Jill Stein at seven percent?

This topic has 15 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 10 months ago by wv.

Viewing 16 posts - 1 through 16 (of 16 total)

Author

Posts
June 30, 2016 at 6:33 am #47508

wv
Participant

============
http://forward.com/news/national/343220/is-jill-stein-the-spoiler-in-chief-for-hillary-clinton-and-the-democrats/

…On Tuesday, CNN’s latest poll put a number value to the two outside candidates’ significance: Seven percent of American voters, the poll found, would like to Stein as their next president. Gary Johnson won support from 9% of those polled. For Stein, this represented a significant advance over polls by other organizations in May and June that showed her support at 5% and 2%, respectively.

Stein and Johnson’s numbers may reveal a growing interest in third party challengers. But that doesn’t mean these challengers will be on the ballot when voters stream to the polls in November. Stein is so far on the ballot of fewer than half the states and in the midst of a struggle to clear the hurdles that will put her on the ballots of the others. Clinton and Trump, in contrast, will be on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

This is Stein’s second run for the presidency as the Green Party’s nominee. In 2012 Stein, a 66 years old Lexington, Massachusetts physician, won just under a half a million votes nationally, more than any other woman candidate in a general election. Hillary Clinton is sure to break this record in November.

Jill Stein and the Role of Radical Jewish Women in Politics
Lana AdlerJune 23, 2016

Though raised as a Reform Jew, Stein now says she is “culturally Jewish though I’m not actively a practicing Jew.” Nevertheless, she considers her Reform Jewish upbringing an important influence on her life choice of social activism.

The new polling data proves Stein is correct in describing herself as “plan B” for frustrated Sanders supporters.

Eighteen percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning respondents who favored Sanders, now support Stein.

In a May 25 interview with The Hill Stein said there is “an incredible love affair between our supporters and Bernie supporters. You can’t distinguish them; they are already co-mingled.”

The same is not true, however, when it comes to endorsements from progressive and labor groups that backed the Vermont senator during his primary race. On an institutional level, all groups that stood behind Sanders are now shifting their support to Clinton.

Her better numbers notwithstanding, Stein still falls under the category of a protest-vote —— or worse, from a liberal perspective, a spoiler who ends up helping Trump. At her current level of support, she stands no chance of winning any votes in the Electoral College. Nor does the Libertarian Johnson. Still, Stein or Johnson could tilt a tight race in some key battleground states, with Johnson drawing votes away from Trump, and Stein, to a lesser extent, costing Clinton the valuable votes of disaffected Democrats.

For Democrats who were around for the 2000 elections, this threat is all too real. Green Party candidate Ralph Nader won 97,488 votes in Florida that year —— a number that could have swung the state into the election column of Democrat Al Gore to give him that state’s 25 electoral votes. This would have given Gore the election itself by giving him a clear majority not just in the popular vote, which he had, but in the Electoral College, where elections are actually decided under the U.S. Constitution. Instead, the state went to George W. Bush after a narrow and contested Florida win for the Republican led to a recount that was ultimately aborted by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Stein answers fears that a vote for her could send Donald Trump to the White House with a call for “courage.”

“We need to bring that courage into the voting booth,” Stein said. “To adopt a position of cowardice in the voting booth is to surrender to a predatory political system on all fronts.”

The Clinton campaign has yet to spend any time or resources time on campaigning against Stein or trying to win over her supporters. A Democratic source said there is no need for such moves. “We’re not in a Ralph Nader moment,” the source said.

Contact Nathan Guttman at guttman@forward.com or on Twitter @nathanguttman

June 30, 2016 at 6:37 am #47509

wv
Participant

http://www.jill2016.com/ballot_access
States Jill is on that ballot

June 30, 2016 at 10:57 am #47545

Zooey
Participant

I would love her to get up to 15% so she could get into the debates.

June 30, 2016 at 11:04 am #47546

Billy_T
Participant

Sorry to see she hasn’t got on Virginia’s yet. She was in 2012, and I pulled the lever for her then.

