Jill Stein refuses to attack Donald Trump.

Start here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism

And Stein and Dick Cheney are carbon copies of each other.

Jill Stein is running ads attacking Hil and thus is supporting Trump...she is his surrogate...nothing more.

One can say many things about those who have chosen to support Stein, or otherwise sit out the election and not vote for Clinton.

However, "to the right" is not one of them. Conservatism has nothing to do with it.

at the 'other site' where the person will vote for Stein but if the election is close will switch to Trump...to prevent a Clinton victory. Some post here too and they always want us to be nice to Jill. Some of them are Trump voters also. The Greens are not left and they do not produce outcomes that are good for the left either.

But apart from the deliberate GOP plants and right-wing dirty tricksters, most of that is misguided progressivism.

I have a couple of friends like that. I argue with them about it, but I sympathize and understand their frustration with the entrenched status quo. Their motivations are the opposite of right wing or conservative.

If anyone sees a Democrat or Green party voter saying they'll switch to Trump for any reason, they are seeing a troll, probably a paid troll at that. If those fake progressives have agitated some here, then they have done the job they were set out to do.

Does that make you feel better?

Donald Trump is a loose cannon that will run the country just like George Bush did. Donald Trump will get into needless wars. So Jill Stein must support neocons if she would rather see Trump win over Hillary.

would see Trump as the bigger danger than Clinton...

Yet 99.9% of the vitriol from Stein and her minions has been directed towards Hillary since day one...

So it's a legitimate question to ask whether she is honestly running for office, or merely trying to spoil it for Dems...

If she was truly liberal, and concerned about the Country she would be focusing on voters like me. And the message wouldn't be HRC sucks. It would be I disagree with the positions of HRC but they are nowhere near as bad as Donald J. Trump,.... here is where I differ with HRC, I refuse to discuss Trump policies because they are so poorly thought out and detrimental.

Pointing out differences with HRC fine, ignoring the Donald, not fine.

I know Donald Trump is a serial monogamist but I figured he usually goes for younger women.

Besides if you're going to raid yourself with fruit from a big tree, you whack the one that's more laden and with fruit more ripe to drop. That's why Dr. Stein is whacking the Democratic Party tree as we have the ripe fruit that is fit to drop in her bucket. The Republican Party tree is smaller, has less ripe fruit (in her own eyes). So for the Green Party to go after Republicans isn't exactly good strategy.

The latest RCP polls show Clinton doing the same in national polls that include Stein than ones that don't.

ABC/WAPO - Clinton v Trump, Clinton +8
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

ABC/WAPO - Clinton v Trump v Stein v Johnson, Clinton +8
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

Where is the threat?

But her efforts to pretend to be a "serious" candidate have the potential to siphon votes from Hillary.

I pointed you at the poll data showing ZERO impact in Clinton.

but paid political whores. Did you know they took money from the GOP from various places including Texas to run Green candidates to stop Democratic candidates from winning the election? The GOP candidates won...they had help from the non-lefty Greens.

"The Texas Democratic Party went to court Thursday to find out who funded a petition drive for the Green Party that could help Gov. Rick Perry and other Republicans win close races this fall.

The parties struck a deal Thursday afternoon under which the Green Party will delay submitting their list of candidates to the state until a court rules on the matter.

At issue is whether the party, in accepting the petitions from a nonprofit company, violates state law. An out-of-state Republican consultant arranged for the gathering of signatures, a deal first reported by The Dallas Morning News this week.

"Texans need to know the truth about Rick Perry's involvement in the Republican/Green Party petition scam," said state Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie".



http://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/state-politics/20100610-Texas-Democrats-take-Green-Party-to-8824.ece

As you know I love your posts.

when all you ever do is act as a spoiler in order to elect Republicans...and the Greens are paid to do it too. I enjoy your post very much also.

Fuck that fascist. She should eb attacked so long as she is getting a single vote!

But as I pointed out the data indicates that she is having exactly zero affect on Clinton's support. I know it is just "data" and is therefore just a nuisance that gets in the way of red baiting hippy punching and continuing the divisive primary factional wars here, but perhaps Trump is the actual threat?

Even one vote for the fascist is too many.

And I know that the Jackass Laughingstocks love the fascist Putin Poodle.

advice of her most ardent supporters here and focus the campaign against the dire threat Stein poses.

