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]BzaDem
(11,142 posts)44. Not really. Trump will do that quite nicely on his own. They will mostly be running back next time.
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