Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Lashes Out at 'Predatory' Jill Stein

[RandySF]

In an Instagram story posted on Sunday, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a New York Democrat, blasted Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein as "predatory" due to her multiple runs for the White House while struggling to grow the third party at the grassroots level.

In 2016, Stein played kingmaker in several key battleground states. Her vote total was higher than Donald Trump's margin of victory in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan—prompting intense backlash from Democrats and political pundits. Not only was Stein widely condemned as a spoiler, but former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was the Democratic nominee during the 2016 election, later accused her of being a "Russian asset."

Ocasio-Cortez accused Stein and the Green Party, which reached its current party status in 2001, for only putting its emphasis on presidential elections. To date, no Green Party candidate has ever held a federal office and only a handful have been elected as state legislators.

Ocasio-Cortez, responding to a question from an Instagram follower about Jill Stein's candidacy, said that "this is a little spicy, but I have thoughts."

"If you run for years in a row, and your party has not grown, has not added city council seats, down ballot seats and state electives, that's bad leadership. And that to me is what's upsetting," the congresswoman said about Stein.



https://www.newsweek.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-blasts-predatory-jill-stein-green-party-2024-election-1947286

[JI7]

1. The pupose of that party is to help Republicans win

[SocialDemocrat61]

2. Bravo AOC

[HarryM]

3. I met Jill Stein and asked her

How she was going to do anything that requires okays from Congress if she has no support there. I also asked how it is that there are no Green Party members of the House and Senate. This was around 2014 or 2015. She just shrugged off these off. It was at a forum, where I stated that if any of the goals mentioned were to be achieved, people there have to hold office. When the audience of a bout 200 were asked if they would commit to run for office. Only a handful raised their hands. Most just talk And do very little if anything. The least they can do is vote for someone who can fulfill SOME of their aims. Nobody can satisfy all.

[SunSeeker]

4. Well, Jill Stein certainly fulfilled Putin's aims.

Putin is her actual constituent, not those nebbishes at that forum.

[MichMan]

5. I recall people here donating money to her for her fake recount n/t

[CommonHumanity]

6. That was me, for one.

What an unethical bitch. I just can't imagine knowingly decieving people that way. Ugh. Humans, what a damn species...we can be so awful.

[MichMan]

7. P.T Barnum nailed it

[EleanorR]

38. People that wanted Democracy to continue unfortunately trusted Stein in a moment of desperation

Those who follow trump either know what he is and continue nonetheless, making them enemies of Democracy or they don't know and yeah P.T. nailed it...

[yardwork]

8. Electing Trump messed up the con.

Trump's election in 2016 did not usher in a glorious revolution. Instead, he got to appoint three more travesties to the Supreme Court and kill hundreds of thousands of people. The rich got richer and everybody else struggles even more.

There are plenty of people in the U.S. who would like to see us move closer to a socialist country, and they have sincerely held, altruistic beliefs. Some of them are figuring out that Jill Stein and some other losers aren't really on their side. They're grifters.

Once the con is revealed it's hard to fool people the same way again.

[Martin Eden]

9. We need Instant Runoff (ranked choice) voting

Third Party candidates on the left gave us GW Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016 -- by far the worst presidents in my lifetime of 67 years.

[SocialDemocrat61]

10. First, there are no runoffs in Presidential elections

Second, you assume that someone who votes for the Green Party will automatically put the Democrat as their second choice. Most of them hate Democrats and would never do so.

I'm all for ranked choice it primaries. It makes sense there. But in general elections is just give fuel to third parties and doesn't benefit democrats.

[Martin Eden]

12. Obviously, which is why we need Instant Runoff Voting

2 questions:

1. Is the Green Party to the left, or to the right of the Democratic Party?

2. Is the environment important to Green Party voters?

If the Green Party is left and for the environment, then please explain why Green Party voters would rank GW Bush ahead of Al Gore and Donald Trump ahead of Hillary Clinton.

Bush and Trump are disastrous for the environment and on pretty much every issue voters on the left care about.

I am not nearly as concerned about third parties gaining traction as I am about spoilers like Nader and Stein swinging the presidency to rightwing thugs like Bush and Trump.

[SocialDemocrat61]

13. Never said they would

But they wouldn’t automatically make a democrat their second choice. They hate democrats even more than they hate republicans. They could leave the second choice blank or choose another third party candidate. Plus building up third parties hurts, doesn’t help, the Democratic Party.