Stein gets a ton of free press here on the DU!

those who support Jill to peddle the Green poison here and use it to Attack Hil...not saying you...but some who have posted this stuff back Jill or even Trump. We elect Democrats. And Greens hurt the progressive cause by helping elect Republicans...and where is Jill getting her money for the slick ads running in the rust belt? Most likely the GOP;the Green have done it for years...the Greens are an arm of the RNC really and help enact conservative policy. The Green are selfish entitled care for nobodies who have over the years harmed local, mid-term and presidential chances for the Democrats...and Jill Stein is the poster girl for those wackos.

is to be more receptive and honestly open to the good progressive ideas and valid critiques of progressives.

The more the Democrats do that, the less inclined the reasonable progressives will be to support third parties or to give up on reform and politics altogether.

Doesn't mean the Green Party would disappear totally, but the more welcoming and open the Democratic Party is the more the "spoiler factor" will be marginalized.

support the Greens and want to do it here...and we support the Democratic nominee...the only thing standing between us and Trump. Stein attacks Hillary and is cozy with Trump...she can not be tolerated here.

thus they will never by liberal enough for Greens...Stein mouths mostly Democratic party platform stuff with a dose of Bernie...we have the most liberal platform in many years...and it is still not enough. The Greens hate the Democrats and will look for any opening to do us harm. They are part of the GOP really as they elect Republicans and will never go away. They are paid GOP trolls really.

on the radar screen for me until I encountered numerous threads on DU attacking her. I still don't understand the over reaction, but I'm sure I will be attacked yet again for just saying that. Either some people have an unnaturally short fuse or an agenda that is not apparent to me.

Assuming Puke/Greens are benign or irrelevant is just as prudent a strategy as ignoring the sentinel harbingers of any disease.

Better to nip that shit in the bud.

So, she will be discussed too.

she will tank.

...logic to formulate your questions?

I found this August 8th discussion/analysis informative:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/

I don't find her appealing- she has no experience or accomplishments in public life and her vp pick was awful, but she's no threat.

She isn't even a threat as a 'spoiler'.

She is helping Trump and involved with the Russians who are hacking for Trump, probably altering emails and passing them along to the useful idiots Wiki. She deserves what she gets and more.

wide enough so that we're never in the position of 2000 again, having the national election decided by a handful of voters in a single state.

But there is also evidence that Russia may be seeking to help both Trump and Stein's candidacies, so discussing Stein's connections with Russia is relevant in that respect, too.

You keep saying people are supporting Dr. Stein when all they are doing is advocating ignoring her. Why do you make such over-dramatic disingenuous statements? If you want any credibility you should at least characterize the statements you are answering with some accuracy.

And that's one opinion I won't change.

indicating anyone should kiss any ass you are again being disingenuous. Why can't you truthfully characterize the post you are answering?

So we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

it doesn't make it true. You can't point to a single word asking for Dr. Stein to be supported in any way at all. The lack of truthful discourse on a forum that I would hope values reality is depressing.

We know what Jackass Laughingstock posters want in this election.

You cannot hide what is posted there.

A Google search brings up dictionary definitions for Jackass and Laughingstock. I'm not actually interested in whatever it is that you have found as grist for your juvenile name calling, but it does illustrate that you lack adult seriousness.

When she does. Any chance to take a jab at someone who takes constants jabs at Hillary Clinton - then I'll take it.

Greens, Republicans, Libertarians - this new guy McMullin. Eff em all!

Stein is runnig ads in swing states and will be attacked anytime someone make a 'concerned for Jill post' "Or does Jill really matter post" or "let's unify with the Green post (gag vomit). Let me begin she is a disgusting selfish entitled piece of garbage spawned from Hell.

I guess you can see I don't like Greens...people don't understand how they have in places like GA and Texas meddled even in local elections..taken money from the GOP to prevent the Dem who had a chance winning from winning...now how is that progressive when you enable the GOP? And of course there is 2000...the Greens most successful year...they helped elect Bush...and own United, 9-11, the wars, Katrina deaths, more bad court decisions, tax cuts for super wealthy and other equally bad stuff...The supreme irony is that when the green bastards complain about wealth inequality and money in politics...they don't seem to realize they helped create both...completely oblivious. The other explanation is that they are paid political whores who are for sale to the highest bidder...I lean towards that.

In latest threads - about an hour ago - yet ANOTHER thread about MSNBC's morning team demaning apologies from Clinton. Perfect case - are we a part of the solution or a part of the problem.

This McMullin guy - last I heard was going to run. Bravo - who gives a fuck except he's going to go after Trump.

Johnson - just looking at subject lines on this thread - is really NOT a threat to Clinton. Everyone I know that 'jumped' to him is a disgruntled Republican. I know 11 people like this.

Stein is just a tool for Trump and Putin. I'm beginning to feel she is actually the 'Manchurian Candidate'.

