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/

    • Zaktor
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 months 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.

        • Zaktor
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months 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
            6
            arrow-down
            20
            ·
            3 months 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
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              3 months 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.

              • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                14
                ·
                3 months ago

                Jill Stein says things and then does nothing to actually make them happen,

                You are describing the Democrats not Jill Stein.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                15
                ·
                3 months ago

                And because Kamala Harris doesn’t mention ranked choice voting, somehow that’s magically supposed to happen?

                It doesn’t take a meme to find the flaw in that reasoning.

                • Zaktor
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  I don’t expect the Democratic establishment to implement it, that’s why the Greens should actually get some state reps elected. Or even just compete in the places where they do have ranked choice voting. There’s plenty of state level races that don’t need a lot of money to be competitive. My rep was reelected with 3,000 votes.

                  But voting for Jill Stein for president isn’t going to do anything. She has literally zero chance of winning, doesn’t seem to even put in the effort to understand the position she’s theoretically trying to obtain, and just pops up every four years to perpetually lose elections while grifting money away from rubes.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          3 months 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
            10
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            3 months 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 👍

              • Ion@lemmy.myserv.one
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                3 months ago

                Don’t worry. Dick Cheney, the architect of the invasion of Iraq, stepped up and took my vote for Kamala instead. Birds of a feather.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 months ago

              In a first past the post system, you either vote Democratic or you get the Republican. 3rd party is not an option.

            • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              3 months ago

              Why do liberals assume they are entitled to leftist votes?

              Your confusing that with the fact that an overlap of two circles is a venn diagram.

        • Iunnrais@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 months 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.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months 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.

    • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months 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

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      pol sci 101: fragile fptp systems (like the electoral college) tend to result in two parties.

    • Soup@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      It’s because there’s never any serious third party candidates.

        • Soup@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Riiiiight…… It’s a lack of bravery that people aren’t voting for the useless 3rd party candidates that only surface every four years to split votes.

          Maybe it’s that everyone else is smart enough to see it for what it is- and you’re just…… not.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                You should encourage people to embarrass themselves so you can correct the record. The Green Party has been around since the 1990’s, and was founded in 2001. Jill Stein is not the Green Party, it will exist after her, provided people are brave enough to separate their identities from the two-party system in America. If you don’t like Jill Stein, have a look at the Party for Socialism and Liberation.

                • Soup@lemmy.cafe
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Right… so, vote the party, not the people- right? You’re as plastic as you accuse others of being. West and Stein are provenly useful idiots;

                  ““Cornel West, he’s one of my favorite candidates. I like her also, Jill Stein, I like her very much. You know why? She takes 100 percent from them. He takes 100 percent.”

                  ~ Donald Trump

                  This is all the Green Party does, and everyone knows it. Seriously man…. Grow up.

                  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    Such hostility for having thoughtful views, no wonder America is in this position. I’m voting for Harris, as a pragmatist. But I will not demean others for not voting for a genocide or voting third party. That is their right in a democracy. I’m simply pointing out that the choices we have been given are not going to change until we choose to step outside the paradigm. How can a third party that everyone seems to want develop, unless people choose to support it?