Green Party Nominee Jill Stein Invites Bernie Sanders To Take Over Ticket

[caquillo]

Nice timing, Jill, as Sanders is set to endorse Hillary. Will he take the bait?

Bernie Sanders has been invited to continue his underdog bid for the White House by the Green party’s probable presidential candidate, who has offered to step aside to let him run.

Jill Stein, who is expected to be endorsed at the party’s August convention in Houston, told Guardian US that “overwhelming” numbers of Sanders supporters are flocking to the Greens rather than Hillary Clinton.

Stein insisted that her presidential bid has a viable “near term goal” of reaching 15% in national polling, which would enable her to stand alongside presumptive nominees Clinton and Donald Trump in televised election debates.

But in a potentially destabilising move for the Democratic party, and an exciting one for Sanders’ supporters, the Green party candidate said she was willing to stand aside for Sanders.

More at the link below...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/08/jill-stein-bernie-sanders-green-party

[La Lioness Priyanka]

1. He won't and she's an idiot if she thinks he wull

[La Lioness Priyanka]

2. Will. Can't edit on phone

[silvershadow]

9. You are correct, he won't. You are also correct, that she is an idiot for thinking he will.

She has been angling for *any spot, any kind of spotlight, for months. Every attempt by her and her supporters to make this happen is not only nonsense, but is self-serving Nader-esque crap. It isn't going to happen. It didn't quite happen for Bernie, with all of his rather impressive support. She was like 1% or something.

[Hortensis]

27. By her account, Sanders had never returned any

of her previous phone calls and other contacts about his joining the Green ticket.

[still_one]

82. Agreed. Bernie has made a positive impact within the Democratic party, and will continue to do so.

[MH1]

40. I wouldn't be surprised if she doesn't think it for a minute

The purpose could be just to get media attention.

Since it's a given that he won't do it, there are worse things she could do to get attention.

In fact when he graciously declines, and turns around and endorses Hillary ... I would think that would be a positive for the Dems in appealing to the left.

[anoNY42]

3. If Sander's supporters would vote green with him on the ticket

why wouldn't they vote green with Jill Stein on the ticket? Is there that much daylight between those two candidates (guns is one issue where they differ, I suppose).

[forest444]

78. Don't forget that to many Sanders supporters, keeping Trump out of the White House is job one.

The forest for the trees, you know.

[geek tragedy]

4. lol, Jill Stein nt

[Scootaloo]

5. You know he's not going to do that.

But you know. Keep fishing I guess.

[caquillo]

15. Actually, I'm not so sure

IMO, Sanders is a loose cannon, and he hasn't exactly been a man of his word this primary season. I don't trust him. If he does rebuff Stein and goes to endorse Hillary on Tuesday (as planned) then I'll feel better. Until then...

[Scootaloo]

19. I'm certain you are sure, actually.

Sorry "caquillo" you know as well as I do that Sanders isn't going to jump on the Green ticket. Please stop your attempts to insinuate otherwise.

[still_one]

84. Kick & REC!!!!!!!!!

[MFM008]

30. well if he endorses next week

then problem solved.
I think he will.
I want to believe he is a man of his word.

[RandySF]

6. The Greens still won't learn the lesson

Last edited Fri Jul 8, 2016, 04:28 PM - Edit history (1)

That they would make a bigger impact in the country and everyday lives by running and winning on the local level.

[NCTraveler]

14. This. nt.

[DinahMoeHum]

54. +1000s

[forjusticethunders]

66. The Greens are a microcosm of what's wrong with a lot of the "Left".

Big on rhetoric, publicity and drama, small on actual real world impact or anything that helps the marginalized. Let me know when all these "independent leftists" liberate a single worker. I won't hold my breath.

[Hekate]

72. Been saying that for years. They have good ideas, and they could, if they tried....

...work their way up instead of insisting the top job should be theirs without building the necessary structure.

[MineralMan]

8. Silliness. Senator Sanders is not going to do that.

Jill Stein is just seeking publicity for herself.

The Green Party is not going to get 15% of the vote. The Libertarian Party might, if enough Republicans use it as an option instead of voting for Trump. Their candidate has been the Governor of a state.

If the Green Party manages to get 5%, I will be greatly surprised. Its candidate, Jill Stein is unqualified for the office of President, through lack of experience. She has never been elected to any office beyond the municipal level.

