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.

“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
    4·
    3 个月前

    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
      5·
      3 个月前

      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
        7·
        3 个月前

        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.

      • nednobbins@lemm.ee
        2·
        3 个月前

        In terms of her affect on the Green party, those numbers make it look like she’s fairly run-of-the-mill. Her first one was low and later on she posted numbers similar to more famous candidates.

        I did a quick search on where those candidates are and it seems that many of potential Green party candidates are in swing states. It also looks like many of them are specifically siding with them because of their stance on Gaza.

        That suggests that she’s just fine for the Greens and is likely even helping them. She’s a problem for Democrats because there’s an assumption that those voters would switch to the Democratic ticket if they don’t vote Green.

        • ZMoney@lemmy.world
          1·
          3 个月前

          Right. If democrats want those votes then Biden needs to make significant progress on ending the genocide now. The threat from third parties exerts an outsize pressure on the Democrats to actually do something. But of course they likely won’t, and instead Trump will take advantage of this.

          • nednobbins@lemm.ee
            1·
            3 个月前

            I don’t think it would even have to go that far.

            It’s mostly that Harris needs to be able to present credible red lines. Right now, the perception is that Israel can get away with absolutely anything.

            Anything to break that perception it might be enough. A light version might be something like, “Every time X happens, we’ll delay weapons shipments by a week while we investigate.” That’s not much and it might not even change Israel’s behavior but I suspect that just articulating some policy and sticking to it would be sufficient.

    • geekwithsoul@lemm.eeOPEnglish
      2·
      3 个月前

      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.