“With membership at new lows and no electoral wins to their name, it’s time for the Greens to ditch the malignant narcissist who’s presided over its decline.”

  • nednobbins@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    2 months ago

    Is she really responsible for the problems of the US Green party?

    As near as I can tell the EU Green parties had a different trajectory. They initially started winning seats in parliaments on purely environmental platforms. Those MPs actually started pushing green agendas in various parliaments. That, in turn led to more people voting for them. Eventually that had to adopt policy positions beyond the environment and they tended to be pretty left.

    The US never had Green party members in a position where they could actually do anything useful about the environment. That means they could never fulfill their primary goal in the US. So when they tried to branch out the same way the EU Green parties did, they just turned into a vague hodgepodge of leftists ideas.

    Is there any suggestion that Jill Stein’s replacement would have any chance of saving the US Green party?

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 months ago

      The Green party is doing exactly what it was designed to do. It’s siphoning off eco-conscious Democratic voters just significantly enough to affect voting margins but not enough to win. To be clear I’m not saying that Even a significant number of people in the green party have that as a goal, but top down, that’s all it’s about.

      We are a two-party system and they are allowing the green party to exist to use it as a wedge.

      • febra@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Then I guess y’all should starting reworking how your system works, because it doesn’t sound like a democracy at all if you can’t vote for what you actually believe in.

        • thatKamGuy@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          America has what I like to call ‘Monkey’s Paw Democracy’; almost as if someone wished for a representative Government from a cursed object.

          Now instead of voting for policies they like, voters are forced to vote against policies they dislike or risk being punished my having their rights slowly chipped away.

        • linearchaos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          We would, but as it stands now it’s an authoritarian dictatorship, right wing hellscape, and a marginally awful moderate right wing dystopia in a trench coat and they’re not about to cede any distance to allowing us new liberties.

          If we don’t get at least a 60% margin there’s a really good chance the guy that said this will be the last time you ever have to vote, I’m going to be a dictator on day one and I’m going to imprison all of the opponents, legislators and donors that went against me.

          Outside of an actual moderate or left-wing coup which is pretty much impossible I don’t see there’s any way that this country is getting out of this.

        • linearchaos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          It would be nice but you’d have to go back to 1850 because we eradicated them and made sure it couldn’t happen again.

      • Socialist Mormon Satanist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Every vote for Harris is stealing a vote from third-party candidates who represent real change. By sidelining those voices, you’re indirectly helping Trump win!

    • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 months ago

      The issue is she sucks all the oxygen out of the room with her pointless presidential runs and does nothing for the four years in between. There’s an inconsequential number of Greens who run and win elections in small cities and towns or less consequential elections, and none of them have won any federal elections. A real party leader would recruit and foster candidates in large cities and state legislatures— and then get folks to run for the US House, the Senate, state governorships, and then the presidency.

      Stein is less a party leader and more a figurehead who basically seems to be in it for the grift. And so US Greens (especially in comparison to those in the EU) are less a party and more just a convenient label for those of a certain bent that want to run as something other than as a Democrat.

      • nednobbins@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        My question was more along the lines of the “(not so) the great (wo)man” hypothesis.

        Let’s imagine that Jill Stein was permanently abducted by aliens. What do we think would happen?

        Would the Green Party just collapse?
        Would the former member just join the Democrats?
        Would they start a new party?
        Or maybe someone new would take over who could do a better job?
        I think we’d likely just get someone who’s functionally equivalent.

        • ZMoney@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Maybe vote count is instructive:

          Nader 2000: 2,882,955

          Cobb 2004: 119,859

          McKinney 2008: 161,797

          Stein 2012: 469,501

          Stein 2016: 1,457,216

          Hawkins 2020: 407,068

          I don’t think the party would collapse without Stein. They have been around for decades and they have a cadre of oranizers who will continue to show up regardless of results. Stein is just the most famous person they can use for a presidential election, and you can see from the above results what happens when they run someone nobody has heard of.

          I think they genuinely believe in their core values, and it’s unfortunate that Stein is their only viable candidate. They won’t ever be a real political party until they start winning local/state elections, but they’re looking to secure more federal funding by getting enough votes. If Stein disappeared then they would keep doing this but they’d never breach half a million votes. Maybe a progressive democrat in the House would smell an opportunity and break ranks to run for president with the Greens. That could maybe get them a million or two votes again.

          Or maybe it absolutely does not matter who they run and they just get a lot of votes when the Democrats run particularly shitty candidates for president.

          • booly@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            2 months ago

            Nader 2004: 465,650

            Nader wasn’t even the Green candidate in 2004. Nader ran as an independent in 2004.

            That year the Green Party ran David Cobb, who got 119,859 votes, putting him behind the Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party, and the independent Ralph Nader.

            In 2008, Nader ran again as an independent and beat the Green Party once again, with 739,034 votes, versus McKinney’s 162k. In between were the Libertarians in fourth place, and the Constitution Party in fifth place.

            The Green Party has never even come in third place, and several times hasn’t even come in fifth place, in our two party system.

        • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Ah, I get your question now. Unfortunately I think it’s impossible to say, but I do know it’s impossible to find out while she’s still there.