I welcome Republicans to vote Libertarian, though. That will be excellent for Democrats.

[benny05]

17. agreed eom

[BlueMTexpat]

53. +1!

Especially in some of the so-called "red" western states ... I know some people who STILL have yard signs for "Ron Paul" in some areas.

Yes, I know that Ron Paul last ran in 2012. But I also know that there are several "true-believer" Libertarians who have only voted for GOPer candidates (and likely in open Dem primaries for Sanders) because they didn't have another option. Many of them can stomach GOPers generally (and voted for Romney in 2012), but most I know thoroughly dislike and distrust Trump. Whether that will be enough is yet to be seen. But if Ron Johnson is on the ballot, I can only see this as good news for Hillary and down-ticket Democratic candidates.

But we still must take nothing for granted and work our hearts out for her!

[NCTraveler]

10. In my opinion she would have done better than Sanders had she run as a Dem.

Why would she say something this foolish?

[geek tragedy]

12. No, she's a nobody who's never been elected to any relevant office.

She wouldn't have even gotten on the debate stage as a Democrat.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

33. She barely got appointed ward councilor in her hometown

"Dr. Jill" is a clueless moonbat.

[Maru Kitteh]

37. Self-evident.

Stien is a damned fool.

Bernie Sanders is a United States Senator. Jill Stein is a heartbeat away from lead dog-catcher.

[casperthegm]

11. platform differences

I've seen a couple of interviews by Jill Stein and her positions sound quite similar to the Democratic platform. Is anyone here aware of any significant issues where the Green party and Dems part ways?

[Maru Kitteh]

38. Who give a roll through the donuts? This isn't Third-Party Underground.

There's a few sewers on the internet you can go to for that, including someplace called Jackass Delusionals, or something like that.

[casperthegm]

39. You know, I made a comment earlier about the lack of critical thinking

and open dialogue regarding the pros and cons about the direction of the Democratic party. It seems that the DU is simply a place to come and cheer each other on, swear unwavering allegiance to HRC, and insult anyone who tries to discuss the issues in an objective manner.

I can't say that your comment has done anything to change that conclusion.

[Maru Kitteh]

42. I won't level a thinly vieled personal attack at you, as you've done here with me.

And I won't offer a critique nor attempt to explain all of DU. I will simply say I have no interest whatsoever in discussing Stein or pretending that the Green party is relevant. If one wishes to entertain such fantasies, there are plenty of places to do so.

Democratic Underground prohibits shilling for third parties, particularly in general election mode. As a lifelong Dem who is interested in electing Democrats, I'm a huge fan of that policy.

[Armstead]

44. God forbid there should be any actual discussion of actual issues

God forbid that it should even be possible to acknowledge that maybe -- despite some of their purist tendencies -- that people who have the Green viewpoint have any valid points whatsoever.

It will sure be a better country if the DLC Cenhtrism is the only position allowed in the Democratic Party.

(Just in case: )

[Maru Kitteh]

47. Good morning Armstead! Nice to see you.

[Armstead]

48. 7 a.m. on a Sunday morning...unhhhhh

Woke up early and just decided to check into DU.

And get sucked into it even before my first morning coffee....unhhhhhhhh

[Maru Kitteh]

49. Right? What the hell? It's a sickness. I am long afflicted, and yet

well. Nice to see that you are too.

[Demsrule86]

52. Discussing Jill Stein is a waste of time.

And your post came close to holding her up as some sort of choice for Democratic voters. She is no such thing. Hillary is the only thing standing between us and Trump. Stein would act as the Greens always do...as a spoiler. They will never win but would only help elect Trump. There is no reason to discuss her. And we do want to elect Hillary Clinton who is our nominee. An election year is not a time to discuss the 'cons' of the Democratic party nor the 'cons' of Hillary Clinton. this would only hurt our chances. Why would a Democratic website encourage that? This is an election year, if you are a Democrat, your job is to elect the Democratic nominee...to vote and help in any way you can.

[casperthegm]

57. Disagree

Your point about Stein and the Green party hurting Hillary's chances are valid. We agree on that much.

