. The yes people, they will be the foe.
An MD who does not simply outright laugh at homeopathy is pretty appalling. She actually seems like a thoroughly intelligent person who knows full well that a high percentage of Green party supporters are anti-science, conspiracy-theorizing loons, and so she is bending over backwards to not alienate them.
Greens have a lot of work to do, why not, "Greens: be better"? I think the answer is simple: Dan Savage is desperate. He likely recognizes (at least unconsciously) that a party training death squads to go after environmentalists, funding "rebels" who make behading a 14yo a publicity stunt, helping to starve some 14 million Yemeni and keep the Bahrain monarchy in place, had to be dragged to supporting gay rights, and supports maintaining the low-caste status of blacks through anti-science drug and incarceration policies, amongst other things, really does not care about his rights at all so he has to suck up at every opportunity, and be vicious despite no expertise.
He is a good vehicle for this sort of stuff because his career as an advicist is full of blunders that he appologises for simply, and faces no consequences.
@27: So, you joined up just to bitch about how you don't want to hear Dan Savage's political opinions?
Well, buh-bye, I guess.
@47: Oh, well if people are worried about "corporate science", well then THAT makes casting baseless suspicion on routine lifesaving vaccinations totally okay!
It's not skepticism. It's contrarianism. Learn the difference.
@56: Yes, and Ben Carson went to Yale and Ron Paul went to Duke Med. Having an education doesn't make one not an anti-science nutcase. Did you miss the part where she defended homeopathy by claiming that pharmaceutical research is less trustworthy if it's conducted by people connected to the pharmaceutical industry, and therefore terms lik "medically proven" are meaningless?
The past 6 years have pretty much shown that divided government means that not much will happen. So maybe if any of the greens could get elected to the house they might actually matter. But until then the focus should probably be where the actual governing happens, state and local offices. gotta learn to walk before you can run
@60 "Minus Bernie, she's the only candidate providing acceptable solutions,"
Once again, Is Jill Stein going to implement those acceptable solutions with .9% of the popular vote?
We have a Federal System of Government, all third parties from Free Soil to the Progressive Party merge with one of the two mainstream parties. We have factions in the two mainstream parties. Dr. Jill Stein rather be a gadfly than pushed those acceptable solutions.
If the US had a Westminster style of Government, the Greens in the US would thrive as much as the NDP thrives in Canada. However a Westminster form of government gives absolute power to a party with the majority of parliamentary seats, even the party gets around 35-40% of the vote.. It is a dictatorship of a party for around five years..
I am very well aware of the problems with the Dems, but they are not going to cut medicaid, food stamps, keep mandatory minimums, re install DADT, try to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges. They will help put on SCOTUS Justices that will over turn the Citizens United decision, make reproductive health, a health issue, rather than in the schematics of religious belief..
There is give and take, and the candidate that will help with the "acceptable solutions" and has a strong chance of winning the election, is Hillary Rodham Clinton. Voting for any other candidate in this election just helps Donald Trump. If Latino, and don't want to be profile because of your ethnicity or speaking EspaΓ±ol, than vote for Hillary. Dr. Jill Stein is not going to move the needle, just try to get media attention so she can try for 1.2% of the popular vote rather than .9% of the vote..
But yes, as long as the Greens are in a state of arrested development, they have not earned any place at the adult table. That will be earned when they have become an effective political party.
"Looking at the number of Greens actually elected and claiming that it's the same as the number of Green candidates running is a little misleading. Running for president is a pretty effective way to bring national attention to your party that no one's ever heard of, thanks to the biased reporting of mainstream media. The hate seems a little uncalled for. "
The problem is that we went through this already, in 2000. Regardless of whether you think they contributed to Bush's election or not, one thing that can't be denied is that the Greens did not get any attention for it - not the kind they said they wanted, anyway. Democrats didn't decide to nurture the progressive bloc or pursue progressive causes, progressives didn't flock to join the Greens, and they failed in any way to make an impact upon the debates in Congress or the discussions in the media.
No matter what happens in November, the Greens still won't be any more viable after the election than they are now, or ever have been. They'll either be a footnote in history as contributing to Trump's election (just like the Progressive Party in 1912, the Reform Party in 1992, and the Greens in 2000) or forgotten until some future point where they will have either gotten their shit together or gotten popular enough to impact another election in just this fashion.
Or maybe you're objecting to "dirty party-line whore" which, we all know is not totally true; Dan pays money to the DNC and doesn't want to see his donations go to waste. But, he'll do anything to push his agenda, no matter how questionable that agenda is. Do you have a better term for that?
Of course, we know exactly how respectful you are of people who don't agree with you, don't we dear? Bless your heart, your concern has been noted!
Cheers!
If you think the two person system is good, and working for you, then you should hang in there. But if you don't, and believe third and fourth parties would help, when do you imaging this would miraculously happen? Are you leaving that for your kids to accomplish? Stop being afraid. It has to start somewhere. It has to start sometime! Sing with me!
(B) You've completely moved the goalpost; in your original comment, you said the Greens need to run candidates for other offices besides President. Then, when we show you that we do, and have actually won elected office, you say that doesn't count because it's a tiny percentage of the elected offices around the country. Can't have it both ways, Dan.
(B.2) Filing deadlines for most elected offices (where there won't be primaries) are not for at least a couple weeks (my filing deadline for OCC Board of Trustees is Tuesday). So the fact that we only list 100-and-whatever in the database right now is meaningless.
(C) Finally, you simply double down on the "don't run Presidential candidates until you've won something lower" argument, COMPLETELY ignoring the really important part of the response: Presidential campaigns *help* us gain at the lower levels by earning us state ballot line, fundraising, more volunteers, more registered voters, and more candidates to run for those very same offices you want us to focus on. When we don't run aggressive, national Presidential campaigns, we *lose* ballot status, we raise *less* money, we recruit fewer* volunteers and candidates, and we *lose* registration. Dan, you clearly don't know how third parties work, so please don't tell us what to do. Don't vote Green if you don't want to, but after that, kindly shut up.
