“Jill Stein is a useful idiot for Russia. After parroting Kremlin talking points and being propped up by bad actors in 2016 she’s at it again,” DNC spokesman Matt Corridoni said in a statement to The Bulwark. “Jill Stein won’t become president, but her spoiler candidacy—that both the GOP and Putin have previously shown interest in—can help decide who wins. A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump.”

  • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    i’m glad the “you’re pro-genocide if you vote anything but 3rd party” morons finally shut the fuck up around here

    edit: LOL

    have you had ANYONE turn around and say " you know what, you’re right!" on lemmy? or ANYWHERE?

    gtfo russian cumfarts

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Probably doesn’t help that Stein refuses to call Putin a war criminal.

      https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-vladimir-putin-war-criminal-1954965

      "Hasan later asked Stein why she had labeled Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a war criminal, but not Putin.

      “Well, as John F. Kennedy said, we must not negotiate out of fear and we must not fear to negotiate,” she replied. “So, if you want to be an effective world leader, you don’t start by name-calling and hurling epithets.”

      “So, how will President Stein negotiate with Israel then if you’ve called Netanyahu a war criminal?” Hasan asked in response.

      “Well, because he very clearly is a war criminal,” Stein said, prompting Hasan to ask: “So Putin clearly isn’t a war criminal?”

      “Well, we don’t have a decision—put it this way—by the International Criminal Court,” Stein said.

      The ICC has issued an arrest warrant for Putin, alleging that he is responsible for war crimes. No such warrant has been issued for Netanyahu, whose war on Gaza has killed more than 40,000 Palestinians. However, the chief prosecutor of the ICC has applied for an arrest warrant for the Israeli prime minister.

      “There’s an arrest warrant for Putin and there isn’t an arrest warrant for Netanyahu, so why is Putin not a war criminal, but Netanyahu is?” Hasan asked.

      “Yeah. Well, let me say this. We are sponsoring that war. We are sponsoring Netanyahu,” Stein responded. “He is our dog in this fight. That is why we have a responsibility to pull him back.”"

      • If anything, if he’s “our dog” as she says, doesn’t that mean he’s just a tool rather than a war criminal?

        Why is this interesting? Here’s another point of view, one that’s a bit more consistent. Israel, while not being a member of NATO, has a special relationship with it and is basically a major defacto ally.

        If you are pro-(Putin’s) Russia and believe NATO’s actions are war crimes, then it’s no leap at all to consider Israel in the same group. In fact, hurting Israel (the country) then benefits Russia as it weakens NATO (by weakening a close ally of theirs).

        • grue@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          LOL, that just proves his point. I read the transcript, and Stein had every opportunity to clearly and definitively repudiate Putin. Not only did she refuse to do so, she continues to refuse, dishonestly misrepresents being called out on her bad faith as a “misunderstanding,” and doubles down with bullshit "both sides"ism.

          In fact, that press release has sealed the deal on convincing me that she’s a deeply unserious piece of shit and a Russian asset.

          So congratulations troll farm vatniks, you’ve played yourselves.

            • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Just out of curiosity, do you think it would help her win the election if she did? She boycotted his speech in congress. She is treading a really thin line, and the only winning gambit seems to be keeping her messaging neutral until after the election. Rocking that boat right now gives the Republicans further ammunition to use against her, and will embolden Netanyahu to militarily escalate.

              At the moment she can hide behind the veil of the current policy being driven exclusively by Biden rather than inserting herself in the middle of things, and therefore presenting additional leverage to her enemies. I don’t like the situation, but I don’t see how it was possible to play things any differently while still preserving a serious chance to win the election.

              We normally see eye to eye on a lot of things, but in this case I think it is disengenuous to conflate the motivations of Jill Stein & Kamala Harris.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                I don’t think it would help Harris to call Netanyahu a war criminal. I understand the reasoning. But, to attack Stein for inconsistencies in an interview, which she has since corrected by releasing a statement, is hypocritical. If Harris isn’t willing to call Netanyahu a war criminal, because of the election, then how can it be possible to hold Stein to a different standard?

                • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  Well, I think for one thing because Jill Stein seemingly had nothing to lose in that interview with Mehdi. The whole thing just came off as weird to me, and clearly that sentiment was pretty widely shared. I just don’t understand it I guess. If she had provided more context around her initial hesitancy perhaps I would feel differently.

                  I am also totally willing to admit that it is an intellectual double standard, but it isn’t a strategic one because the outcome of Kamala Harris’ speech has the ability to affect the outcome of this election in a huge way. I guess you could argue that Jill Stein’s does too since she is potentially peeling votes from the Democrats, but if she was actually serious about affecting change she could be lobbying Kamala Harris for policy concessions behind the scenes instead of just virtue signaling.

                  Jill Stein in that Mehdi interview really gave off the same energy as Kim Iversen in her debate with Destiny yesterday. Neither one of them did much to counter the narrative that they were at best highly sympathetic to Russia, or at worst closeted Russian assets. It was all just really bizarre and extremely suspect…

                  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    We don’t know what her motivations are, we can only speculate. She may not want to anger Russia, because they fund her campaign. Much like Harris doesn’t want to anger AIPAC because they fund her campaign. Regardless, it’s still a double-standard.