But I disagree when it comes to examining what the party stands for, including the nominee. A party that stifles discussing about the issues it stands for because it's "not a convenient time" for the party- that is no party that I want to be a part of. First, we must always be watchful of the party platform and make sure that it's looking out for the people. Otherwise, we risk things like support of the TPP, corporate welfare, regime change, etc. becoming part of the platform. If something is wrong, it's wrong and we absolutely should be encouraged to speak out, no told to sit there like good little dems, because it's an election year. Come on.

[Demsrule86]

64. No one even remembers what the party platform was in past election years.

It does not matter unless we take Congress...and the time to 'examine' parties and candidates is during the primary. Once a candidate is elected...as Hillary Clinton was, now comes the heavy lifting the winning of an election...people always say this is the most important election...but this year it is completely true. As for the TPP, if it passes at all and I hope it does not, it will happen in a lame duck session in Congress. It is very unpopular as it should be. But Pres. Obama who ran on trade agreements ( I knew this when I voted for him)...supports it. I see no reason to discuss Stein...waste of time. She is nothing but a spoiler. And there is no point in raising objections to our nominee instead of working to elect her. We may not agree on everything, but we darn well have way more in common with a Democrat than Trump. I saw this nonsense play out in 2000 and that got us Bush the terrible. So no, we should not discuss Stein. We should not encourage people to view her as any sort of option. Voting third party is the same as voting for Trump.

[MH1]

41. Well, last I checked - and it's been quite awhile, so I could be wrong:

1) Greens are strongly anti-nuclear power and strongly anti fossil fuels

2) Greens strongly oppose the death penalty

3) Greens campaign on removing ALL restrictions on funding abortions. I'm guessing "repeal the Hyde amendment" and "repeal all restrictions on abortion", are not in the Dem platform. (although a majority of Dems would probably support that)

4) Greens, naturally, support election reform such as instant-runoff voting, which would give 3rd parties more of a chance in our system (where currently they have none, except in rare situations.)

-- for just the first four I can think of.

That said, if you read their platform (I won't link to it, it's easy enough to find their website), while it sounds great (if you like that sort of thing, and I do like much of it), they have no workable idea how to get there from here. I'm not sure "there" is even physically possible at all, but if you think about the kind of things that would have to happen to get there ... nope. Then factor in that there is ZERO chance that they can get anyone elected nationally. The way our elections work, unfortunately a vote for a 3rd party candidate such as a Green, most likely will help elect the Republican.

I just want to add to the "no workable idea how to get there" comment - they also, at least nearly all of the Greens I've ever talked to, don't give a single f*ck what happens to people whose lives would get turned upside down by the drastic changes they would make, even the children of those folks, because they don't see those people as people. They see them as "evil" and "deserve what's coming to them", never mind that for the most part we are talking about people who are playing by the rules as they exist today. I'm sure that kind of callousness is not formally in their platform, but you can read it between the lines. I don't buy into that. Whatever changes are made, we have to help as much as possible to keep people from being caught in the gears. For example if you are going to shut down coal mines, how do you help coal mining families transition? I'm not saying Dems do that well either. I wish they did. But electing Dems will give you a better possibility of it than voting Green.

[Armstead]

45. How about ifthe Dems were to actually agree with many of those goals....though not the means?

I tend to agree with you that the Greens are too focused on goals, rather than how to get there, or how how to make sure things do address the whole picture.

But I also think that many of their goals -- and many specifics -- are quite in line with what the average non-wingnut rank and file voter prefers over the corporate oriented policies and politics of today.

It would sure be refreshing if the Democrats actually used the political machinery to implement those goals, instead of either ignoring them or dismissing them in favor of the Corporate State and Kowtowing to the GOP Base.

[casperthegm]

56. Thank you

Just wanted to jump in and say thanks. Good to see there are some here who will talk about the issues. For many dems it's all about the party and almost a sin to even look at someone else's platform and compare/contrast. And I understand the argument about the "how do you get your goals accomplished?" question for the Green party. They need to have a plan and like others have said, work from local on up.

The thing is, I heard the same argument/question posed to Bernie supporters. You know, "he seems like a nice guy but he's just selling dreams that he can never make good on." Personally, I'd rather have a candidate that sees how things should be and at least tries to fight for them over a candidate who looks, shrugs, and says "eh, you're such an unrealistic dreamer. The status quo is good enough." Inspiring...

[Maru Kitteh]

69. You are just dreadfully easy to see through here. "But Bernie . . . . + let's 'talk' about the Green

party."

