this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
714 points (93.4% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2371 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“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.”

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Any of the Stein shills want to explain to everyone why Trump (among many other awful people/companies/etc) attorney Jay Sekulow was representing The Green Party in their case against the State of Nevada?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2024/09/18/how-republicans-and-democrats-are-boosting-third-party-spoiler-candidates-as-trump-lawyer-represents-jill-stein/

Anyone?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (3 children)

They’re not wrong, but they could stand to recognize that some of their own policy shortcomings opened the door to her challenge.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Jill Stein wouldn't say that Putin is a war criminal. You should really listen to how she dances stupid the interview with Medhi Hassan.

https://boingboing.net/2024/09/16/kremlins-favorite-candidate-jill-stein-refuses-to-call-putin-a-war-criminal-during-interview.html

The fallout/optics from that blatant fear to speak clearly about Putin was bad enough it seems that she's now made a follow-up statement to lightly say the phrase, with qualification (after checking with daddy) and associating it only with Syria and refusing to mention Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

She is their stooge.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Jill Stein needs to go, condemning Putin should be the easiest thing in the world to do for any non-Russian.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›