The candidacy of Jill Stein makes a mockery of our democratic system

[CajunBlazer]

I guess anyone, even the grossly unqualified, can run for President of the United States.

Jill Stein proves that point. The biggest organization she has ever run is her medical practice and she probable hired a office manager to handle that job. She has run for Governor of the State of Massachusetts (twice), the House of Representatives, Secretary of the Commonwealth, and now President of the United States (for the second time). In each of her previous races she was of course defeated by HUGE margins.

The only political post Stein has ever held is one of 21 elected Representatives to the Town Meeting in her home town of Lexington, Massachusetts which has a total of 31K residents. There also 10 at large Representatives to the Town Meeting including the 5 Selectmen who actually run the town of Lexington along with a Town Manager. Town Meetings in Lexington are held on average twice a year and the 31 Representatives deal mainly with allocating the town budget and dealing with zoning issues. Stein was first elected a Representative in 2005 when she received at total of 539 votes, 20.6% of the total. she was re-elected in 2008, finishing second of 13 vying for eight seats

So the Green Party's candidate for President's only political experience has been running for offices she had absolutely no chance of winning and holding a relatively unimportant political position in a small town. She has no experience in management or in state or national office, yet she seeks to become the most important chief executive in the entire world. If, by some miracle of miracle, Jill Stein were to be elected to be President of the United States, she would be in shock her entire term. To say that she is totally unqualified for the office is a whopper of an understatement.

Those who vote for her cannot in good conscious claim that they are voting for the best candidate. They need to admit to themselves that theirs is a cope out protest vote. They might as well vote for Mickey Mouse, or Minnie if they want to vote for a female.

[dlwickham]

1. at least Gary Johnson was a governor

[CajunBlazer]

2. Which makes him infinitely more qualified

... but in his case that's not saying much.

[dlwickham]

4. I served in my college's student senate

I'm more qualified than Dr. Jill

[Ken Burch]

15. What was your position on "school spirit"?

n/t.

[yeoman6987]

27. The requirements are

Born in u.s. Be 35 years old. That's it. A ton of people are qualified to be president.

[CajunBlazer]

53. No, millions of people meet the constitutional requirements to be President

Jill Stein is unqualified to be President. That is my personal opinion and I think that it would be the opinion of any rational person.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

152. I think I would make an excellent president.

[yeoman6987]

153. I think so too

I'd vote for you!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

162. Awesone!... you can be my running mate yeoman! hahaha

[Ken Burch]

3. I'm pretty sure you only posted this to try to get people to defend Stein

so you can get them tombstoned. Not a cool thing to do. And not worth doing.

The best way to hold Stein's vote down(as I think HRC has realized)is to embrace the best of what her campaign would call for-not to insult the woman and try to bait people into defending her.

You're better than this.

[villager]

5. "baiting" seems to be the main enjoyment for some posters, still, rather than discussion...

...let alone any semblance of unity.

[840high]

6. .that^

[CajunBlazer]

7. I don't think anyone DU is that stupid; why would you assume they are?

Evidently you and the two DU members that replied to your post above are intelligent enough to fall for such a ploy. Why would you assume that other would? I certainly don't.

Jill Stein, like Donald Trump is running against the Democratic nominee, so she is fair game.

I was stating my opinion and trying to dissuade anyone who might be consider voting for her. I was frankly appalled that anyone would consider voting for Stein if they know her record, and then go on to state they are "following their conscious". How could anyone in good conscious vote for a totally unqualified candidate unless they are wittingly casting a protest vote and never in million years expect her to win.

You shouldn't assume everyone has the worst motives.

[AgingAmerican]

11. Given what you have posted in the past, this is par for the course

The primaries are loooong over. Resist the urge.

[CajunBlazer]

17. You are entitled to your opinion

But it is just that, an opinion like millions of others. I am entitled to my opinion as well and I have stated it. I think that Jill Stein is totally unqualified to be President because she has no experience. I think that Donald Trump is totally unqualified to be President because of his temperament. And I think both of these are totally sound opinions and I would try to dissuade any person reading DU from voting for either of these candidates. That is perfectly in sinc with the purpose of DU.

[Ken Burch]

23. How about dissuading them by making a positive case for OUR nominee?

And by pointing up all the progressive things in OUR platform?

Trash-talking Stein on a personal level doesn't win votes for HRC.

[CajunBlazer]

54. How I choose to dissuade them is up to me

You, on the other hand, can make the case any way you choose.

[Ken Burch]

59. It's sad that your approach to politics is purely negative and destructive.

No one can stop you from doing what you want...but you are accountable to others here for it.

Elections can only be won by campaigning "for"...they can't be won by campaigning "against".

Positive politics works.

[CajunBlazer]

60. Get a grip, if you haven't noticed, politics is a nasty business

....but pointing out that a candidate is totally unqualified for an office is open and above board when it is based on facts. My case above was totally based on facts.

[hobbit709]

108. And it doesn't become better because of attitudes like yours.

[CajunBlazer]

112. You're intitled to your opinion

But DU is a Democratic site dedicated to electing Democratic candidates. Pointing out the deficiencies of a candidate of a rival political party is totally in keeping with the purpose of DU. One can only assume that those who choose to frequent this site feel as I do.

[Squinch]

114. How about if you want to do that, you should go ahead and do that. This OP is raising a legitimate

complaint about a presidential candidate, and your attempts at censoring that legitimate complaint are disturbing.

