Cornel West recently announced he is running for president as a Green Party candidate, challenging President Biden in 2024. Some Democrats worry that West’s candidacy could split the progressive vote and help reelect Donald Trump if he is the Republican nominee again, as Jill Stein’s campaign did in 2016. However, West has supporters who see his run as a way to push Biden further left on issues. Still, even some progressives acknowledge West could hurt Biden’s chances of reelection. Democrats argue that beating Trump and enacting progressive policies requires electing Democrats first.

  • lumpen2@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m So Glad that Cornel West is Running because he’s immediately exposing all the lies of the Liberals and how they don’t care about democracy itself. If Democrats feel so threatened by West maybe they will adopt some of his promises, like for example, Ending the Blockade of Cuba, or pardoning political prisoners, things West Promises to do first days in office.

  • SwampYankee@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    “In 2016, the Green Party played an outsized role in tipping the election to Donald Trump,”

    They’ll blame anything other than the facts of Hillary being unlikable and Wasserman-Schulz being incompetent. Johnson took 3x as many votes from the Republicans as Stein took from the Democrats. In the end, Hillary was an electoral dud and Wasserman-Schulz’ mishandling of the primaries led to faithless electors.

    • rambaroo@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah I’m so sick of hearing about the Green Party. Yes they suck, but we have data on who green voters are, and only about 30% of them said they would vote for a Democrat if there was no green candidate.

      It’s a convenient excuse for establishment Democrats to avoid taking responsibility for their losses, but doesn’t hold up to any level of scrutiny. Their biggest issue is consistently failing to motivate their own base. Obama understood that Democratic voters respond well to positive campaign strategies while Clinton and Biden cling to 90s triangulation strategies. Which didn’t even work back then they just got lucky that Ross Perot existed.

      Green Party voters vote against the system. You can’t blame losses on them because the vast majority would simply sit the election out instead of voting for a Dem.

    • slartibartfast42@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Instead of “just leaving this here”, how about you actually clarify what you’re implying? It sounds like you’re accusing Jill Stein of being a Russian asset, and I think it’s really irresponsible to make this kind of accusation in a vague way that gives you plausible deniability.

  • Tomatoes [they/them]@beehaw.org
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Democrats argue that beating Trump and enacting progressive policies requires electing Democrats first.

    They’re still arguing that? We’ve been waiting for the Dems to enact progressive policies for the past two years. It turns out that if you want progressive policies, you actually have to elect progressives.

    • FlowVoid@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Progressives saw climate change legislation and student loan reform in the last two years. If that’s not enough, then you’ll need a Senate supermajority.

      The latter was shot down by the SCOTUS, which serves as a reminder that progressive policies can easily be undone.

    • HQC@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you have a solution to enacting progressive policy that doesn’t require electing a bunch of Democrats to create, introduce and vote on said legislation?

      • lumpen2@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        No, they have no solution, all they want you to do is Vote Democrat and shut up because any criticism will make you a “Russian Asset”

  • AttackBunny@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    So, like 2016 DNC wants to keep the status quo, and won’t bend at all. At least this time the actual issue isn’t on the same ticket, and they can’t force the ticket. I honestly don’t think stein was their problem. Bernie was. And Clinton (she is wildly disliked by MANY) herself. But it was the DNC treatment of Bernie that cost them, not the third party ticket votes. At least imo.

    Personally I’m excited to see people running, who share my views, more than any “mainstream” candidate ever has.

  • SomeGuyNamedPaul@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    These days Green Party is code for Kremlin Asset. Just look to where Jill Stein contested 2016 results and Gemany’s green party actions in trying to stamp out support for Ukraine.

    • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just look to where Jill Stein contested 2016 results and Gemany’s green party actions in trying to stamp out support for Ukraine.

      i’m not sure what these two things have to do with each other, or why either is indicative of being a “Kremlin asset” when the more logical explanation for both is just that Green parties are and have historically been full of people with idealistic political analysis. sure, Stein could be bought off by Russia or something―but i feel like it’s a lot more likely she’s just a weird person with ill-informed takes (she’s basically a soft-antivaxxer and think Wi-Fi has health effects on children’s brains) and that’s why she does weird political things.

  • arctic pie (he/him)@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Perhaps the Democratic Party should understand that this is what happens when you campaign on social justice and then govern like a Republican from the early 2000s, and then adjust accordingly. For many on the left, the prospect of having a Republican president in 2024 may be less frightening than letting the center-right Democrats get bullied around by the GOP and Fox News for another 4 years while actively targeting/destroying actual progressive movements. I’m not necessarily saying I’m on that side of the fence myself, but the Dems have spent the last few years deeply undercutting a lot of the progressive base that got Biden across the finish line and into the White House.

    • adderaline@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      i don’t really know many on the left who would find the idea of a modern republican less frightening than center-right Democrats, and any awareness of what republican state legislators are currently doing in red states should disabuse people of that notion. whatever disappointments suffered under our current gov are not a match for what was happening under the other guy by any measure, and if you’re queer it really should not even be a question as to who is more frightening.

      the comment about getting bullied by the GOP and Fox doesn’t really make sense to me either. Fox isn’t doing great right now, state GOP is hemorrhaging money, and Trump’s been indicted several times, with more coming down soon. i’m nowhere near happy with Biden, and would prefer somebody far more progressive, but your perspective just doesn’t seem super well informed to me. i’m not sure where you’re getting your info.

      i’d also like to know what movements have been targeted/destroyed. the things i can think of are the railroad strike, which didn’t turn out as bad as people think, and maybe what’s going on with Stop Cop City? there are lots of state and city Democrats fucking with that shit, but its a pretty republican push overall, and i don’t think the federal government is involved yet.

  • Irina@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    My first thought was; did Jill Stein’s 2016 campaign have any real impact on the result?

    Looking at this table of results implies that if all Stein voters had voted for Clinton, then maybe Clinton would have won Michigan (final EC result is still 290:248), but the contests elsewhere either weren’t close enough, or didn’t have enough Green voters to matter. Looking at that table, it’s clear that the Libertarians had a much bigger impact.