[Martin Eden]

14. You assume a majority of Green voters are irrational, or blinded by hate

Every voting group has diversity. In general, I think voters on the left are more rational and mostly share the same long term goals of saving the environment, human rights, and our democracy.

Rational voters on the left know the Republican Party -- especially these days -- is an absolute disaster for those core values.

They also know we are a long way from any third party candidate winning the presidency -- which means it will come down to the D or the R.

Some of the more narrow minded or bitter Green voters might exclude both the major parties from their ranked choice ballots.

Currently, not a single Green vote can go to the Democratic candidate.

So the case for Ranked Choice comes down to this:

For those who do include one or both of the major parties on their ballot, what percent is more likely to put the D candidate ahead of the R candidate (or vice versa)?

[SocialDemocrat61]

15. No You're assuming

that they think like you do. Big mistake. If everyone did, democrats would win every election. You’re these assumptions without any evidence. Those assumptions are a fools errand.

[Martin Eden]

18. You have no evidence, so logic must be applied

My anecdotal experience with Green Party voters is that they share the same core values as most Democratic voters I know, and they are not delusional.

They think both major parties are corrupt, and though they know the R's are much worse they think the D's are also beholden to deep pocket interests (though to a lesser extent) than the R's.

They feel their voices aren't being heard and the pace of progress is much too slow.

I disagree with their voting decision, though I understand them.

I stated an absolute indisputable fact in my last post:
Curently, not a single Green Party vote can go to the Democratic cabdidate.

So, as I also stated:
Would more Green Party voters place the D ahead of the R on their ranked choice ballot?

I will be bold in making this assumption:
D's would gain more votes than R's on ballots with Green ranked first.

In my last two posts I've put forth logical arguments why D's would garner more votes than R's.

To effectively counter that assertion, you need to make the case that;
A) Zero Green voters would include a major party candidate on their ballot
B) More Green voters would rank the R candidate ahead of the D candidate

[SocialDemocrat61]

19. That's not logic, it's assumptions

If Green voters operated on logic, they wouldn’t be throwing their votes away to begin with.

There is no reason to believe that Green Party votes will make a democrat their second choice.

[Martin Eden]

22. Bullshit. I provided several good reasons

You rely on the entirely unsupported assumption that zero Green voters operate on logic. The one ones I know are simply fed up with the current binary choice and believe things will mever change if they always compromise.

I strongly disagree with them, but they are not delusional. They know their candidate has no chance in a presidential election, but they're fed up.

Ranked choice gives them the chance to vote their first choice, and do so without helping the environmentally destructive Rethug.


I'm done with you today.

Have the lsst word if you must.

[SocialDemocrat61]

23. You provided several assumptions

I’m relying on that it’s not a guarantee that anyone voting Green Party will automatically make the democrat their second choice. It’s a total assumption that the would. And making the argument that people who would vote for someone that has no chance of winning and throw an election to someone like Trump or Bush are rational and logical is not a good argument when they have already done so, twice.

[Cirsium]

28. Maybe

If it is true that someone who votes for the Green Party will not vote for the Democrat as their second choice because they hate Democrats and would never do so, then that would mean that Stein is not a spoiler.

[SocialDemocrat61]

29. She's still a grifter

[MichMan]

16. Gary Johnson received 3x the votes that Jill Stein did in 2016

Johnson, running as a Libertarian received 3.27% of the votes while Jill Stein got 1.06%.

I tend to believe that most of the votes Johnson got were probably at Trump's expense, not Clinton's. IMO, had neither been on the ballot, it would have likely helped Trump more than Clinton. Hard to say because no one knows if third party voters would have turned out to vote at all otherwise.

[Martin Eden]

20. THAT is a valid point

It's difficult to know how Johnson voters would fill out their ranked choice ballot.

However, assuming in general they are intelligent and rational, they should know Donald Trump is a much greater threat to Constitutional liberties and to the foundational principles of our republic.

As a matter of principle, I don't like the fact that voting for your first choice helps your last choice win an election.

[MichMan]

25. Just not convinced that Libertarian voters would have switched to the Democratic candidate rather than the Republican

Of course it's pure speculation either way. Just as no one knows if Green Party voters would naturally default to the Democratic candidate

[Martin Eden]

27. Neither am I. They couldn't bring themselves to vote for Trump

With a "normal" Republican nominee, most of tjem would probably vote R.

Which means Instant Runoff Voting wouldn't be as much of a factor.

Of course, a discussion about the impact of ranked choice is hypothetical because there's little prospect of it being implemented at the national level.

Personally, I like the idea of letting voters select their first choice without helping to elect their last choice.