Stein is unqualified and she is running against our candidate.

[Ken Burch]

133. If I was trying to censor, I'd alert on the thread.

I'm just trying to persuade.

Our candidate and our platform this year are nowhere near as weak as they were in 2000...the last time the Greens were a significant factor.

Why do you have so little confidence in our ability to win on the merits?

[Squinch]

134. Oh, great. Another "when did you stop beating your wife?" post. The hallmark of bad faith.

[Maru Kitteh]

148. Why are you so afraid of others pointing out what an incompetent loon Stein is?

If you have no need to defend or discuss Stein, why do you have so many posts in this thread? If you wish to see positive threads about Hillary Clinton, why not just go get to work on that right now?

[bettyellen]

19. Stein is a GE candidate- and I had no idea her record was so pathetic....

This has nothing to do with the primaries, except for those with CDS, who might write in for Stein.

[Ken Burch]

90. Nobody here is going to do that.

What I'm saying is, we can hold Stein's vote down by pointing up the progressive things we've added to the platform this year(it's the best we've had in decades), by running a campaign about what is positive in that platform, the merits of our candidate and the running mate she will eventually choose.

Threads like this, which are basically "PROVE you're not a closet Stein voter" threads, are not a constructive part of that.

[bettyellen]

96. I don't see it as a trap, and there still are people here who

Who are wrapped up in hatred for Hillary and if they screw up and let their mask slip, it's on them. Sown are wishing her dead now. They are unreachable at this point. They turned on you just a day ago- they have been harassing the rest of us for more than a year. We will win without them. Let them create a Jill site now. Don't care.

[Squinch]

115. And we can also point out how dismally unqualified she is. Again, if you want to have a thread

using another tactic to show how bad a candidate Stein is, you should make one. This thread is a legitimate complaint about an opposing candidate, and you should stop trying to impose your censorship.

[AgingAmerican]

136. And some folks just need to have enemies

[Squinch]

156. And one of the purposes of DU is to give information about the qualifications of opposing

candidates. Those who find that offensive should examine why they are here.

It has nothing to do with enemies.

[AgingAmerican]

135. She is a non threat in the GE

And she is being made a scapegoat.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scapegoating

[bettyellen]

138. Not in this election, but Greens want to be spoilers more than they want to build anything.

Hard to blame them for anything when they do jack shit.

[AgingAmerican]

139. I will never understand the obsession

With non entities.

[bettyellen]

140. Don't understand why the run, or why people vote for them. I love a good mystery.

[AgingAmerican]

141. I think they run because the USA is a Democracy

And because are stuck in a dysfunctional two party system. That, and some people have different ideals than we do. It isn't hard to figure it out.

[bettyellen]

144. Why don't they do any real party building or find serious candidates?

To me it's like they are just playing at it.

[AgingAmerican]

146. I would surmise that it's not an easy thing in an extremely polarized two party system

[skepticscott]

166. It's not just you

Every four years, the Greens (and those Democrats feeling honked off enough to join them) have their little self-congratulatory orgy of moral righteousness and ideological purity, and then after the election go back to accomplishing exactly zero in the real world of politics and governance.

But it's pretty hard to find serious candidates when your platform touts "alternative medicine" like homeopathy, and other anti-science crap.

[Maru Kitteh]

147. Primaries? I'm sorry, what primary was Stein in again?

Are only certain people approved of by some to discuss Stein? Are only nice things approved of by some to be said about Stein?

Too bad.

She's a crank and a loon. Her incompetence is just - epic. Thank DOG she's not a Democrat.

This is general election season. People should try not to support opposition parties like Greens and Republicans. Resist the urge.

[cheapdate]

73. Any candidate or party that makes protection

of the living environment the cornerstone of their ethics and politics has my attention.

Furthermore, anyone willing to step up and put their hat in the ring has my respect.

For what it's worth, I'm in a deep red state (TN).

[Exilednight]

106. Small minds talk about people.

The laughing stock of our democracy is that we only have two viable parties.

[Else You Are Mad]

127. Exactly.

I am a Democrat and always have been, but most nations have many more than two parties, and have much better run governments than ours.

I am not advocating for any other party but the Democratic party -- but to say that it is a joke that a third party is trying to run is not true.

[jack_krass]

194. This!

[Freethinker65]

10. Pretty obvious. Nt

[DanTex]

34. Not everything is a conspiracy.

I see a post criticizing a thoroughly unqualified and feebleminded candidate who is running for the sole practical purpose of siphoning off votes from the Democratic nominee in order to help make Trump our next president. I'm not sure how anyone who cares about progressive policy could possibly object to this.

[MirrorAshes]

51. You'd know, since you did the same the other day

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2245114

[Ken Burch]

93. All I did there was to try to stop attacks on a person who didn't deserve them.

Nobody was baited there.

[Silver_Witch]

77. Totally agree!

Flame bait!!

[CajunBlazer]

102. So telling the truth about a opposing candidate is now flame bait....

I would like you to point out one thing that I posted about Jill Stine which isn't true.

I would like you to also point out why anyone on this board cannot try to dissuade people from voting for a candidate who will do nothing but siphon off votes from the democratic nominee.

Why would anyone feel the need to defend an opposing candidate who is absolutely devoid of accomplishments, has no executive experience, and next to no experience in public office. If the Greens were a serious party, they would have nominated a serious candidate.