What's the matter, couldn't find someplace to plug in your neon sign?

[casperthegm]

71. If I'm easy to see through then you are simply transparent

Feel free to go back to cheering on HRC and the party while keeping your head buried in the sand. The democratic party is awesome, it can do no wrong, and nothing is to be gained by examining it or any other party's platforms and discussing the issues. Sound about right? I will not be a part of such willful arrogance. But if it works for you have fun. Buh bye.

[Maru Kitteh]

91. Gosh golly goodness, supporting Democrats on Democratic Underground!?!

It's scandalous I tell you! I can see why you're so upset. And by that, I mean that I can see why you're so upset.

[nolawarlock]

89. ^^^^ this

[Demsrule86]

50. Greens

Do not like the Democrats and are unwilling to do what is needed to get elected ;post United where money must be raised for elections by Democrats:no choice. They attack Dems relentlessly while giving a pass to Republicans; this affect Democratic voters and I think is the reason many stay home in off years ...why Democrats are their target of choice, I don't know. And they cost us elections. The one in 2000 was the worst example. I dislike Greens and would never vote for any of them. I will never forgive Nader or Greens for Bush.

[FSogol]

58. Electabilty. If you like Trump, you should vote for Stein.

[casperthegm]

60. Yes, yes, we all get it; a vote for anyone else is a vote for Trump

Good lord, we all get that concept. What boggles my mind is the general lack of willingness to consider that the party's direction may be more beneficial to corporate interests than those of the people the party is supposed to be fighting for. I'm not saying the Democratic party is bad and we should look elsewhere. I'm saying we need to take a closer look, compare/contrast, and talk about things, including flaws within the party's platform. What I'm seeing here is a lot of people saying, "no, we aren't here to talk about the party's problems. Let's just ignore them and get as many Dems elected as possible." Why can't we do both?

[FSogol]

61. "I'm not saying the Democratic party is bad and we should look elsewhere." That's exactly what you

are saying.

You have to be in power to affect change. The Green Party with their top up strategy is nothing more than a way to get some dollars out of gullible people and political malcontents. If the Green Party was serious about anything, they'd make a major push on the local level, not the national level.

[casperthegm]

62. Ugh

Come on, I could give a rats ass about the Green party. This thread started by the op was about the Green party, so it led me to ask about their platform, so we could compare and contrast vs the Democratic party. You can't tell me that the Dems platform is so perfect, so flawless, that we can't look around for ideas that we like and might want to take on, make our own, or tweak in some way? If not, that smacks of arrogance/ignorance.

My point, just to be clear; Discussion about the Democratic party platform. Both the pros and cons. A genuine conversation, where we don't all have to be cheerleaders, but can point out what we feel are flaws. With fear of being branded traitors to the the cause and having posts banned. Why this is either frowned upon or seen as anti-Democratic party is beyond me. I think most people on this board are here because they are well informed political junkies, yet the responses are so defensive, so anti-critical thinking...

[Chathamization]

63. There's some strange stuff there, like not allowing Puerto Ricans in the military to be deployed

It actually sounds like they might be opposed to Puerto Ricans in the military at all, but maybe this is just about recruitment centers:

We oppose recruitment of the youth of Puerto Rico into the U.S. armed forces and their deployment to U.S. wars abroad.

Likewise, this sounds like it might be 9/11 trutherism, but it's not clear:

The Green Party calls for a complete, thorough, impartial, and independent investigation of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, including the role of the administration of George W, Bush, various U.S. based corporations and interests, and other nations and third parties.

They also seem to advocate a policy of trying to keep the GDP from growing:

Economic growth, as gauged by increasing Gross Domestic Product (GDP), is a dangerous and anachronistic goal. The most viable and sustainable alternative is a steady-state economy. A steady-state economy has a stable or mildly fluctuating product of population and per capita consumption, and is generally indicated by stable or mildly fluctuating GDP.

There's other strange stuff too. Granted, there's good stuff in there as well. But we're able to talk about the good stuff without talking about the Greens. I'm not sure how relevant being in the Green Platform is, or how much it contributes to the conversation.

[auntpurl]

13. Of course not. I expect Sen Sanders will keep his word.

And Jill Stein is not a good candidate.