Anyway,I think that Dan was Overly Vitriol,as he can sometimes be,even when he's right,BUT agree totally that even legitimate 3rd Parties can steal votes and lead to the election of the Greater of two Evils,as famously happened whenMr. Unsafe at Any Speed ran against W and Kerry. Very Hapy that Bernie Sanders hasn't pulled that Shit.
(I've tried to run against Republican congressmembers in districts where no Democrat has bothered to file, and in 2014 I actually won the statewide Democratic primary for Congress in Wyoming because no one else bothered to run. And even though I didn't spend a dime and I don't even live in Wyoming, I got 23% of the vote compared to 24% for the previous two Democratic candidates and I managed to win Teton County, the Jackson Hole area, when the native-born, money-spending Democratic candidates for governor and U.S. senator lost it. Maybe being openly gay helped?)
Anyway, as a sometime Green Party member, I can't disagree with anything you said here. A vote for Jill Stein is a vote for Donald Trump. I guess if you live in a state that will go safely Democratic or safely Republican like Vermont or Wyoming, Texas or California, your vote won't matter -- but if Trump is elected, you will never be able to say that you voted for the only woman who could have beaten him. How many progressives today are proud to say that they voted for Ralph Nader instead of Al Gore? Two. And both of them are freaking assholes.
I don't read everything Greens/Stein put out, but I do follow them and I cannot think of one instance where vaccines came up, except from people wanting to smear. People still think that death panels are real because of absurd readings, and that is all you are getting from these folks so desperate to discredit they accuse Greens of acting like the people they say you should vote for.
Here in Australia, you can vote for the Greens, the Sex Party, or whatever tiny fringe party you like the best, and your vote isn't wasted. That's because if your candidate doesn't get past 50%, your vote goes to your second choice β and third, and maybe fourth, until someone does get past 50%. Minor parties actually get a shot, third-party candidate get elected, and the major parties have to take notice if a small party does especially well.
If you'd like to see Greens, Socialists, or anyone else have a chance in the electoral process, then have a look into this. I think it's called Instant Runoff Voting in the USA.
Funnel your concerns with the green party can vote or not help anyway u can... fighting for all not just the few SUPPORT the global cry and hope for change a reality......
....w w w. j i l l 2 0 1 6. c o m join for peace of mind for your love ones forever.... now! not later the truly alternative plan to check...join...hiring common sense and honest people and share the wisdom...
π βππ―π«β€ππ―πΊπΈπ«
Dr. Jill Stein check her Facebook page check out mine..for peace with peace in peace!
The only doer working for and by the people and the planet...for your and all peace of mind in all concerns all of them....because a true real leader unites and uplifts not divides and oppress!
Trumpy's hill's trick....
You repeat perpetual ignorance instead of real research....Wikipedia is not facts fox news or alike are NOT FACTS...
THE GREENS CORE VALUES ARE WHAT MATTERS TO ALL BENEFITS AND PROTECTS JUSTICE AND TRANSPARENCY FOR ALL NOT THE FEW....
obama and romney have united to block 3rd parties from the American people....because Dr. Jill Stein won the 1st and LAST online instant LIVE POLL....THE AMERICAN CHOICE BEING BLOCKED....OPEN THE DEBATES NOW!
Thr DUOPOLY is the real cause and effect of these MASSIVE run for your lives exodus because of PRIMITIVE OPPRESSIVE toxics for profits WARS....
THE VACCINES ARE PUSHED WITHOUT TRUE RESEARCH BY CORPORATIONS PUSHED NONSENSE TESTS...FDA DO NOT CONFIRM THE FINDINGS JUST ALLOWS BIG MONEY NO QUESTIONS ASK PASS....
SO SHE ENCOURAGE MORE RESEARCH IN FAVOR OF TRUE NOT INTIMIDATED SCIENCE FOR THE SAFETY OF THE WORLD....FOR WHAT'S JUST FOR TRANSPARENCY FOR WHAT WORKED WHAT WILL AND WHAT SHOULD USING HISTORY'S FACTS AND SUCCESSES OF OTHER NATIONS TO CREATE A PEACEFUL SUSTAINABLE TOMORROW!
First, he stated that maybe in 35 years he would vote Green or whatever he said, but he fails to see that is exactly the kind of thinking that the two party stranglehold has been using to keep third parties down.
Secondly,Hillary supporters will try to convince you to vote for her like the Kerry supporters did in 2004 and that didn't work. The real data shows that the "spoiler myth" is just that. People who vote their conscience as opposed to the lesser of two evils HAVE A CONSCIENCE. Why can't Savage see this?
Now get back to lubricants and pegging, that is your forte. Clearly you know very little about politics except how to stir the pot so that your twitter feed trends, or whatever. I like you Dan, but you should stay out of politics, and I will stay out of penis piercing advice.
if trump becomes the next president, blame yourselves democrats for lacking the courage to nominate a person who could have made a difference in favor of one who is the status quo personified. don't blame sanders, the republicans, stein or anyone else. you chose her now live with the consequences.
I'd rather my vote go towards something that I actually believe in, such as helping to build a legit third party alternative to this cynical Republicrat duopoly. This corrupt electoral system only maintains its power, so long as we continue to slavishly provide it with our consent.
Voting is a fart in the wind. Let people vote how they want, jeez. All this threatening just leads to non-participation. I'd rather have Greens/Berners show up and vote down-ballot Left than stay home on the couch. But that's nuance, and this is the internet. *ducks the punches*