[Silver_Witch]

118. Sorry won't play

Have a super wonderful Wednesday.

[CajunBlazer]

120. Plays perfectly for me

You have a good day as well.

[CajunBlazer]

110. No, DU is what it has always been:

A vehicle where Democrats come together to try to elect Democrats to public office. Right now Jill Stein, regardless of her political views, is an political opponent in a rival party who could help to prevent the Democratic Party nominee from winning the White House. Either you are for Hillary Clinton or you are for Jill Stein, you can by definition at this point be for both.

In addition, not only were my comments in line with the purpose of DU, everything I wrote about Jill Stein was absolutely true and the conclusion I drew from those facts were the results of rational thinking.

Now, if you want to challenge my facts or my deductions, feel free. But don't impune my motives.

[Squinch]

113. WTF??? Now we aren't allowed to say Jill Stein is unqualified? Guess what? SHE ISN'T QUALIFIED!

Last edited Wed Jul 13, 2016, 03:50 PM - Edit history (1)

Your post is full of paranoia.

Everyone here knows the deal: you can't try to get anyone elected other than Democratic candidates. If you have a real problem with that, and if a post like this OP will somehow trick you into showing your true feelings and those true feelings will get you tombstoned, then YOU DON'T BELONG HERE.

Jill Stein is no more qualified to be president than you are. We are allowed to say that.

[Ken Burch]

130. She's also not GOING to be president...so what is the point?

The people who would consider voting for her don't think she's going to get elected. I doubt SHE thinks she's going to get elected.

It doesn't help us to harshly attack someone who isn't the problem.

If we stay where we are on the issues(as we need to)there is no chance of the Green vote rising. And we are twelve points ahead, so we have no reason NOT to stay where we are on the issues.

[Squinch]

131. People have the right to criticize the opposition candidate whether you think it is productive

or not. It is not for you to censor them. It is not for you to lecture people who are discussing Democratic opponents on a Democratic message board.

If you don't want to talk about Stein, then don't. Others have the right to, and you are simply being obnoxious trying to order them not to.

Who, really, do you think you are?

[Ken Burch]

132. Yes, people have that right. Other people equally have the right

to argue that doing that isn't good strategy.

And all I think I am is a fellow, equal human being.

[skepticscott]

167. If people are convinced to vote for her

instead of for Hillary Clinton, how is that not a problem for the Democratic candidate?

[Ken Burch]

180. If they ARE convinced to vote for her, what's the point of attacking them

and demonizing their organization with false accusations of collusion with Trump?

Why do you not think it's a more effective strategy to say "A vote for the Green is a vote for Trump-AND the Dems are a more progressive party than they were, so there's a case FOR voting for HRC".

Why is it so important to reject that approach and go with "Greens want Trump to win and anyone who votes Green is a despicable idiot"?

What good has rhetoric like that EVER done?

[skepticscott]

184. Who said anything about "demonizing"

and "false accusations of collusion with Trump"? Who said "anyone who votes Green is a despicable idiot?" Not me, and not the OP. That's just made up bullshit you pulled out of your ass.

People have all of a sudden decided to vote for Jill Stein even though they know almost nothing about her. Telling them true things about her like the fact that has no experience that would remotely qualify her for the job or that she supports dangerous and irrational medical woo woo, may convince them that she's not such a good choice after all. I see nothing wrong with that. You, on the other hand, seem desperate to paint relevant criticism of her as a personal attack and telling the truth about her as a losing strategy.

No one appointed you forum scold.

[pnwmom]

170. How come it's fine for Jill and her supporters to insult Hillary

but not the other way around?

[Ken Burch]

179. It's not "fine" for Green voters to do that.

It's just that going scorched-earth can't STOP them doing that and can't hold their vote share down.

[pnwmom]

182. There is a difference between justified criticism of Jill and going "scorched earth."

It is important to make it clear that she isn't an ally; she's an adversary. Especially with former surrogates of Bernie's, like Cornel West, rallying to Jill's side now.

[Ken Burch]

183. This should not turn into an excuse to go after Bernie...he has nothing to do with that.

And Bernie was right to say we need change in this party.

[pnwmom]

185. It's not an excuse, it's a fact. Jill is trying to draw Bernie's supporters

to her side, and is using Cornel West and others to do it.

We need to explain why Jill is not a good choice for anyone who shares Bernie's core values.

[Ken Burch]

188. We can explain that our platform is better and that Bernie's campaign made a difference.

Nobody voting for Stein thinks she's going to get elected.

Fight the Greens effectively is all I'm saying.

[AgingAmerican]

8. So now that Bernie endorsed you decided to go this route?

Wow!

Perhaps you should just walk away from politics for a few weeks to calm down, then try again.

[yodermon]

9. Bernie's out; line up the next hippie to punch

Have at it

[Silver_Witch]

80. Well played

[stevenleser]

186. Bernie is a hippie? He had made over $100k a year for 20 years Jill is a hippie?

She is a doctor who has made a lot of money.

They don't seem like hippies to me.

[MohRokTah]

12. Jill Stein is an idiot.

Her politics are extreme.

[tonyt53]

151. Probably, but so are the people that support her.

[Duckhunter935]

13. She meets all of the qualifications required

By the framers of the Constitution. I meet them too but I do not plan on ever running. You might want to check the actual requirements to run for president of the United States.