Hope that changes. I can’t vote for either the Dem or the Republican. So it’s a no vote for me if she isn’t available.

June 30, 2016 at 11:39 am #47547

bnw
Blocked

Zooey wrote:

I would love her to get up to 15% so she could get into the debates.

Why would democrats and republicans let anyone else in their debate? Thats why they took it from the League of Women Voters in 2000 to keep Nader and Buchanan from debating with Bush and Gore. If anything has changed it is news to me.

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

June 30, 2016 at 12:14 pm #47549

wv
Participant

Billy_T wrote:

Sorry to see she hasn’t got on Virginia’s yet. She was in 2012, and I pulled the lever for her then.

Hope that changes. I can’t vote for either the Dem or the Republican. So it’s a no vote for me if she isn’t available.

================
You can always write her name in.

w
v

June 30, 2016 at 12:17 pm #47550

wv
Participant

bnw wrote:

Zooey wrote:

I would love her to get up to 15% so she could get into the debates.

Why would democrats and republicans let anyone else in their debate? Thats why they took it from the League of Women Voters in 2000 to keep Nader and Buchanan from debating with Bush and Gore. If anything has changed it is news to me.

==================

Do you know anything about this Gary Johnson who is polling at NINE percent according to that article ? (I’m skeptical about that number, btw)

If someone were to actually siphon away nine percent from Trump’s Republican Party that would really hurt his chances, obviously.

w
v

June 30, 2016 at 12:19 pm #47551
wv
Participant
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/pay-attention-to-libertarian-gary-johnson-hes-pulling-10-vs-trump-and-clinton/
May 26, 2016
Pay Attention To Libertarian Gary Johnson; He’s Pulling 10 Percent vs. Trump And Clinton

Gary Johnson might be on the verge of becoming a household name.

At the moment, he’s probably most often confused with that plumber who fixed your running toilet last month or your spouse’s weird friend from work who keeps calling the landline, but he’s neither — he’s the former governor of New Mexico, likely Libertarian candidate for president, and he’s polling at 10 percent in two recently released national polls against Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

A Morning Consult survey published Tuesday and found Clinton getting 38 percent of the vote, Trump 35 and Johnson 10, with 17 percent undecided. A Fox News poll conducted from May 14-17 showed Trump leading over Clinton, 42 percent to 39 percent, but Johnson at 10 percent as well. Lest you think this is some fluky May development, a Monmouth University survey conducted in mid-March — while the political universe was still busy wringing its hands over the Republican nomination — found that in a three-way race, Clinton would get 42 percent, Trump 34 percent and Johnson 11 percent.

Given that Trump and Clinton are sporting historically high negative ratings, Johnson’s polling makes a fair bit of sense; Gary Johnson is neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton. He might not win a state, but he could make some noise….

———-
w
v
- This reply was modified 7 years, 10 months ago by wv.
June 30, 2016 at 12:25 pm #47553

Zooey
Participant

bnw wrote:

Zooey wrote:

I would love her to get up to 15% so she could get into the debates.

Why would democrats and republicans let anyone else in their debate? Thats why they took it from the League of Women Voters in 2000 to keep Nader and Buchanan from debating with Bush and Gore. If anything has changed it is news to me.

To be eligible, a candidate must poll a minimum of 15% in 5 national polls.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Presidential_Debates

June 30, 2016 at 12:30 pm #47555

wv
Participant

Zooey wrote:

bnw wrote:

Zooey wrote:

I would love her to get up to 15% so she could get into the debates.

Why would democrats and republicans let anyone else in their debate? Thats why they took it from the League of Women Voters in 2000 to keep Nader and Buchanan from debating with Bush and Gore. If anything has changed it is news to me.

To be eligible, a candidate must poll a minimum of 15% in 5 national polls.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Presidential_Debates

================

Obviously, there oughta be debates where that rule is tossed away.
There oughta be debates where the Dems, Reps, Libertarians, and Greens, send their nominees to a few debates. Those four parties would at least give the public some real differences and some actual ‘debate’ on core issues.