                • TheFonz@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Because Stein has notthing to lose. She could easily take a stand on something like Netanyahu but it was pulling teeth to condemn Putin. When the stakes are so low she can make any statement she wants.

                  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    How do you know what she has to lose? If Russia funds her campaign, that would be something to lose. It’s still a double standard to criticize Stein and not Harris for the same actions.

          • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            I like how everyone who is aware of the terror America has caused all over the world is immediately a Russian asset.

            I like that she has the balls to rightfully call our living current and past presidents war criminals. Not every american is so brainwashed.

            And before you ask I’m voting Democrat. I like that Jill Stein is putting pressure on the Democrats, and I can’t say I disagree with anything in the statement they released.

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        LOL it took a whole hour

        you kids are slacking

        and no. voting for harris does NOT make me “pro-genocide,” no matter how much you wish it did.

        have fun watching jill stein get a single digit percentage of the vote. if that. but don’t feel like you accomplished something by throwing your vote away, because you didn’t

            • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Quite binary to assume that a critique of a liberal implies that I am a conservative. Socialists. Can’t stand either one of you

              • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                And yet the hatred you constantly exude evokes conservatism and the voting you push helps conservatives. Putin would salivate at your post history.

                  • pooperNickel@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    And yet any objective observer would conclude you hate “liberals” as much as any Nazi hates minorities. Also nice job inappropriately using the word Nazi.

                    The way you write begs for all of your ideas to be discarded wholesale. You obviously aren’t looking to convince anyone, only to feel superior, which you aren’t. To anyone.

              • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                The problem is that “support genocide” is being used overly broadly.

                The stated policy of the Biden/Harris administration is that Israel has a right to defend itself.

                Surprise! They do. Every sovereign nation has that right.

                As a result of that stated policy, Biden and Harris both support providing weapons and funding for the continual defense of Israel.

                https://www.npr.org/2024/08/23/g-s1-19232/kamala-harris-israel-gaza-dnc

                So follow me here:

                1. Israel has a right to defend itself.
                2. The US will support that defense.

                Where it breaks down is Bibi and Likud taking that defensive support and directing it into the Genocide.

                That’s on THEM. The United States is making a good faith effort to provide support for the defense of Israel. Israel is intentionally misapplying that support.

                Trump’s stated policy is that Israel needs to kill everyone quicker.

                https://apnews.com/article/trump-biden-israel-pr-hugh-hewitt-21faee332d95fec99652c112fbdcd35d

                “They’re losing the PR war. They’re losing it big. But they’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life.”

                Only one of these two policies is pro-genocide, Trumps.

                Biden/Harris is pro-defense which is illegitimately being used for genocide, not at all the same as being pro-genocide.

                • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  That’s on THEM. The United States is making a good faith effort to provide support for the defense of Israel. Israel is intentionally misapplying that support.

                  This is not a good argument. They’re not infants, they have agency and the ability to perceive the impacts of their actions.

                  Biden/Harris is pro-defense which is illegitimately being used for genocide, not at all the same as being pro-genocide.

                  Eh, it certainly means they’re not proactively anti-genocide.

                  But more importantly it’s not going to move someone uncomfortable with the Democratic material support for the genocide a single iota closer to accepting that there is still a better candidate both for Palestine and for all the aspects where they’re actually good, not just not as a bad.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    They do have the ability to percieve the results of their actions, and they know if they cut Israel loose, they lose the election.

                  • jordanlund@lemmy.worldOPM
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    3 months ago
                    1. It’s not going to be finished by January.

                    2. Israel doesn’t need our help to shoot little kids in the chest and head. Bullets are cheap.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          and no. voting for harris does NOT make me “pro-genocide,” no matter how much you wish it did.

          Of course not. You being pro-genocide means that you have two candidates to choose from.

            • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              If Harris promised to stop sending weapons to Netanyahu, how many centrists do you think would become trumpers?

              • DancingBear@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Zero intelligent ones, because everyone knows we just need someone to say it at this point.

                But you know what?

                Harris can’t even say out loud that she will stop the genocide.

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  You mean to tell me that centrists would rather throw a tantrum and withhold their votes just because they didn’t get 100% of everything they wanted, even when that would mean guaranteeing a Trump victory?

                  The exact same shit they’ve been accusing progressives of doing? The same rationale they use to blame progressives for Clinton’s loss in 2016?

                  Why does Vote Blue No Matter Who only ever work one way?

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Its not crazy to acknowledge that the current choices are genocide or genocide light. You can even still vote for Kamala and feel slightly bad about her stance on Israel. Wheres the problem with allowing some nuance here? Turning this into all or nothing, live or die, good or evil, is not very convincing in my opinion.

              • DancingBear@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                Yea well buddy, I’m sorry but I’m not going to just sit here and allow genocide or genocide light without calling you a jackass on the internet.

                But I will walk up to the store right now and get another beer.

                Brb

    • barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Those MAGAs cosplaying as lefties will have an even harder time now that the Uncommitted group have said they cannot support Harris but Donald will be worse. The same as we have all be saying.

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Not just Trump will be worse as some sort of abstract moral statement. Their statement is that Uncommitted voters should actively vote against Donald Trump no matter how inadequate Harris’s statements and commitments have been.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Ahahaha oh no the “office workers” are still all over here, their content usually just gets downvoted into being permanently hidden and they’ve stopped picking fights outside of their own posts.