[CajunBlazer]

20. She may have meet the constituational requirements, but she still is not qualified.

And in my opinion neither is Donald Trump. Note I spoke of qualifications not requirements.

[yeoman6987]

29. There are NO requirements like political office to run for president

We need civics back in school ASAP!!!!!

[CajunBlazer]

76. Did I mention REQUIREMENTS to run for President? NO!!!

I said she was unqualified to run for President. There is a difference. Anyone who is over 35 years of age and a natural born citizen meets the constitutional requirements. But not everyone who meets the constitutional requirements is qualified to be President.

For instance, I meet the constitutional requirements, but like Jill Stein, I don't consider myself QUALIFIED to be President.

[CajunBlazer]

78. Someone needs to go back and take another civics class

There are constitutional requirements to run for President. One must be over the the age of 35 and be a natural born citizen.

I am sure that Jill Stein meets these constitutional requirement, as do I. However, she still isn't QUALIFIED to be President.

[GeorgeGist]

44. What qualifications do you have to judge?

[CajunBlazer]

79. Common sense - though apparently that isn't a common trait

[stevenleser]

187. In a Democracy we all have the right to judge. nt

[NorthCarolina]

150. I'm curious, exactly what

"qualifications" do you believe she is lacking? You may not like her for whatever reason(s), but that doesn't mean she is not qualified. That is, unless you personally are the official USA presidential candidate qualifier supreme.

[dlwickham]

75. I have some hairs in my shower drain if you'd like to split those

[SaschaHM]

14. Let's not spread the names of...

thirsty Third party candidates anymore than we should. Let her spread her name through awful tweets and ridiculous PR stunts.

[Ken Burch]

16. And let's not do OP's that are nothing but an excuse to try to bait people

into breaking forum rules.

[SaschaHM]

18. OPs against Stein are just as fair game as OPs against Trump.

She is an obstacle to getting a Democrat in the White House. I'm not sure why we need to handle her with kid gloves on Democratic Underground during the GE when she's throwing broadsides at Hillary every time she gets the chance.

[Ken Burch]

21. They should be on the issues and her possible effects on the chances of beating Trump.

Not insult-based screeds like this OP which are clearly meant to try to provoke the remaining progressives on DU into getting themselves banned.

The way to win is to run a positive campaign based on the progressive aspects of our platform.

Trash-talking the Green candidate on a personal level is a waste of effort and can only have the effect of shoring up her support(support we will need to cut into in the fall if the race tightens).

I'm anti-Stein, but I'm also anti-stupid tactics.

[SaschaHM]

24. Readiness and qualifications for the job is an issue when it comes to electing a president.

It's not just about what you will say you will do, it is also about what you have done.

[Ken Burch]

26. Nobody actually thinks Stein is going to get elected...even her supporters don't think that.

So attacking her as unqualified is pointless.

Better to point out the progressive things in our platform and to make a case for why OUR nominee is the strongest on the merits.

Arguments that are personal attacks on Stein are only going to have the effect of making those who support her dig in out of anger at the personal offensiveness of those attacks.

It's just not good strategy or the best use of our time.

[CajunBlazer]

35. These are not personal attacks

Either someone is qualified for an office or they are not. She is not, period, but anyone's definition. Is this the best candidate that the Green Party can muster. If so that is very sad.

So those people who vote end up voting for her will do so because they like her politics even though she would likely be a total failure as President? Is that what they want "in good conscious" for their country, a totally unqualified person to be President. That's also very sad.

[AgingAmerican]

137. IT's a personal attack

As are many of the replies within this OP.

[Avalon Sparks]

91. Yup it sure is about what you have done isn't it....

Some candidates have a longer lists of 'dones' to consider......

[CajunBlazer]

31. A candidate's issues don't mean crap if she is totally unqualified for the office.

By process of elimination, here are probably hundreds of people across this country who support exactly the same political positions I support. On the other hand I don't see one politician with any thoughts of running for President with whom I agree 100% of the time. But I am certainly not going to vote for some yahoo simply because she agrees with my political positions if she is totally unqualified to be President.

[OnlyTheGood]

41. OPs that confuse 'conscience' with 'conscious' are discredited and deserve

nothing but mockery.

[CajunBlazer]

82. Posters who dwell on spelling mistakes apparently....

.... don't have much else to say.

[OnlyTheGood]

126. Oh, you spelled the word perfectly. But you used it

incorrectly.

Big difference, not that you would know or care.

[CajunBlazer]

22. Ken Burch, do you feel baited?

If I wrote a similar post about Donald Trump, would you feel baited to defend him.

[Ken Burch]

28. Not personally. And attacks on Trump's competence are actually worth making:

Trump could actually be elected: Even the Green candidate's own supporters don't think she has any chance of winning.

Your OP gives the impression that, even though the primaries are over, you STILL can't stop attacking people to your left. Given that the left is no longer the problem(if it ever was)is that the way you want people to perceive you here?

Why aren't you switching to making a positive case for the Democratic nominee and focusing your attacks on her REPUBLICAN opponent?

[CajunBlazer]

37. If they don't think she cand win - theirs is a throw away vote, a protest vote

It would have the same affect it they voted for Mickey or Minnie or didn't vote at all. That is a fact.

[Ken Burch]

43. Which is why THAT's the case we should be making:

n/t.

