View Poll Results: Would You Consider A Vote For Jill Stein?

Voters
308. You may not vote on this poll
  • Absolutely!

    107 34.74%
  • Only If My Preferred GOP Candidate Loses The Nomination

    42 13.64%
  • Only If My Preferred Dem Candidate Loses The Nomination

    49 15.91%
  • Strong Maybe, Leaning Yes.

    40 12.99%
  • Meh. It Could Happen.

    18 5.84%
  • I Like Her And Support Her Run, But No....

    32 10.39%
  • No Way!

    20 6.49%
Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 131

Thread: Jill Stein

  1. #101
    Sage
    Lovebug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,876

    Re: Jill Stein

    I Like Her And Support Her Run, But No....
    Summary of the Green New Deal - Jill Stein for President
    Idealistic goals, and I too would love nothing more than to strive for a perfect world. If everyone played by the rules, that would be great. But that is, sadly, not so.
    I am looking for someone with realistic and achievable goals.

  2. #102
    Struggler
    JayDubya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    17,181

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    This may come as a shock to you, but I really don't care who you think I should and should not support.
    Great. It's still a thread that's public to all members and I answered your question. I asked one of my own because I found an element of it bizarre. I still do. It's not "black and white" as there are multiple parameters involved in looking at a candidate; left vs. right alone does not cut it, especially since that is merely an economic consideration. How much authority you want to give the government also matters. Foreign policy also matters. I guess economic considerations just don't matter as much to you.

    Okay. Your response was a bit harsher than my question warrants. If you don't like my tone, then let's be frank - you have liked to question my bonafides as a libertarian in other threads. Well, the LP is a strongly rightist, uncompromising free market party. That's why I like it. The mainstream GOP gives lip service to libertarian ideas but doesn't follow through.

    To be frank, there is a much larger percentage of libertarians that agree with me on that single wedge issue in which we vocally disagree - by virtue of the DoI's declaration of unalienable, individual human rights and the central axiom of non-aggression - than there are a percentage of libertarians who could ever support someone advocating for collectivist economics. And that makes sense, because see above - individual human rights. Individualism is important to the LP, it's given lip service by the GOP at large, and it's vehemently opposed by everyone else.

    I am wavering between Gary Johnson and Jill Stein. Why? Because they are the same on most social issues (gay rights, pro choice, legalize drugs, etc.)
    I doubt Jill Stein supports overturning Roe v. Wade because she supports federalism and the Constitution as written; Gary Johnson does. That's hardly the same. Speaking as someone who lives in a state that has a legal ban on the books that was specifically violated by that court case because of a lie 7 men perpetrated about the contents of our Constitution, that's a rather large gulf between them, and it certainly makes a difference to me, because it means appointments to SCotUS would actually do their ****ing job instead of spitting on it.

    civil rights (abolish ndaa/patriot act, reign in nsa, stop racial profiling, demilitarize police, etc)
    Okay, yeah, those are libertarian notions, and that's part of why I support the GOP primary candidate I do (and potentially Gary Johnson afterwards). This is also a case of the mainstream members of one major party giving lip service to these notions but not following through, but it's the leftist party this time.

    On the same point, I am both socialist and pro-gun.
    Okay, so it's all about priorities. I get that. You are socialist but economics isn't that important to you. You are pro-gun, but the Second Amendment just isn't that important to you.

    I understand, because that's how I feel about gay marriage; it does matter to me because freedom of contract is important and the government should not be involved in issuing licenses, but in the big picture, since it only affects so few people and in such a minor way, it matters less to me than probably anything else, far less of a priority to me than life or death matters like gungrabbers trying to eliminate my right to self-defense or socialists trying to violate everyone's right to property.

    I am for both helping the poor and for ending or at least shrinking most national bureaucracies.
    Now that is absolutely not possible. Socialist entitlement programs demand a bloated bureaucratic infrastructure. Leviathan, thy name be "the welfare state."

    If you want to help the poor but you want to shrink the size of government; well, that's why us libertarians believe in voluntary private charity.

    I am for both unions and homeschooling.
    Ehh. Being for unions can theoretically work for a libertarian if they are strongly freedom of contract and don't mind unions' collectivist bent, I guess. What's bad is when the government coerces private businesses into making that sort of contract under duress, which is why I'm glad I live in a "right to work" state.


    So I get what you're saying. You've explained it so that it kind of sort of makes sense. Your priorities are what they are, and they are such that right vs. left doesn't actually mean much to you. Got it.
    Last edited by JayDubya; 02-01-15 at 11:13 AM.

  3. #103
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: Jill Stein

    Anyone who complains about current gridlock can't support Stein with much credibility. Both her and the Green's platform is a comical wishlist that wouldn't even garner support from Democrats, let alone two Republican controlled houses.

  4. #104
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    Anyone who complains about current gridlock can't support Stein with much credibility. Both her and the Green's platform is a comical wishlist that wouldn't even garner support from Democrats, let alone two Republican controlled houses.
    That is in issue all to itself. You have two parties that are similar in nature, so similiar when our president uses the other party's ideas from their very own platform, that party still refuses to compromise. As illustrated, it doesn't come down to compromise at all. It comes down to red team vs blue and it's wreaking havoc on our country. The cherry on top is big industry still wins with their hand picked choice. Many people are fed up with the entire system and the rampant corruption. The current system is designed to maintain the status quo for those who buy politicians.

