Green politicians from across Europe on Friday called on U.S. Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein to withdraw from the race for the White House and endorse Democrat Kamala Harris instead.

“We are clear that Kamala Harris is the only candidate who can block Donald Trump and his anti-democratic, authoritarian policies from the White House,” Green parties from countries including Germany, France, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Ireland, Estonia, Belgium, Spain, Poland and Ukraine said in a statement, which was shared with POLITICO ahead of publication

  • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    European Greens must be dumb as fuck then, because the US Green party exists to:

    Get

    Republicans

    Elected

    Every

    November

  • zanyllama52@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Third party candidates. The real threat to america. /s

    Will she get any votes? Tune in next time on Election Ball Z!

  • rusticus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Jill Stein is funded by Russia. Every multicellular organism knows this by now.

    • Vanon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      22 minutes ago

      Yup, even my friend Fred the Fungi was just yapping about this, told me to follow the money.

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    I think Europe’s Greens can calm down at this point. Trump is doing enough to prevent his own victory. I’m looking forward to Tuesday night, and the ensuing impotent shenanigans the Trumpublicans are going to entertain us with as they piss all over themselves.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 hours ago

      Hes actually still projected to win by a lot of stats. For example, the FiveThirtyEight simulated election outcomes LINK and also the 270towin polling map no-tossup LINK

      So I guess prep for the dissolution of NATO and the final world war culminating with the end of mankind.

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        25 minutes ago

        Or just wait until the election is over, because fretting about these fearful scenarios won’t change anything.

        • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 minutes ago

          Or, that person can do whatever they want, what do you care if they want to fret and express their concerns? You aren’t the wise sage of the internet you think you are.

  • SarcasticMan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    206
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Haha they must be new to this, Jill Stein isn’t running for president, she is running to split the vote like they paid her to.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      75
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Of course they know that. They’re saying this to make exactly this point. While the average US voter will be entirely unaware of and oblivious to what some pinkos from cheese eating surrender monkey land say, potential green voters just might take notice.

  • Intergalactic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Good. I was apart of the Green Party, I left when I learned they were planning of running a candidate this year, when internally, we were floating around the idea of NOT running a candidate.

    • edric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      That’s interesting insider info. Was the reason for not fielding a candidate because of this particular issue (splitting the vote)?

      • Intergalactic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Can’t say exactly, it was just floated around, I’m guessing it was for that specific reason, but that was around the time I was thinking of leaving for other reasons, they are VERY unorganized as a party and it really, really bothered me. The way smaller Transhumanist Party seems more organized than the Green Party.

        • Wrench@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          Probably because running a presidential candidate is a waste of money unless your intent is to split the vote.

          Start local, gain influence, work your way up.

          Edit - to those downvoting, the Green Party literally has zero representation, even at the State level. And you want to jump straight to POTUS. Riiight.

          Get one state senate seat. Get one House of Representatives seat. Get some kind of representation. Then you have a bargaining chip.

          • Omega@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            The threat of splitting the vote is a good reason to run, if you feel like your position isn’t being taken seriously enough AND that it’s important enough that everything else is worth losing.

            The problem is that the majority of the Democrats are on board with green initiatives. The only holdup on the $10T program before was Manchin. She has now pivoted RCV, or more specifically destroying the duopoly because they are the enemy for “reasons”.

            Also, she’s said that she wouldn’t pull out even if the Dems gave her what she wanted. So it doesn’t really work as a threat either.

            • jj4211@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 hours ago

              Eh, threatening to split the vote might in theory get some campaign promises, but such promises are likely to evaporate when things get down to it.

              Meanwhile if you actually hold a persistent presence in the house or senate, particularly when it’s close, you got ongoing leverage. Hell, folks like AOC, MTG, Boebert have an absurd amount of national influence for being elected by merely a singular district.

  • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    59
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    People really need to stop assuming every Stein voter is a stolen Harris vote. I’d rather stay home than vote for Harris.

    I suspect the actual pushback is to prevent the Greens from reaching the 5% voter threshold, and making them a more viable party.

    • ChillCapybara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Everyone gets downvoted from time to time. In this case the reason is that you’re pro Trump. Perhaps not in philosophy but certainly in action. Which is all that matters.

    • kinther@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Tell me you don’t understand a first past the post voting system without telling me.

      For real though, you sound like an idealist, a perfectionist, who lets good be the enemy of perfect. I don’t think you actually want a conversation - you want others to hear your voice and opinion.

    • FuzzyRedPanda@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yep.

      But you’re in lemmy.world, and the commenters here are just looking to pick fights with rational thoughts like yours.

      They are scared and are lashing out; I get it. But it’s still not okay. Randos telling you you’re supporting Trump is disingenuous garbage. They won’t care that you still voted in congressional races and local issues.

      I appreciate comments such as yours. Please don’t be dissuaded from making them in the future.

  • Lojcs@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Why does she need to do this before the election? They can just form a coalition after the election if Kamala doesn’t win

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      This is to elect the President. In a presidential system, as in the US, you choose the leader of the executive portion of government separately from the legislative leader. In a parliamentary system, as many countries in Europe use, the public doesn’t choose the leader of the executive portion of government. Instead, they just vote for representatives in the legislative portion, and then those legislators form a coalition (if necessary) and choose a leader of the executive (the prime minister). The closest analog to coalition forming in the presidential election is doing exactly what the Greens are proposing above – having a candidate drop out and endorse another, with the hopes that they can sway their supporters. It’s basically what JFK Jr did, for example, with Trump.

      While hypothetically the US could form legislative coalitions, in practice, due to the way the US electoral system works, US parties are essentially equivalent to electoral coalitions in parliamentary systems already – we already form “big tent” parties necessary to control a house. In the US, the closest analog to this sort of thing actually happening after the elections is when you hear about something like “an independent legislator who caucuses with the Democrats”. The US also has weak party discipline compared to many countries in Europe, so legislators are much less constrained to vote along party lines anyway.

      Different systems, function kinda differently.

      • Lojcs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        But I keep hearing how the American system isn’t democratic since you don’t directly vote for the president, you vote for some middle person who promises to vote for your president? Those people might not be members of the parliment but they can still form coalitions after the fact by voting for who has a chance to win

        • tal@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          you don’t directly vote for the president,

          Well, okay, so, the US does have the electoral college, and strictly-speaking, you’re choosing electors that choose the President, but the election is and has for a long time functionally been a direct one. That is, you know the person that you are voting for in voting for the elector. Some states don’t even constitutionally let electors vote for anyone other than the person they have pledged to vote for, and in any case, the electors are chosen by the parties, who have no incentive to choose someone likely to vote for anyone other than the candidate that they’ve pledged to vote for, so it’s not really an aspect of the electoral system in the normal case. While false electors exist, normally as a protest vote if they know that their candidate can’t win, they’re rare and have never altered the outcome of an election.

          This came up this year in some discussion in the context of what happens if a President drops out after being placed on the ballot but prior to becoming President, which I assume is what you’re thinking about, so that the electors cannot vote for the person on the ballot, and in that situation, yeah, they’d have to find some kind of fallback.

          But that’s a pretty limited corner case. That is, they don’t just have a blank check to go out and build coalitions and select someone.