[CajunBlazer]

48. So you don't think a candidate's qualifications matter?

I have seen people post in the past that they are willing to throw away their vote on someone they know won't win. Doesn't seem to bother them. They say they will at least be "voting their conscience". What I question is whether people can possibly "vote their conscience" if the person they are voting for not only has no possibility of winning, but she is also totally unqualified.

[Ken Burch]

49. If the candidate has a chance of winning, they matter. If not, they don't.

Trump's lack of qualifications and Nixonian agenda are what you should be going after.

[CajunBlazer]

83. So it is okay if a candidate is not qualified if she doesn't have a chance to win

But its not okay if she is not qualified if she has a chance to win

Yea, that sounds rational to me.

[Squinch]

116. Let's not let our paranoia prevent us from making legitimate posts criticising opposing candidates.

Let's not try and censor legitimate Democratic complaints.

[Ken Burch]

30. I see what you did there...

... ...

[sheshe2]

65. so did I.

[CajunBlazer]

84. So did the administrators

[sheshe2]

89. Post hide?

Hmmmm

[tk2kewl]

52. +1

[TwilightZone]

72. Bernie Sanders is a professional politician.

A career one, at that. Your brush might be a tad too broad.

[aikoaiko]

32. I think just the opposite.

That a person with an idea can receive any national recognition as a candidate shows the strength and legitimacy of our democracy.

[CajunBlazer]

45. The only reason anyone knows anything about Jill Stein is because...

... she was willing to be the Green Party nominee in 2012. She received 0.36% of the popular vote. Yea, she has national recognition. That shows strength and legitimacy. Mickey probably got more votes.

[mwrguy]

33. Stein is an opponent of the Democratic Party and therefore fair game

[BobbyDrake]

36. But she knows the purity codex by heart, and can recite it perfectly on cue.

And to some, that's all that matters.

[SaschaHM]

40. I would make the Perfect presidential candidate...

If I knew that there was no conceivable chance that I would ever be asked to govern. Want to solve world hunger? Should have voted for SaschaHM2016!

[BobbyDrake]

42. +1 nt

[DanTex]

38. She is also a clueless human being. I saw an interview where she described quantitative

easing as a form of magic and thinks we could "quantitatively ease" away student debt (apparently by having the fed purchase long-term bonds at fair market value). Not someone you want running a car wash, much less a country.

[OnlyTheGood]

39. You should review the difference between 'conscious' and 'conscience' before you post again. - nt

[CajunBlazer]

46. You should try to find something more important than spelling mistakes in posts

When you nitpick spelling mistakes, you have probably run out of more important things to say.

[OnlyTheGood]

125. LOL at 'spelling mistake'. Whatever you have to tell yourself, but spelling

is the least of your concerns.

[Her Sister]

161. Being rude to the OP this way is unnecessary!

LOL at 'spelling mistake'. Whatever you have to tell yourself, but spelling
View profile
is the least of your concerns.

[Warren DeMontague]

47. No, the constitution is quite clear on the requirements to hold the office.

I'm not voting for her, but she has every right to run.

[CajunBlazer]

50. Sure, she is 35 or older and is a national born citizen

She meets the constitutional requirements - so do I - so do millions of other people in this country. I didn't say she didn't meet the requirements to be President - I said that she is totally unqualified to be President.

[Warren DeMontague]

55. Actually, you said it "makes a mockery of our democratic system"

It doesnt seem to me, it does. She will probably not get a whole hell of a lot of votes, which to my mind will be our democratic system working just fine.

[CajunBlazer]

57. Well maybe that was a bit overboard

However, my main point was that she is totally unqualified to be President - I don't think that point can be effectively countered.

[Warren DeMontague]

58. Bernie Sanders sure didnt do her any favors by endorsing Hillary at the same time she was begging

Him to take over the Green ticket.

[CajunBlazer]

61. You're right about that....

Even she obviously thought that Bernie is more qualified than she is.

[redStateBlueHeart]

56. Her name is not Hillary Clinton

That's enough for some.

She comes off as a bit delusional to me. Remind me again why Stein is so excited to usher in a Trump presidency? She KNOWS she's a spoiler.

[CajunBlazer]

62. Jill Stein will effectively sign the death warrent of the Green Party....

...if she somehow prevents Hillary Clinton from becoming President. There is an old political adage: Third parties are like bees, when they sting, they die.

[TheProgressive]

63. "I guess anyone, even the grossly unqualified, can run for President of the United States"

Ain't that the truth...

Oh, who are you talking about?

[bettyellen]

67. Sneaky.

[CajunBlazer]

85. Not anyone who ran for the Democratic nomination.

Who are your talking about.

[63splitwindow]

64. Sounds more qualified than Don the Con. nt

[TheFarseer]

66. Just be glad they don't have a more credible candidate

A former governor would be much more effective in syphoning off votes. See Gary Johnson.

[TwilightZone]

70. Johnson got 1% in 2012

He was not much more effective at siphoning votes from the main candidates than Stein was.

[TheFarseer]

71. Yeah neither has been a huge factor

But Johnson got double the votes she did in 2012 and I promise you he will up his total this year.

[CajunBlazer]

86. Actually he got triple the votes Johnson got - Stein got 0.36% of the total vote

[retrowire]

68. no it doesn't

Donald Trump does.

But then again, it's America and anyone can run.

[ThePhilosopher04]

69. That's total fucking bullshit. It's exactly the American way. If you're worried about Jill Stein ...

you have major fucking problems.