Manchuria is not getting much bang for their buck.

And they should just stop trying already.

That's reason enough for DU to go after her. But, there are many others. She has no experience with governing. She is an uptalker. She appears to have some sort of connection with the Russian Federation and Putin, based on recent photo evidence. But, since she's an opponent to the Democratic candidate, she'll find no support here on DU.

Why do you care?

I suppose if she gets up to 2.5% from 2%, you could call that a surge.

and it wouldn't be a blip on the radar.

Trust me, they won't be directing massive ad money for anti-Stein commercials. Pay no attention to the diversions.

That being said, she's not a sacred cow, Warren.

I'll go on record that I don't like the petty name-calling.

However, I don't have any problem with criticism and ridicule of Stein.

If she says something idiotic (which happens often) then she is going to get criticized or ridiculed at DU.

If she keeps smearing the Dem nominee in those glossy TV ads of hers, she'll be criticized as well.

she's a dead horse. That's why I look on in wonder at those doing such vigorous flogging.

But rather they are my life-long antipathy to progressives with relatively okay ideas and absolutely insane procedural or electoral strategies

Her feverish stridency and her attitude that every single elected official is evil but that she alone holds some kind of secret key to truth? What is that?

Breaking bread with anti-gay extremists offends me also.

However, I consider anybody running whom might help tilt the election towards Donald Trump in November a political opponent and fair game for us to criticize. I also just find the Green Party's general tendency in general to spend more of their time attacking Democrats instead of Republicans baffling/offensive. Democrats will always have way more in common with the Greens than Republicans and will be way more likely to meet the Greens halfway than Republicans but because most Democrats, in order to remain politically viable, have to bend a little here and there and compromise in order to get things passed and signed into law, what they actually accomplish never seems to be good enough or "pure" enough for the Greens. Hillary is the only viable alternative to Donald Trump. Stein and Johnson's only role in this election is as a spoiler who might possible throw the election to one candidate or another. I don't know how much of a threat Johnson poses to Clinton but he's currently polling better than Stein and making a bid for Sanders supporters, so he is equally open to attack and criticism. It's still a ways until November, so who knows what will happen to anybody's polling and how it might affect (or not) the November election but the point is, that, for the purposes of this discussion board, Hillary is the only candidate we should be supporting and everybody else is an opponent.

move Democrats left nor does more willing than TeaPubLieKLANS translate to actually willing much less able to proritize issues while trying to attract more conservative voters.

Frustrating, I can get though it would seem that frustration would act as a platform to have some empathy for the frustration that drives folks to push from the left.

"Shouldn't we be focusing on him?"

I imagine one may focus on any number of opposition platforms without losing any relevant information and gaining additional contrast.

Seems naive (at best) for a rational mind to ignore a thing simply because one is unable to see an absolute or direct peril or menace. Allowing something attention allows ourselves additional information.

Which is why I have been saying for weeks that we need to do oppo research and knock her down on the merits, rather than just telling people that a vote for her is a vote for Trump.

Calling Stein a moron, neo-con, batshit crazy, traitor, political whore, quack, fucking fascist, etc. is only persuasive to people who already hate her. I personally don't consider her an issue in this election, but the baseless insults are bound to turn off Democrats who are still recovering from Bernie's loss.

I've seen implications that she is working with Trump and Putin, conspiracy theories that do not add credibility to people's criticisms. It would seem that there are enough valid reasons to disqualify Stein as a presidential candidate, people don't need to resort to hyperbolic insults and then call people who advocate civility, Stein shills.

This is issue has taken up far too much attention in this election.

Not even she thinks she could possibly win a state (let alone the presidency) so then what is her actual goal?

There are only two realistic outcomes to this election: President Clinton or Trump. If Stein's going after voters who would never vote for the D or R, then fine. It's a wash.

But:

1. She's attacking Clinton far more forcefully than Trump and in SWING states. Why?

2. Because she's attempting to convince Clinton leaners to vote Green, which takes away from Clinton's total while leaving Trump's unaffected.

Now this all seems obvious so the questions become: how could these actions NOT increase the likelihood of a Trump presidency? And why should Democrats and anyone rightfully worried about a Trump presidency simply ignore the Green Party then? Why shouldn't we call it as we see it?

No matter the "intentions" the result ONLY BENEFITS TRUMP.

triangulation

Any post supporting her or the Green party should be considered the same as supporting Trump and the Republicans.

Just like Trump.

She is helping him get elected.

I wonder what Putin gave to Jill and the Green party for their help?

in 2000.