Jill Stein Is Killing the Green Party - eviltoast

"How has Stein fared as a leader? By AOC’s perfectly reasonable standard, she’s done abysmally. As of July 2024, a mere 143 officeholders in the United States are affiliated with the Green Party. None of them are in statewide or federal offices. In fact, no Green Party candidate has ever won federal office. And Stein’s reign has been a period of indisputable decline, during which time the party’s membership—which peaked in 2004 at 319,000 registered members—has fallen to 234,000 today.

This meager coalition can’t possibly kick-start a legitimate political movement, capable of organizing voters and advancing ideas outside of perennial electoral events. It’s just large enough, however, to spoil the work of those who put in this kind of work."

  • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The only people attacking that are republicans

    No, itt alone there are Dems advocating for these ideas.

    Taking away people’s right to vote, or advocating for speech that does so, is fascist in nature, yes.

    • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Practically no one would agree with you that what was said was fascist or taking rights away or any of these other scary words you’re throwing out. Unless they are trying hard to justify third party voting.

      • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/amdt14-S1-8-6-2/ALDE_00013450/

        All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

        The Supreme Court has determined that, under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, states may require a duration of residency as a qualification to vote, but such requirements will be held unconstitutional unless the state can show that the requirement is necessary to serve a compelling interest.1 According to the Court in Dunn v. Blumstein, [t]his exacting test applies because the right to vote is a fundamental political right . . . preservative of all rights, and because a durational residence requirement directly impinges on the exercise of a second fundamental personal right, the right to travel.2 While acknowledging that states have a legitimate and compelling interest in preventing fraud by voters, in Dunn, the Court determined that a one-year residency requirement in a state and a three-month residency requirement in a county was not necessary to further a compelling governmental interest.3 In contrast, the Court in Marston v. Lewis upheld a fifty-day durational residency and voter registration requirement, determining that the law was necessary to serve the State’s important interest in accurate voter lists.4

        Kinda seems like majority opinion agrees with me that making education a requirement to vote would be blatantly unconstitutional. Because it denies people their right to vote. Which is literally fascism - an authoritarian dictatorship - when people don’t have democracy or the ability to vote.

        • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          We all know the reasoning for that wording. Discrimination and such. We’ve made plenty of amendments in the past. Do you call those unconstitutional? You’re very much overreacting to this very specific idea which btw practically no one throws around. But I understand it completely. It is not even in the same ballpark as fascism, that’s ridiculous bullshit and the wrong thing to hyper focus on. We have a problem with people not understanding what they are even doing. That is something to try to address and calling that fascism is absolutely and plainly ridiculous af

          • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            A normal person would’ve said “careful about putting conditions on voting” or something. Not you, somehow it’s supposed to not be sus AF that you’re raging on about fascism and the constitution. It’s an understandable sentiment that you could’ve talked through but what you chose instead is to demonize the sentiment and ignore the dude’s point while insisting it’s a dog whistle. And now you’re doing it to me. No conversation is possible here. However it’s clearer than ever that your priority is defending uneducated votes above all, like that’s a worthy cause lol

          • LustyArgonian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Making education a REQUIREMENT to voting is 100% fascism, and saying fascist ideals and dog whistles isn’t okay. Making education a requirement to voting is inherently discriminatory.

            I get that you’re trying to gaslight me, it’s kinda cute. Rawr, you almost bamboozled me. I’m not overreacting and I’ve linked numerous very reputable sources. One of which is the literal constitution, which you’re dismissing by saying it can be amended eventually lol. I mean lol. Yes but currently everyone else including Dem president Lyndon B Johnson and Bill Clinton and Obama and Biden and Harris currently all are fine with this constitution as it is. Like we have a ton of establishment agreement here. It actually hurts the Harris campaign to advocate for something like this - maybe you want people to vote 3rd party.

            You want to amend the constitution to reduce people’s ability to vote, which you claim is no biggie and def not fascism lol.

            I agree we need more accessible education - through a free national online school with adaptive learning and no time limits or age restrictions. If grandpa wants to learn 5th grade science or computer science, let him and give him the educational credit. Build an educational legacy.

            But we don’t need to make education a reason to deny someone their right to vote.