[CajunBlazer]

87. I guess I have a major fucking problem

And so does the Green Party is Stein is ultimately responsible for Hillary Clinton losing the election. Old political adage: Third Parties are like bees, when they sting, they die. If Stein siphons off too many votes from Hillary, Stein and her supporters will have signed the death warrant for the Green Party.

[Ken Burch]

92. Then let's make sure they DON'T do that...

..by running a positive campaign in support of OUR candidate and OUR platform . Both are good enough that we can win on their merits.

The only person we should be going negative on is Trump.

Bashing Stein on a personal level makes us look like bullies and, if anything, will have the effect of shoring up the Green vote(especially attacks involving the unprovable claim that Stein is TRYING to help Trump get elected).

You are simply putting too much effort into a tactic we don't need to use.

Show a little more confidence for the ability of the person YOU supported in the primary to get people to vote FOR her.

[CajunBlazer]

119. Again, I am not bashing Stein on a personal level

For all I know personally she might be a great person.

We may differ, to me qualifications is the first benchmark I use to judge a candidate. That's not person, it is a matter of a persons record.

Hillary record is that she was the most politically active first ladies in history, she was a US Senator representing one of the most populous states in the union, and she was an extremely able Secretary of State.

Donald Trump, while he has numerous serious issues, and least ran a very large business operation.

Jill Stein, on the other hand, has virtually no experience in management or political positions.

It makes no sense to pay any attention to a candidate's political views if he/she is not qualified to the job. Choosing Jill Stein only because of her political views is as illogical as saying your cousin would make a good President because agrees with you politically.

It seems to me that when finding matches for our political views becomes more important than voting for the person who will do the best job, that is equivalent to selfishly caring more for our emotional needs then the needs of the country a whole.

[Ken Burch]

128. The best tactic with the Green candidate would simply be to not pay ANY attention to her.

If we run the kind of campaign I described in the post you just responded to, that by itself will guarantee that the Green candidate(we also shouldn't use her name, for obvious reasons)is not a factor.

I don't want people to vote for the Green presidential candidate, either...but your approach is overkill and could actually give her a sympathy vote.

There would be better ways to hold down the Green vote presidentially...for example, by supporting electoral reform and pr for congressional and state legislative races in exchange for the Greens not having a presidential candidate.

On another note...I find it disturbing that you don't seem to think that people should expect a presidential candidate to support what they want on the issues, but should care only about preparedness for the job. The record shows that if we focus solely about whether someone is "qualified", we are more likely to elect people who know what they are doing, but who will do more bad things than good.

And it's not self-indulgent to fight for your principles. If we take principles out of politics, what does that leave?

[CajunBlazer]

163. Let's not pretend what we say here on DU will affect the election

Especially when we are talking about the Green Party.

There may be a few thousand people who frequent this site, but when you spread all of those DU people across 50, states, many of which are either dark blue or dark red, you are left with only a minority of us living in swing states who even have the potential of affecting the outcome of the election.

In addition only a minority of DU Democrats and leftist independents in those swing states are are potential Stein voters. Of those the far left independents in swing states and who were only on DU only to support Sanders, most are gone, and they would never vote for Hillary anyway. In addition, the DU members in swing states who are part of the 85% of former Sanders supporters who already supporting Hillary are not going to get upset that I am pointing out that Stein is grossly unqualified. Whatever, they may think about her political positions, She, like Trump and Johnson, are standing between the Democratic nominee and the White House. In addition, I didn't attack Stein personally or attack her politics, I simple pointed out that the women doesn't have the experience to be President. And that is a true statement I would be willing to debate with anyone.

The only leaves two categories of DU voters in swing states who might be potential Stein voters. The first set are those DU members in swing states who have planned to vote Stein ever since it became apparent that Sanders would not be the nominee; and they aren't going to change their minds. I know that some of them are still here on DU because they made it clear before the new rules kicked in that they were going to lay low during the general election period so they won't get kicked off of the site. Let me make it clear that I consider them lost causes and don't give a rip if they don't like me attacking their candidate.

That leaves only small handful of DU voters in swing states that have the potential, no mater how small, of making a difference in the final income. They are the potential Stein voters who haven't made up their minds whether to vote for Hillary or Stein. However, the chances that their votes will make a difference in the final outcome are infinitesimally small. But regardless of how they ultimately decide to vote, they should know and take into consideration the qualifications of both candidates.

[NorthCarolina]

160. You should probably start a movement to change the type of "Democracy" we have in America

if you truly feel that people running for public office that aren't your specific candidate represent a "Mockery" of the system. Perhaps only allowing a single party to exist and compete would be more to your liking. Russia had that, didn't work out to well for them. Our media had been purchased and consolidated into a pretty good representation of Pravda though.....perhaps there is some solace in that?

[colsohlibgal]

74. Not Sure How

Jill is far from dumb as well. I also haven't as yet disagreed with anything she has said. That does not necessarily mean I will vote for her but she is more qualified than Dubya and at least three times as smart...and that dry drunk legacy frat boy was president 8 years. Jill would figure it out.

Gary Johnson is different, just an extreme anti government republican who is pro pot and anti war like virtually all libertarians. The old joke about libertarians just being republicans who want to smoke pot is not far off.