[LoverOfLiberty]

16. Its not hers to give

anything to stay relevant Jill.

[rusty fender]

68. Exactly!

The Green Party convention isn't till August, and I understand that she has an opponent. Stein doesn't own the Green Party nomination for POTUS

[BobbyDrake]

18. Perennial loser Jill Stein is a joke, but a bad one.

One could argue that she's a bigger egomaniac than Trump. He's only abused the presidential election process for his own glorification once so far, while she's done it a few times now.

[zappaman]

20. LOL!!!

[geek tragedy]

21. next up: Canadian Football League team offers Cam Newton backup QB job nt

[Jitter65]

22. She is doing nothing but helping Donald Trump get elected. Sanders should invite her to join

the Dems as we try our damnedest to fend off the GOP onslaught on our lives and freedoms. There is plenty of room under the Dem tent for her if her ego allows for it. Otherwise...Ralph Nader in a dress.

[Armstead]

46. No, the Democratic tent fights to keep people like her out....

or marginalize them.

There should be room for those with her views and goals...and Nader's too for that matter. (I do not approve of Nader's past political actions, but I agree with much of what he has stood for all his life. Even though he is personally an asshole, Nader actually represents what a large segment of real Democrats actually believe.)

[Demsrule86]

65. No there is no room in the political spectrum for third party spoilers.

Consider Maine...where a third party spoiler helped elect the terrible governor...these folks accomplish nothing and hurt everyone.

[LongtimeAZDem]

87. We learned that lesson in AZ the hard way 30 years ago, and got Ev Mecham (nt)

[Demsrule86]

90. I am not familiar with that situation

But I will google it. I a liberal ...more so than Pres. Obama. I hate trade agreements...yet I voted for the President who supports such agreements. You will never get all you want. If you live in a reddish area, you will get more conservative Democrats...who vote with you most of the time. It is better than having a GOP who votes against you all of the time. You might think I would have supported Bernie...but I never believed he could win a general. I liked both of our candidates really. Imagine being a GOP and having the clown car ride again and ending up with Trump...gag, yuck. I almost feel sorry for them...almost but not quite because they brought it on themselves by playing to the lowest of the low for years.

[Demsrule86]

24. And Trump in the White House

Which means future elections oh for 30 years or so...really won't matter after Trump sets policy and packs the courts (four justices over 80)

[NurseJackie]

25. IOW: Jill Stein says something outrageous in order to make headlines, so that she's not forgotten.

[onehandle]

26. Ever Lying Stein

'“overwhelming” numbers of Sanders supporters are flocking to the Greens rather than Hillary Clinton.'

Liar.

[DemonGoddess]

28. Jill Stein is a stirrer of shit n/t

[SaschaHM]

29. This is just a stunt to pick up some hardcore bernie or busters and improve her standings in polls.

She knows that he won't do it, but she probably sees it as an opportunity to get her name out there and increase her poll numbers.

I'm a bit pleased/impressed by the thirstiness. She and Johnson are effectively keeping each other from the 15% threshold for debates and that will force Trump into a 1v1 debate and keeps him from blending into the background.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

32. There's a vaccine for that

But then again, "Dr Stein" wouldn't know....

[Maru Kitteh]

36. Ha! That's a good one.

[Cali_Democrat]

34. LULz

[Maru Kitteh]

35. Stein is such a feckless idiot. Of course Sanders will have nothing to do with her.

Why would he. The man has a career he'd like to keep.

[CobaltBlue]

43. The two-party structure

Nomination or no nomination…his decision to join the Democratic Party in 2015, and seek the nomination and presidency in 2016, likely was a recognition by Bernie Sanders that bringing about transformative change—for improving the country and the lives of its people—cannot get done outside the two major parties.

Since 1856, every United States president has had a “R” or “D” after his name. Since 2000, the combined percentage of the two-party presidential vote has been no less than 96.25 for George W. Bush vs. Al Gore. (Typically, lately, it’s been 98.xx for R-vs-D.)

I think Bernie Sanders is well-aware. It’s that his platform—and the fact that he earned about 70 percent of the primaries vote from 17–29 voters nationwide (that age group, 18–29, is the first to carry Democratic in general elections)—is most important. That it is definitely more important than the name of the president of the United States.

[Night Watchman]

51. He'd be a Fool if He Did So

"The man who made Trump president" is a label I don't think the senator wants attached to him.

