The committee has largely kept quiet about the Green party nominee. But that’s now changing.

“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.”

  • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
    0·
    2 months ago

    While that’s an accurate description of NYTimes and Wikipedia, they’re probably not the outlets you had in mind.

    Ample evidence suggests that enlarging NATO over the years stoked Moscow’s grievances and heightened Ukraine’s vulnerability. After the Cold War ended, Moscow wanted NATO, previously an anti-Soviet military alliance, to freeze in place and diminish in significance. Instead, Western countries elevated NATO as the premier vehicle for European security and began an open-ended process of eastward expansion. Even though, as the former secretary of state Madeleine Albright noted, the Russians “were strongly opposed to enlargement,” the United States and its allies went ahead anyway

      • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
        1·
        2 months ago

        What evidence are you calling into question specifically? That NATO expanded after the fall of the USSR?

        • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
          1·
          2 months ago

          I’m not. I’m not the same person. I’m just telling you that you shouldn’t cite an opinion piece as evidence.

          • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
            1·
            2 months ago

            Oh, in this case an opinion piece in US media is evidence. @catsarebadpeople believed that the opinion (NATO’s expansion partially caused the war) was limited to Russian / BRICS media.

            • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
              1·
              2 months ago

              Which could have been influenced by Russian media. You and I don’t know because it’s an opinion piece. It’s not a researched piece of journalism.

                • FlexibleToast@lemmy.world
                  1·
                  2 months ago

                  Hey, at least you got the concept of what I’m saying. Don’t trust opinions. Trust actual, credible journalism.

                  • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
                    1·
                    2 months ago

                    I have to agree that completely ignoring the nytimes op-ed section is healthy and brings you closer to the truth. I’m glad we’ve established that.