Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
simon
@sa
"In 2016, Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin to Trump by 22,748 votes; Stein carried 31,072 votes. In Michigan the story was similar: Clinton lost to Trump by 10,704 votes while Stein carried 51,463. Ditto for Pennsylvania, where Trump won by 44,292 votes and Stein pulled in 49,941 votes." https://newrepublic.com/article/187038/jill-stein-green-party-grifter-hand-trump-white-house
3 replies
0 recast
6 reactions
Thumbs Up
@thumbsup.eth
This is some serious gaslighting. Clinton was a terrible candidate and no one who would have voted for Stein would have voted for her. It’s fair to want to pattern-match these numbers but the reality is these green voters would probably vote PSA or just abstain before they’d vote for a hypermilitarist, pro-big bank, sexual abuse–enabler like Clinton.
3 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
BrixBountyFarm 🎩
@brixbounty
This is the story I’ve heard as well, tends to be folks who wouldn’t have voted for either candidate. Though we won’t know for sure.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Thumbs Up
@thumbsup.eth
We don’t know and ultimately as much as it may be a worse outcome, blaming people who exercise their right to vote is toxic af. What if they vote for Trump instead? This entire argument is predicated on the assumption that the Democratic Party has enough overlap with the Greens that this is just some silly trivial decision. Most people voting for the greens are doing so out of explicitly anti-war, anti-corporate finance, eco-socialist goals, which Harris has not even tried to meet in the middle on. I agree that pragmatically throwing a vote to Harris is sensible, but it continues in a long trend of undermining true small D Democratic principles, and I don’t fault anyone for being principled. The real issue here is the unwillingness of the party to appeal to the left, choosing always to try for so-called swing voters they rarely get.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