The anger toward Jill Stein and the Green Party puzzles me.....the top two parties have as strong a monopoly on things as ever, and Hillary would have to really blunder a lot for this race to be remotely competitive.

[CajunBlazer]

88. If a dumb relative agreed with everything you said, would you vote for him...

... for President?

[DemocraticWing]

81. People would take the Greens more seriously if they had a real candidate.

Stein is horrible, she doesn't even carry herself well on stage and honestly looks worse than the fringe of the fringe candidates from parties that even fewer people have heard of. Cynthia McKinney is the most credible candidate the Greens have ever had and she didn't get any votes either. I think the people (about 500,000 out of like 150 million) who actually vote for the Greens are living in their own world, and we didn't get the invite.

[adigal]

94. I think you have it backwards

That you don't have to be a politician for 20 years and can run is what makes us a democratic system!

I'm not voting for her, but how elitist of you. Shameful, really, at DU.

[rbrnmw]

107. Shameful at DU?

DU is Democratic Underground not Green Party Underground. People voting for Jill Stein are as dangerous as those voting for Trump, because it will result in a Trump Presidency.

[hobbit709]

95. did Pat Paulsen make a mockery of our democratic system?

[Ken Burch]

97. Perhaps...but then, he MEANT to make a mockery of it.

And, since he was estimated to have taken up to 500,000 write-in votes in 1968, he may have(accidentally) cost hubert Humphrey the election.

[Vote2016]

98. How does Jill Stein make this point better than Trump? Stein is underqualified but has a great

platform while Trump is less qualified and has an ever shifting shitstorm of a platform, and yet Stein is at 5% in the polls and Trump is running close in several key battleground states.

Stein will NEVER be president and 100% of people voting for her KNOW that and they are just voting for her to show support for her platform. Trump is an underdog but he MIGHT STILL GET ELECTED.

How can anyone think Stein is the problem here?

[struggle4progress]

99. People ARE voting for her! She got 0.36% in 2012!

[DinahMoeHum]

101. With a little luck, she'll get 0.72% in 2016.

[struggle4progress]

123. Assuming she picks up 0.36% in every election cycle, she's a shoo-on for 2568!

[Funtatlaguy]

103. Anybody know how many state ballots the Green Party made?

Gary Jihnson has said the Libertarians will be in all 50 ballots.
Haven't heard about the Greens.

[fasttense]

109. No, the Libertarian, Ayn Rand, party is ONLY on 35 state ballots.

https://www.lp.org/2016-presidential-ballot-access-map

The Green Party is on 20 state ballots. http://www.gp.org/ballotaccess

We all know the reason this slur against Jill is posted is because many of the former Bernie voters are voting for the Green party.

Since the Ayn Rand party funnels money from the same kind of uber rich oligarchs as does the RepubliCON party, then it is no surprise that they can buy their way onto more ballots. But they still don't have them all.

Facts do matter.

[bettyellen]

117. I heard about 20 so far? Wasted vote

[jcgoldie]

104. Whatever her qualifications

She lost my respect when I barely knew who she was with her ignorant and spiteful mothers day tweet about HRC.

[peace13]

105. This entire election cycle has made a mockery of the American people and the system.

Just saying ... look at the original slate of potential candidates and if that doesn't make your head spin I don't know what would. Couple that with a process that needs a remodel and we are in trouble. I doubt Jill is the worst nut in the hidey hole. Hint...The color orange comes to mind.

[NorthCarolina]

111. Actually, things like the electoral college and Super Delegates and Super PACs are

what truly makes a mockery of our Democratic System of Government. Not somebody running for office regardless of your personal thoughts with respect to that person. The fact that that person CAN run is the essence of Democracy.

[CajunBlazer]

173. Trying to change the subject again?

[NorthCarolina]

174. No, just stating an obvious truth. -nt-

[CajunBlazer]

175. Well, my OP was the obvious truth

Some people obviously don't like to read the truth

[Hekate]

121. Unqualified? Yes. A mockery of US democracy? Nah. Every 4 years a whole bunch of men....

...who are equally unqualified feel a stirring in their hearts: "Look at that jerk in the Oval Office! I could do that job, no trouble!"

Businessmen, retired military, Congressmen in their first term in the House -- they have all received this epiphany. (I'm still talking about the ones who are visibly unqualified.) Some are cynical. Some are idealistic. Some have a message. Some lust for power. The thing that they have in common is massive ego. And until very recently, they have all been men.

I remember when Michelle Bachmann ran for president. Remember that? She makes my flesh crawl. But my own epiphany was the above: she's no less qualified in many respects than many of the men who preceded her in this quest. Back home she was a big frog in a little pond, and now she thinks she can run a superpower. Thank the gods she failed spectacularly.

Since I pay almost no attention to the Greens Jill Stein is only a name to me. I learned 98% of what I know about her from reading your OP. No, she's not qualified to run a superpower, and there's no threat that she will get to run this one. Her only threat to us is what the Greens have always been since Nader: a possible spoiler in a close election. I don't forgive that.

However, even that threat is undercut by Senator Bernie Sanders getting nearly everything he wanted from the Dem Platform Committee, and his full-throated endorsement of SoS Hillary Clinton. And boy oh boy can that man do full-throated -- I am really looking forward to this. Most of the people who followed Sanders will now vote for Clinton -- from the looks of things, the vast majority will by November.

GOTV people. We're stronger together.

