Every bit as bad as conservatives, often worse. It is one of the most unethical, immoral, and mentally bankrupt ideologies out there.

They would have never voted for Clinton. At all. We also don't want anything to do with them. That is why the argument being put forth here doesn't work. Said group is not a part of the left. I am not making a blanket statement about Stein supporters but it is a considerable chunk of them. If you want to see what the disgusting pigs look like take a minute and go to JPR. That site is full of liberal isolationists. They don't believe in solid progressive philosophy. They stand in direct opposition to it. We need to stop acting as if they are somehow a part of the left.

Because that's where they are and deserve to be.

Judging by the numbers, many of 'them' stayed home or left the top slate blank.

But in an election that really mattered - a fascist pig could win! - what kind of person would throw their vote away?

Said group stands in direct opposition to progressives and progressive ideology.

I think someone fit in very nicely with their agenda, and so did a number of his fans.

Is like the arsonist hanging around the fire to help the fireman put out the fire. She and her recount are no friends to the Dem party

Green voters would have voted, and would have voted for Clinton, if Stein had not run. Remember, the Greens would have run somebody, or a similar third party effort would have been made. Gary Johnson may have tilted things, as well. To say someone spoiled our effort is simplistic, and diverts attention from what we need to do to elect more Democrats.

I know people are hurting and looking for someone to blame but it is not helpful to our chances in 2020 to do this circular firing squad to disgrace people we will need in our coalition. The candidate did not campaign once in Wisconsin. The candidate did not poll in Michigan. She did little campaigning in the summer except for fundraisers. These were all in control of our party, our candidate, a woman who has been involved in multiple presidential campaigns and should have known better. Change those three and we'd be discussing who Hillary was choosing for her cabinet today.

It's one thing to close one's mind to reality once. It is quite another to do so in a subsequent cycle, after watching what they previously took for granted be dismantled before their very eyes. Many will realize just how much they stand to lose, just as the bulk of Nader supporters in 2000 realized before the subsequent election.

This dynamic is precisely why a third party will never gain any sort of traction in our first-past-the-post system. But it can sometimes do just enough damage to throw one election.

Too late though.

n/t

It's never Hillary's fault for losing the race to the WH. It's always someone else's fault.

Repeat. Spin. Recycle.

What you have done here is simple dismissal by way of straw man.

Clinton stayed at 47, Trump miraculously jumped from 40 to 48, and Stein and Johnson both lost about half their predicted voters. Stein went from 2.1 to 1.1. This suggests to me that her participation was basically immaterial as the votes would have been moved to produce that wunderbar 1% victory one way or another.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/wi/wisconsin_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5976.html

That asshole ran against Hillary and now there are people actually sending her money that worked to support Hillary.

The right doesn't need to cheat to win when our side is sondamn stupid sometimes.

You simply cannot assume that all Green Party supporters would vote for Hillary. You cannot assume that
Hillary supporters would have all voted for Bernie if he'd been nominated.

It was what it was. Now we have to deal with what is...and I'm still trying to wrap my head around a Trump regime.

Yes, I was a Bernie supporter. Yes, I voted for Hillary. Pointing fingers and laying blame is not going to be productive.

We ALL have to figure out how to minimize the incredible damage that is going to be done to this country for a generation--or more--depending
upon how many Supreme Court Justices are appointed by Cheeto Fucktrumpet in the next 4-8 years.

We in North Carolina understand how incredibly destructive Republicans are because McCrory and the Republican led Legislature have trashed
this state in just 4 short years. Hell, they had done a bang-up job of laying waste to the state in just 2 years. What they have done is about to be done to the entire country.

I am sick. Just sick at the thought. Please, can we stop pointing fingers and come together to figure out how to minimize the damage that is about to be done?

At some point the circular firing squad has to end.

There is a lot of blame to go around including Hillary Clinton and the Democratic establishment. Let's move on and figure out how to not lose elections to a madman.

That's strange logic.

Maybe we could also serve the shit sandwiches. Fucking no good losers.

Best not to be seen as too liberal.

This isn't a particularly controversial point. To the extent any Jill Stein supporters desire that progressive policy will be enacted, most will be voting for the more progressive candidate in 2020. To the extent that they believed in 2016 that there was little difference between the parties, the next four years will work wonders to thoroughly disabuse them of that notion. In the imaginary universe where HRC actually ran again in 2020, she herself would get many of these voters (though such voters would of course deny that at the present time). Which is not to say that HRC would win in 2020 in said imaginary universe -- just that 2016-Jill Stein supporters would be the least of her problems.

This doesn't mean that the party won't change. The party will of course change on many ways, as parties always do. It is just to say that such change will not be prompted by any particular desire to reach out to Jill Stein supporters, and such change may or may not intersect with the set of changes Jill Stein supporters say they want.

I agree that she also got many who might have been thinking of supporting her. And that is a good reason to continue to remind people before the election what the consequences are of voting third party. I'm just saying that for those who were not convinced this time around, and who actually prefer progressive policies, most will be convinced next time around (quite apart from anything the Democrats do).

Iit will be that way every election as we continually slide further right-look how far to the right we are in comparison to the Ronald Reagan Presidency-he's considered a liberal now in some circles. Some voters say enough-we refuse. Maybe it's just part of the whole "Identity Politics" movement going on in politics today.

Jill Stein has been running for President for years. The DLC knew she would be running, it shouldn't have been a surprise.

I don't care if Jill Stein and Ralph Nader ran at the same time. No one should lose to that joke. Unless they are an even bigger joke...

What do you call the person who lost to trump?

The most qualified person in history to run for president? Forget Jefferson or Lincoln. Were talking HRC. Most qualified person IN HISTORY! Could not convince some factory workers in Michigan and Ohio she was on their side?

Stein received almost 50,000 votes in that state. Hillary's policies vs.Trump's "policies" ->>> Does not require much convincing when it comes to one's future.

Seeing as how she lost to Trump

I know that many Bernie supporters like myself were sorely disappointed by the results of the primary and many were infuriated by the details of the behind the scenes shenanigans with the DNC that were revealed in the first batch of Wikileaks emails. That being said, most of us lined up with Bernie and fought for Hillary, even if she wasn't what some on the left viewed as a "perfect" candidate. Refighting the primary will get us nowhere. Even if we are shades away from each other on policy issues, we're a helluva lot closer to each other than we are Trump. We must let the past be the past and move beyond whatever differences we had months ago to provide a common opposition to Trump.

We live in a red state, recently moved back home. My wife and I stayed up Election night until the election had been called. We looked at each other in disbelief and said almost simultaneously, "What do we tell the kids?" My high schooler cried her eyes out on the way to school because in her mind, bullies had been vindicated. My seven year old son, who had been ecstatic that Hillary won the Nickelodeon Kids election also cried. I told both my children that morning "It's ok to be sad. Even Mom and Dad are upset and scared. But whatever you do...don't show your emotion to other kids whose parents are Trump supporters". We were that scared...mainly because we had just moved from a very blue state to the buckle of the Bible Belt which was home for me and a second home to my wife who grew up in Louisiana. We're all hurting, and I fear we will continue to hurt. Casting blame at this point is just chasing windmills. The cure for that is to lean on each other with our common ground to take on the Trump assault that surely lies ahead.

I've decided to focus on the recount and hope Hillary can win this thing in overtime!

I'm still pissed...

We have to figure out a way to work together to counter Rump.

This is productive!

.... voted for Clinton rather than anyone else.

The Green Party have a right to exist, campaign on their platform... we have something resembling a democratic system of sorts here.

Why isn't this same claim being leveled at Gary Johnson? Because he's an ex Republican? Because he's not going after a recount?

We don't have single transferable voting - we have first past the post.

And if this argument has more validity then the Republicans would be saying Gary Johnson is their Ralph Nader.

However we need full, accurate and transparent recounts. It's part of a free and fair election, even if I dislike the outcome.

Greens here are just more dreamy liberals, with the same goals as most liberals who are Dems.

Of course people can vote for whoever they want.

The real problem is Stein voters who are now upset because Trump won. Because they are a big part of the problem.

glad you got that under control.

I also think it is not productive to blame 3rd party voters or candidates. They exist because they are equally dissatisfied with both major parties. Looking at election history, there are years with strong 3rd party support like this one, and others (most) where it drops back to 1% or lower. We want to attract those voters back to us. Sometimes 3rd parties hold positions still considered fringe but on the cusp of going mainstream. The Libertarians supported marriage equality and legal recreational marijuana in 1996, for example.

What if an additional 2 or 3% of Democratic party members or Democratic-leaning voters had shown up to vote? At some point we need to stop blaming others and figure out how to sell the Democratic Party to casual voters - like the GOP has.

She will forever live in infamy, along with Nader.

n/t

Lucky I don't know any Green Party idiots IRL but have been listening to progressive talk more. After the election some guy calls in from Minnesota. Everything is normal until he says he voted for Stein. WTF. Before that point he was saying how he wished Clinton won and terrified of Trump. Then he says it's ok because Minnesota went blue. Well yeah but barely. So this got me thinking, how many green party voters in the rust belt went for Stein because they thought Clinton was going to win their state? People say their vote doesn't matter but clearly it did.

of the people who voted for Stein would have voted for Clinton if Stein wasn't running.

Since they actually voted for someone unqualified to be President, if Stein wasn't running they might
just have voted for Trump.

Everyone knows that third party candidates can't win in the current system. The question then becomes what made Clinton so repellent to voters that they couldn't vote for her.

1990's moneyball politics. It arguably got Bill elected - but after three terms of Republicans, the country was ready for a change. After 30+ years, we voters get it. "Go left in the primaries, center-right in the general election, and govern according to the whims of the Republicans and the Wisdom of Inside-the-Beltway thinknig". Democrats talk up hope and change, then bring in Wall Street, Big business and collaborate with the GOP on privatizing government at the expense of the other 75 to 85 percent of the rest of us. The part of the party that wants to help the majority of us have to sit down and shut up if they want to stay in the party. The moneyball Democrats know that the party that raises the most cash always wins, and that liberal populism crap scares the big donors. Let the GOP make the huge mistake of appealing to populism say our Party leadership.

The other problem with moneyball politics as currently practiced is that they have no messaging, and no ideas - usually just GOP hand-me-downs like the Heritage Foundation's Affordable Care Act. Be slightly less horrible than the GOP (the last two Democratic Presidents have really governed more like moderate Republicans), so you can appeal to moderate Republicans in the suburbs, instead of being <gasp> liberal. Adapting Republican ideas just makes the GOP ideas justified in the eyes of the voting public, that's why Clinton didn't get those crossover votes she was counting on when her surrogates dismissed Sanders supporters.


Why didn't "we pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia" and "in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin”?

If Third-Way Triangulation is so effective, why does the Democratic Party keep losing?

Moneyball politics has cost the Democratic Party majorities everywhere except solid blue States.

Looking for blame beyond the Democratic Party is pointless - she lost to "Tiny Hands" Trump! That should be proof enough to the party that the 90's are over.

But party leadership keeps their heads buried in the sand and refuses to do anything but find external blame.

This message board is proof of that

Lots of folks screaming and wanting to double-down on failed methods. If that is the approach then we will get saddled with GOP domination into the foreseeable future.

We need closed primaries and if someone wants to vote in a Democratic primary, then should be a democrat

drop out is probably not a winning strategy for dems. that should be pretty well known by now.

Pretty big change in map since 1992 though . Excuses can be made if anyone would like to , but they are not helpful nor constructive for the future ... its a persons choice .......... Here is the link to 1992 map http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/showelection.php?year=1992

"

Party Presidential Nominee Vice Prsidential Electoral Vote Popular Vote
Democratic winner William J. Clinton Albert Gore, Jr. 370 68.8% 44,909,326 43.0%
Republican George Bush Dan Quayle 168 31.2% 39,103,882 37.4%
Independent H. Ross Perot James Stockdale 0 0% 19,741,657 18.9 % "

The above is from article ........ Yes we have a bigger population now ..... I see no reason why third or fourth party cannot run Is it not up to the person running and the party ?

Yes , I did vote for Perot in 1992..........

Thread after thread here about how the election was hacked by Russians and that the recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are going to flip the states to Hillary giving her the Presidency. Some of the posters here make the birther movement look rational.

I wonder how many people wrote in Sanders and how many votes that cost Hillary?

to cost her the other two.

...

He got votes in some swing states that SOS Clinton would have got! Just like Perot, he fucked the best candidate for President of the US with his effing ego to run. He did not know what was Aleppo, who voted for this retard? Let me not ask who voted for the first retard trump?

Not even God will be able to help America when trump takes over. Already he is is associating himself with rogue world leaders. Only redeeming factor is that he will be a one-term president! One can only hope. Bush got two terms!

if Jill hadn't run, I think Gary would have picked up just about all her votes. Green party people are not Trump supporters or republicans; the votes wouldn't have gone to Trump. But they are also anti-establishment, and antiwar, and for that reason hillary and a nonbernie-led DNC may have been a nonstarter. Those who just wanted an anti-war/anti-interventionist candidate without corporate ties wouldn't have been as bothered by Gary not knowing Aleppo.

fact somehow...

That's a bizarre take on democracy! (hope you're joking. )

hauling all their stuff to the curb, then calling the police when someone takes the stuff