Also, I like the idea that it could move electoral politics more into a contest of ideas, away from the bitterly polarized binary choice we have now.

In the realm of ideas rather than lies and fearmongering, Trumpism collapses. Democratic policies better serve the interests of the majority of Americans.

[JustAnotherGen]

31. I would support

Ranked choice if we eliminate the electoral college.

[Martin Eden]

34. Electoral College, gerrymandering, and the Citizens United ruling

Are the biggest obstacles to a truly representative democracy.

[JustAnotherGen]

35. I descend from enslaved Americans

We remove the 3/5 Compromise - as it stands in direct opposition to all men are created equal . . .

There's no need for an electoral college to shore up the representation of Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Maryland. There are no slaves there that need to be counted.

[RandomNumbers]

33. With ending the Electoral College.

I *strongly* support Instant Runoff / Ranked-Choice voting. With zero reservations for most elections.

I think the Electoral College presents a potential issue for presidential elections. We are recently accustomed to the third-party candidates being so kooky that we don't consider the possibility of some 3rd party candidate with enough appeal to actually win an important state with RCV. But, what if they did? And what if the state they won were one that would normally go to the Dem? There will be no RCV for the Electoral College vote, for sure. So you end up with the potential of losing a large state's EC votes to the third party, harming the Dem's chance to win. (Or, possibly the R's chance, but we'd like that).

If the National Popular Vote effort that is currently underway is successful - and stands up in courts - then I will be full-throated for RCV at all levels. Meanwhile we should do it for every other race and get people comfortable with it. I firmly believe that once people understand it, they will like it so well that they will raise hell to get it at the presidential level also.

[DonCoquixote]

11. Green means

Get
Republicans
Elected
Every
November

[moondust]

17. How many rubles is democracy worth,

Jill?

Does he pay in crypto?

[GoneOffShore]

21. Here's the boilerplate I have for the third party fans, both 'Greens' and 'Lie-bertarians'(sic)

The US political system is not a light switch nor is it a fast car - It can be likened more to a very large ship. In order to change direction, it takes time. In the US system, which isn't going to change any time soon, there are two parties, whether you like it or not.
Third parties, until they prove themselves viable, and no, the Greens, financed by Moscow last time out of the gate, nor the Liebertarians (sic), financed by people who don't want government to work, will likely never make it in the US system. Third parties are the four-year locusts of US politics. They show up, make a lot of noise, leave a mess, and disappear.

I also add the following (and please note, this is not directed to any DU'ers!)

You want change? Run for block captain in your local party, run for ward leader, run for city council, run for state senator - in that order. And then you might get a chance at running and winning a Congressional seat. It takes a lot of work. It takes a lot of time. It takes your entire fecking life. And you can make change from within.
Some things to keep in mind -
1 - The perfect is the enemy of the good. - "Opposing progress in favour of perfection is not progressive."
2 - All politics is local.
3 - 90% of success is showing up.
4 - 'Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best' Otto von Bismarck —
5 - You're not going to get a unicorn who shits rainbows.
6 - See number one.
There are never going to be unicorns who shit rainbows.
“Le parfait est l'ennemi du bien. Il n’y aura jamais de licornes qui chieront des arcs-en- ciel

[mvd]

24. Good

Stein cares more about her own running than trying to make Green Party ideas more mainstream.

[enigmania]

26. She is a chaos agent.

[LiberalFighter]

30. There should be a requirement to be on the ballot for President

Green Party must be registered as a party in a state.

There must be at least three elected members in both chambers of the state legislative body. Six total minimum. And there must be at least 35 percent of the counties in the state with a County Green Party. Each county with a Green Party must have at least three elected official combined between county and municipal officials. Once attaining that requirement they would be allowed to maintain the party if it goes below the startup requirement for up to eight years. If they fail to retain the minimum they would be barred from running as a candidate under that party name.

The above is just something to start as a base as to how to it. And apply to any group wanting to create a new party.

[lees1975]

32. She may have been more of a threat in 2016. She's not getting nearly the support now.

And I'm not sure anyone who would bother to vote for her would vote for Harris anyway. The momentum the Democrats now have will mow her down and flatten her campaign, what little there is of it.

I do wish Democrats would find a good way to absorb their issues and neutralize her, though. How did someone like that ever get out of Harvard with a medical degree?

[JustAnotherGen]

36. 3 doors up from me

Someone has a big green Stein sign. I think its the only one in the borough.

[Tarheel_Dem]

37. I'm no fan of AOC, but she seems to be maturing in office. nt