[thucythucy]

55. So if Ms. Stein has such confidence in Senator Sanders

that she has essentially endorsed him for both Green party presidential candidate, meaning de facto leader of the Green Party, and believes his judgment is such that she endorses him as POTUS, does this mean, when he finally endorses Secretary Clinton, that she'll give considerable thought to a Green Party endorsement of Hillary?

....

I didn't think so.

[treestar]

59. So do the Green Party voters have no say?

[Lord Magus]

80. Yeah, I think the Green Party held primaries too.

Would be pretty shady of them to just ignore their voters.

[Orsino]

67. No, no one believes he will.

That is one silly-ass question the OP poses.

[MineralMan]

70. Jill Stein - Folk/Rock Star

[BobbyDrake]

73. Meanwhile, Reality has invited Jill Stein to return whenever she feels comfortable doing so.

No hard feelings.

[tblue37]

74. I believe (and fervently hope) he is too wise to do anything that stupid. Furthermore,

I can't imagine him going back on his pledge not to play spoiler in the GE. Unlike Nader, and despite Sanders' valid criticisms of the Democratic Party, he knows how dangerous Trump is, how important the SCOTUS is, and how much better the Dems are. There is a reason why he has always caucused with the Dems, after all.

I think he will do his best to help the most progressive down ticket candidates as well as keeping Deadbeat Don out of the WH.

[Barack_America]

75. Huh. Interesting.

[Purveyor]

76. Bernie won't go there. This cake is baked... eom

[merrily]

77. Anyone who doesn't know I wanted Bernie to be the nominee (tho I thought that unlikely), just

look at my sig line. However, I also enjoy things like principles, due process, basic documents mattering, votes mattering, etc.

I assume that Jill Stein is the 2016 nominee of the Green Party only because the Green Party, using its internal policies and procedures, duly nominated her to be the 2016 nominee of the Green Party. So, under what authority is she offering the Green Party nomination to someone else? Her party's nomination is not her personal property to give away or not, as she pleases. Did the Party take another vote, consistent with its internal rules?

Things like this, the Shadow Cabinet and failures to get on the ballot after all these years are among the reasons I sometimes have difficulty taking the Green Party seriously as a political party, even though I agree with many of its positions and admire many of the ideological stands taken by Dr. Stein and other prominent Green Party figures. That said, I have issues with the Democratic and Republican Parties as well, though different kinds of issues.

[Lord Magus]

81. The Green Party wants to be a major national party but they have no idea how.

First step is to be a viable party for state-level offices and targeted congressional districts. Which in turn means more than just getting somebody's name on the ballot with a "G" beside their name; they have to recruit serious candidates rather than vanity candidates. People who can run a real campaign and (sadly a basic requirement in modern politics) raise enough money to get their message out. A party with no bench is not going to win or even seriously contend for the White House. Having the best ideology in the world isn't enough if you can't get people in office to implement it.

[merrily]

83. I don't necessarily agree that the best way to become a national party is to start with local or

state offices. However, yes, at some point, whether that point is the first step or the tenth, it's necessary to do a lot more than run for President.

I also don't necessarily agree that the Green Party doesn't know what you are saying. The Green Party just doesn't seem to me to have the will. For example, I once emailed the Green Party of Massachusetts to ask a question. Seems to me, that should have put me on their email mailing list, at least until I unsubscribed. I did get an answer to my question, but I never got another email after that. Granted that is a small thing, but it is an example, much like the "Shadow Cabinet" is an example, much like not making sure you are on every state's ballot is an example.

[Lord Magus]

79. Bernie will continue to not even give her the time of day. And rightly so.

Stein was as surprised as anyone (and probably more surprised than most) by Bernie's popularity this year, and now she wants him to shine that spotlight in her direction. If she was even remotely sincere about this, she would've invited Bernie to run on the Green ticket last March or April before he announced his candidacy as a Democrat.

[brooklynite]

85. And who is Jill Stein to offer up the nomination?

She's not event the nominee; the Green Party won't pick one until August.

And what does this say about the Green Party's respect for Democracy?

[Historic NY]

86. Her party is only on the ballot in 21 states....how smart is that,

[Warren DeMontague]

88. The timing is perfect, because it makes the Greens look even more irrelevant.