And of course, as bnw noted, the Dems and Reps would never
agree to it.

w
v

June 30, 2016 at 1:59 pm #47563

nittany ram
Moderator

My fear is that in 4 years a candidate will emerge from the dem or rep party that is more charismatic than Clinton or trump. Someone who doesn’t have an FBI investigation hanging over their head or who doesn’t make a racist remark at every other political rally. He or she will have similar political beliefs as Clinton and trump but he or she will be a better candidate.

And then we’ll see the momentum Bernie gathered dissipate and Stein’s or whichever socialist candidate’s poll numbers will drop back below 2 percent and everything gained this election will be gone.

June 30, 2016 at 4:11 pm #47572

bnw
Blocked

Zooey wrote:

bnw wrote:

Zooey wrote:

I would love her to get up to 15% so she could get into the debates.

Why would democrats and republicans let anyone else in their debate? Thats why they took it from the League of Women Voters in 2000 to keep Nader and Buchanan from debating with Bush and Gore. If anything has changed it is news to me.

To be eligible, a candidate must poll a minimum of 15% in 5 national polls.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Presidential_Debates

Thank you though the 5 national polls can be contested or the bar raised again by the CPD. What gets me pissed is that the MSM has it in their power to demand the inclusion of 3rd party candidates but passes the buck to the CPD.

I think the bar should be set lower say being on 45 of the state ballots and 5% in national polling.

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

June 30, 2016 at 5:52 pm #47578

wv
Participant

bnw wrote:

I think the bar should be set lower say being on 45 of the state ballots and 5% in national polling.

===============

Agreed. I’ve agreed with you in two threads now. That must mean
youre a leftist now, comrad. Welcome. What size Che shirt do you want?
I’ve got your beret here somewhere…

w
v

June 30, 2016 at 6:28 pm #47579

Mackeyser
Moderator

You know I never got my Che shirt…

The perils of centralized T-shirt distribution…

Sports is the crucible of human virtue. The distillate remains are human vice.

June 30, 2016 at 10:37 pm #47585

bnw
Blocked

wv wrote:

bnw wrote:

I think the bar should be set lower say being on 45 of the state ballots and 5% in national polling.

===============

Agreed. I’ve agreed with you in two threads now. That must mean
youre a leftist now, comrad. Welcome. What size Che shirt do you want?
I’ve got your beret here somewhere…

w
v

Any size Che shirt will do as I will wear the beret on the bidet and drying off with Che.

The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

Sprinkles are for winners.

July 1, 2016 at 6:49 am #47593

wv
Participant

Mackeyser wrote:

You know I never got my Che shirt…

The perils of centralized T-shirt distribution…

=============
What do you think Che meant by this quote right here. I read it this morning but I’m not sure what he meant:

” The future belongs to the people, and gradually, or in one strike, they will take power, here and in every country. The terrible thing is the people need to be educated, and this they cannot do before taking power, only after. They can only learn at the cost of their own mistakes, which will be very serious and will cost many innocent lives. Or perhaps not, maybe those lives will not have been innocent because they will have committed the huge sin against nature; meaning, a lack of ability to adapt. All of them, those unable to adapt — you and I, for example will die cursing the power they helped through great sacrifice to create. Revolution is impersonal; it will take their lives, even utilizing their memory as an example or as an instrument for domesticating the youth who follow them. My sin is greater because I, more astute and with greater experience, call it what you like, will die knowing that my sacrifice stems only from an inflexibility symbolizing our rotten civilization, which is crumbling. I also know and this won’t alter the course of history or your personal view of me — that you will die with a clenched fist and a tense jaw, the epitome of hatred and struggle, because you are not a symbol but a genuine member of the society to be destroyed; the spirit of the beehive speaks through your mouth and motivates your actions. You are as useful as I am, but you are not aware of how useful your contribution is to the society that sacrifices you.

Che Guevara
=======================
w
v
“There is no other definition of socialism valid for us than that of the abolition of the exploitation of man by man.”
― Ernesto Che Guevara
Author

Posts