[riderinthestorm]

122. No it doesn't. Like her or hate her, her candidacy is democracy in action nt

[Vinca]

124. She's no more of a mockery than Trump.

[CajunBlazer]

172. True, they are both mockeries to our system of government

But do you think that anyone would object if I wrote and OP saying why Trump is unqualified.

[JEB]

129. Whatever.

I'm in Oregon. My vote is next to meaningless for President.

[mythology]

143. I disagree with your premise

Yes the only way Jill Stein should ever get in the White House is on the tourist tour, but she's a fringe candidate of a party that gets margin of error level support. Donald Trump being a major party nomination, that makes a mockery out of the democratic system. Somebody so utterly unworthy being taken seriously and yet he received millions of votes in the primaries and will get tens of millions in the general. That to me is far scarier than somebody who is an obscure vanity candidate that has no chance to break 5%.

[CajunBlazer]

171. I totally agree that Trump is not qualified to be President

...based on his character and temperament.

On the other hand, I don't believe that Trump will get the support in the GE of voters in the Democratic primaries except for those Trump fans who voted in the Democratic primaries only to try to insure that the Democrats nominated the weaker candidate.

[cosmicone]

145. Jill Stein is qualified to be the president

of her homeowners' association.

Anything above that office and she is woefully inadequate in training, knowledge, experience and competence.

[NorthCarolina]

154. Sorry, but I have to wonder

exactly what position you hold that gives you such unparalleled insight into her "qualifications" or lack thereof? Are you just another nobody like me forming a personal opinion, or do you have some real world experience in government, and in personal interactions with Jill, or the other candidates for that matter, that actually give you credibility beyond "I thunk it".

[cosmicone]

155. Jill was a medical student and an intern

when I was chief resident at Harvard.

[Iggo]

149. Okay, that's enough.

[JRLeft]

157. I will never understand the hate for the progressive green party.

[CajunBlazer]

169. I don't hate the Green Party

But right now Stein is attempting to siphon off votes from the Democratic nominee and that's not appreciated. I want to make sure she doesn't "Nader" this election.

[JRLeft]

177. She won't Hillary will win.

[stevenleser]

190. The moment their 2000 candidate accepted GOP money to help defeat the Democratic

nominee, with no condemnation from either the leadership or grassroots of that party, their name was mud to me.

[LanternWaste]

158. it can certainly be difficult to accept the basic premise that all things being equal, any American

I imagine it can certainly be difficult to accept the basic premise that all things being equal, any American can run for any office. I also imagine that for the occasional oddball, it's fun to bait people.

[CajunBlazer]

168. So you are you calling me and oddball...

...for pointing out that a candidate of another party is not qualified to be president? Why would any good Democrat who supports the Democratic nominee feel "baited" when someone points out that one of her opponents is totally unqualified to be President, especially when the OP presents that conclusion based only on non-debatable facts.

Plus you need to understand that while anyone over the age of 35 who is natural born citizen meets the constitutional requirements necessary run for President, and is welcome to do so, not everyone qualified to be President. For instance I am more qualified to hold the highest office in his country than Jill Stein and I am nowhere near qualified.

[NorthCarolina]

159. Since when do Democrats consider folks running for public office to represent a "mockery"

to our Democratic system. I know of NO Democrats that actually believe that carp.

[skepticscott]

165. The OP is referring specifically to her running for president

a job for which she is utterly unqualified and unprepared, and in which she would be a disaster if she actually won. She spouts canned ideological purity and that's all.

Of course, she's far from the only unqualified person running.

[skepticscott]

164. Jill Stein is a medical woo-wooer as well

Despite being a doctor.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2016/07/jill-stein-promotes-homeopathy-panders-on-vaccines/

She panders to anti-science leftists to get votes, as does the Green Party in general.

The Stein lovers over at JPR have yet to face up to this, but when they do, they will have to find a new candidate du jour. It kinda blows the "I won't vote for the lesser of two evils" bullshit out of the water. Ideological purity always bites you in the ass.

[David__77]

176. I don't agree.

The constitution lays out the qualifications for presidency.

[HooptieWagon]

178. When you don't want liberals voting in Dem Primaries...

Then they're not going to vote for Dem candidates in the General. There is a price paid for party purity, as you're discovering.

[pnwmom]

189. It's simple for anyone to vote Dem. Registration is easy and FREE. And it's

not even required in all states, as easy as it is.

[Motown_Johnny]

181. Still a far better choice than Trump.

I don't see why you are so upset about her.


He is the problem.

[stevenleser]

191. I don't agree. Someone opposite in ideology winning isn't the worst outcome

The worst outcome is someone from your own ideological area winning and then being so horribly bad and incompetent that it taints candidates from your ideology for many elections to come. That's the reason a lot of Republicans are supporting Hillary over Trump.

[CajunBlazer]

192. Those who voted for Sanders in the primaries are not going to vote for Trump....

... unless they were Trump fans from the beginning and were voting for who they believed was the weaker Democratic candidate. (Some admitted to doing so in exit polls in states like West Virginia after Trump already was, for all practical purposes, the Republican nominee.

However, the same can not be said about Stein. Trump has no real chance of attracting alienated Sanders supporters; the same can not be said about Stein. That's at least one of the reasons why if I wrote a OP pointing out that Trump is unqualified to be President I would encounter no disagreement, but since I wrote that OP about Stein instead......

[SunSeeker]

193. K & R