  5. #105
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by Cavendish View Post
    Having knowledge on something means having read Wikipedia?
    Let me clarify for you. Having knowledge does not mean you read Wikipedia. But you don't have any real tangible knowledge, you have about the information one would find on Wikipedia. You know the names of a couple philosophies, who thought them up, and a couple one-liners. but you don't actually understand left-libertarian ideas.

    Tell that to fellow libertarians who believe that the foundation of all rights lies in property rights.
    Some believe that, some don't.

    To call something quantifiable like economic liberty "propaganda" is just disingenuous.
    It's a buzzword used to shut down conversation. Oh, you don 't agree with me? You must hate liberty.

    It's propaganda.

    Only someone with a tyrant trapped within them would deny someone the ability to enter into contracts freely and the fruits of their labor,
    I'm fine with contracts and the entire reason I am a socialist is because I want people to be able to keep te fruits of their labor. I want workers to be paid what their labor is worth. That's pretty much the backbone of socialist ideas.

    and force them to belong to some workers' collective, which is what left-libertarianism is all about.


    And yes, it takes everything away from what you said, because it exposes how the Greens having nothing in common with libertarians.
    You literally nitpicked two miniscule parts from the platform. That doesn't prove ****.

    Libertarianism in the US has always translated to fiscal conservatism and social liberalism.
    The political party has, yes.

    People with your views usually identify as socialist.
    Yes, I am a socialist. But socialism is an economic school of thought, not a political philosophy. It has no inherent position on other issues. Hence why socialists can be so diverse ranging from socially conservative to anarchist to libertarian to totalitarian. According to the political compass and similar charts, left/right is economics and up/down (authoritarian/libertarian) is social and civil issues. I occupy the bottom-left quadrant. Left-Libertarianism. That may offend you or whatever, but shockingly not everyone sees everything in binary as you do.

    They'll have a hard time attracting votes from libertarians when their rhetoric is anti-gun rights, pro big government and anti property rights (and private enterprise in general). Is that hard to understand?
    Well, that simply doesn't translate to real life. Libertarians and Greens have allied on many key issues, and votes have fluctuated between the two regularly.

    I'll once again stress what I said at the beginning of this debate: you're not a libertarian. So frankly you have no place telling those that are what they believe and who they should vote for.

  6. #106
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by Cavendish View Post

    To call something quantifiable like economic liberty "propaganda" is just disingenuous.
    Really? First define it and then prove that it exist. TIA

  7. #107
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:11 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,413

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    Anyone who complains about current gridlock can't support Stein with much credibility. Both her and the Green's platform is a comical wishlist that wouldn't even garner support from Democrats, let alone two Republican controlled houses.
    This is why any third party would need to build a base of House/Senate people first. A third party President with zero allies in Congress would get nowhere. In fact, the Dems and Reps would probably gang up and pass a bunch of veto-proof legislation. "Common enemy" and all that.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  8. #108
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,938
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    But in order to get into office, you have to have a message that appeals to people willing to give you money. This is not the case with third parties, they have a message that appeals to a minuscule minority of people with no money, it's no wonder they fail. Our political system is messed up to be sure, but third parties are just not doing anything to get themselves money, power or votes. They're just wasting everyone's time.
    This seems to be a case of which came first, the chicken or the egg. No one knows what the message is of a Jill Stein or a Gary Johnson because they do not have the money to get it out. The voters have no idea what the message is these two or any other third party is spouting. Since they can't get their message out, they can't raise money to get their message out. The voter has no idea what their message is, hence they can't adhere to it and can't abhor it.

    Only those who are truly fed up with the two major parties actually look at third party candidates. Then the vast majority of them end up voting for the lesser of two evils, the least worst candidate among the two major parties. They do this because they buy into the mantra that a vote for a third party candidate is a wasted vote because they can't win. So they vote for a candidate they do not want in order to prevent the other candidate they want even less from winning.

    It boils down to whom do you hate less among the two parties, not whom you like or whom you think would make the best president.

    Chicken or the egg, catch 22, whatever. Take your choice.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  9. #109
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,938
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    That's very common in American political history. Third parties are usually parties of only one or two ideas, and if those ideas become popular and the Big 2 adopt them (in some form), the third party ceases to be relevant.
    Yep, that is usually the way it works.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  10. #110
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,792

    Re: Jill Stein

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    This seems to be a case of which came first, the chicken or the egg. No one knows what the message is of a Jill Stein or a Gary Johnson because they do not have the money to get it out. The voters have no idea what the message is these two or any other third party is spouting. Since they can't get their message out, they can't raise money to get their message out. The voter has no idea what their message is, hence they can't adhere to it and can't abhor it.
    I disagree. Politically savvy people know what their message is, they just reject it. I know what they stand for, I've looked into it, I just want no part of it. I think they are better known than you think, it's just another excuse given for why they lose so badly.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •