Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Jill Stein spoiled the 2016 election for Hillary Clinton [View all]jalan48
(14,412 posts)16. If this is true, then the Democratic Party needs to figure out a way to attract more Green voters.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
94 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Let's take the politicial spectrum into the third dimension and just call them "the bottom."
BobbyDrake
Dec 2016
#2
I think it is relevant, because many of them will be running to the polls to vote D next time.
BzaDem
Dec 2016
#42
What kind of idiots voted for Stein? Angry supporters of some primary also ran? nt
LexVegas
Dec 2016
#6
Which is why she's doing the recounts. She doesn't want to be labeled the next Nader
brush
Dec 2016
#7
If this is true, then the Democratic Party needs to figure out a way to attract more Green voters.
jalan48
Dec 2016
#16
Not really. Trump will do that quite nicely on his own. They will mostly be running back next time.
BzaDem
Dec 2016
#44
I don't know what you mean by "needs to change." I am saying that the voters WILL change.
BzaDem
Dec 2016
#50
She got lots of these voters this time around. She just didn't get all of them.
jalan48
Dec 2016
#55
I'm just talking about people who voted for Jill Stein, which she didn't get any of by definition.
BzaDem
Dec 2016
#56
You could well be right because of Trump winning. But after the 2020 election then what?
jalan48
Dec 2016
#57
Please. No. They are of no benefit to the Democratic party, except being spoilers..n/t
asuhornets
Dec 2016
#51
Then don't complain about them spoiling the election for Hillary. It's really that simple.
jalan48
Dec 2016
#52
no it is not that simple. jill stein and her supporters gave us trump...but i digress...nt
asuhornets
Dec 2016
#62
The most experienced person to ever run for Prsident was a joke according to you? n/t
asuhornets
Dec 2016
#69
80,000 votes in three states was the difference. In one state Hillary lost by 10,000+ votes,
asuhornets
Dec 2016
#74
I agree. It will take time. But I agree we need to move forward. Feelings are still raw. nt
asuhornets
Dec 2016
#79
I just hope it does bring progressives together to win in 2018 and beyond. nt
asuhornets
Dec 2016
#81
well, of course they were more similarly aligned to Hillary than Gary Johnson
Fast Walker 52
Dec 2016
#25
Oh, good thing next election we'll have no 3rd party candidates nor 3rd party voters
yodermon
Dec 2016
#24
Perot's impact was neutral, since he actually took votes evenly from both sides. nt
SunSeeker
Dec 2016
#67
Stein's supporters were never going to vote Clinton even if Stein wasn't in the race-they are scum.
Joe941
Dec 2016
#36
Sorry, but that does not logically follow. There is no reason to assume the majority...
PoliticAverse
Dec 2016
#41
Which is why I do not think that greens should be participating in Democratic primaries
Gothmog
Dec 2016
#53
F*ck Nader!!! yeah, not. nobody owes dems their vote, and counting on the competition to
TheFrenchRazor
Dec 2016
#59
I pulled up a map from 1992 election .... Yes things change, people move , events happen
Kathy M
Dec 2016
#61
Perhaps Michigan, but there's no way enough Stein voters would have voted Hillary
jfern
Dec 2016
#65