Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently made headlines for calling perennial Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein “predatory” and “not serious.” AOC is right.

Giving voters more choices is a good thing for democracy. But third-party politics isn’t performance art. It’s hard work — which Stein is not doing. As AOC observed: “[When] all you do is show up once every four years to speak to people who are justifiably pissed off, but you’re just showing up once every four years to do that, you’re not serious.”

To be clear: AOC was not critiquing third parties as a whole, or the idea that we need more choices in our democracy. In fact, AOC specifically cited the Working Families Party as an example of an effective third party. The organization I lead, MoveOn, supports their 365-day-a-year efforts to build power for a pro-voter, multi-party system. And I understand third parties’ power to activate voters hungry for alternatives: I myself volunteered for Ralph Nader in 2000, and that experience helped shape my lifelong commitment to people-first politics.


Register to vote: https://vote.gov/

  • Boddhisatva@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    These third party types always claim that they want to reform the system. That’s bullshit. If you want to reform this system then you need to start at the bottom. You need to recruit candidates and invest in winning at local and state level first. Those are the most winnable offices for an outsider/independent. Hell, win a few critical states and you can get enough states in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact which, while not an ideal solution, would be a good first step in reforming the system.

    Once you have some power and recognition at the state level, you need to aim for Congress. Start winning seats in the House and Senate and you can really start making change. That is where the real power of change resides. How many times have we seen a president with a divided House and/or Senate have their policy goals effectively neutered by legislative antagonism? Without support from the House and Senate, a 3rd party president would be powerless.

    Stein cannot possibly enact positive change even if there were a literal miracle and she became president. The only thing, literally the only thing she can do by running for President is get Trump elected.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yeah, if the greens succeeded at things I might consider voting for them. As it stands I don’t like the democrats but when they do well I get some of what I want. The more votes the greens get the less I get of what I want. I’d love to see a state with a green-dem coalition doing big things to demonstrate that they can actually govern as opposed to just run for office, and not even do that well.

      • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        keyword “system”. It’s the system that formed the two party dynamic. In order to change that we must change the system that led to the problem

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 days ago

        Because it’s literally not a solution. The absolute best case scenario is causing the closest ideological party to fail for many elections in a row before it disintegrates and reforms in the third party, which is now the second party in a two party system and filled with many of the same politicians and beholden to most of the same voters.

        Voting reform is the solution for everyone complaining about the two party system. Get ranked choice and leftier challengers who actually care about the results of elections will run against establishment politicians more often.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Oh ok, well here’s what it does: nothing at best, but when a third party does very well the major party they oppose most wins. That’s fptp, it’s not hard to figure out if you have more than a handful of brain cells.

          • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            You pulled out your Facebook memes to say you wanted to break the two party system by voting third party. Nothing about my response is trying to address whether you should be voting, but your chosen action is stupid and has no potential to accomplish what you say you want to do.

            Your username may be ironic, but outsourcing expressing feelings to a vague and not quite appropriate meme response rather than actually trying to say what you think and defend your personal opinions is one of the big reasons people shit on Boomers. Granted it’s a step up from my old conservative acquaintances on account of not also being in service of the most vile opinions humans espouse, but it’s just as tired and unwelcome.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              Jill Stein supports ranked choice voting, Kamala Harris doesn’t even mention it in her platform.

              A Jill Stein administration will:

              • Replace the exclusionary two-corporate-party system with an inclusive multi-party democracy through ranked-choice voting and proportional representation
              • Implement Ranked-Choice Voting for all elections nationwide
              • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                Jill Stein says things and then does nothing to actually make them happen, like a lot of grifters. Weird how anti-establishment people can be so rightfully skeptical of Democratic politicians and hangers on, but then believe hook line and sinker that non-establishment voices are all in it for the ideology.

          • Iunnrais@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            It affects the election, but not in the way you want. It is literally the equivalent of not voting at all. That does effect the outcome if you would have voted for one of the two main parties otherwise.

          • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 days ago

            It doesn’t count because a 3rd party candidate will never win.

            It can decide an election because it’s removing a vote from the candidate closest to you who is actually electable.

            Let’s say you think taxation is theft, but you can’t vote for Trump because “reasons”. You vote Libertarian.

            You’ve taken your vote from Trump and given it to a candidate with no chance.

            Harris +50
            Trump +49
            Libertarian +1

            Flip it around, you support Roe vs. Wade but you can’t vote for Harris because “reasons”. You vote Green.

            You’ve taken your vote away from Harris and given it to a candidate with no chance.

            Trump +50
            Harris +49
            Green +1

            In neither case will it ACTUALLY be that close, but you get the idea.

            • Ion@lemmy.myserv.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 days ago

              Why do liberals assume they are entitled to leftist votes? The entire DNC prevented anti genocide speakers, yet platformed former Republicans, the Israeli family of a hostage, etc. it’s clear the party is more invested in appealing to conservatives, so good luck 👍

      • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        She’s actually been fairly effective for a new congressman. But in order to get meaningful change she needs both position and allies in congress. She has a number of allies (AKA The Squad) but because Congress is so full of old fucks, getting a position in a committee with any power at all is difficult at best.

        Meanwhile Jill Stein goes on TV, snipes at the democratic party and collects paychecks, all while eroding the party’s position all for literally no benefit whatsoever. The Green Party has been the single most ineffective third party in the history of the country. The only thing they’ve accomplished is siphoning off votes from Democrat presidential candidates and getting Republicans elected.

        • PeggyLouBaldwin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 days ago

          The Green Party has been the single most ineffective third party in the history of the country.

          oh, so the democrats have no interest in the green new deal? or expanding renewables? i know they don’t give a fuck about stopping war, but i think you are mistaken about the effectiveness of the green party.

          • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            i think you are mistaken about the effectiveness of the green party.

            Which green party senators or house members have pushed for that? How many of them are there? What national office holders are making the changes you’re looking for?