Sorry, if you can’t follow the rules, you can’t play the game. No ability to field electors, no ability to offer a candidate. Bet all the others fail as well, and we don’t have any Russian aided spoilers helping Comrade Trump.
State law requires that those who nominate electors in October be state officers, which includes members of the Legislature, judges and others. They could also be candidates for the Legislature.
The Green Party does not have anyone who qualifies to be a nominator, and therefore can’t legally name a slate of presidential electors as required by law, the complaint alleges.
Sucks to suck. Maybe do your homework next time you attempt to help a man baby get elected again.
Well I guess she DID follow the rules because they have decided to keep her on the ballot after all. They denied the Democrats demands: https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-jill-stein-harris-trump-lawsuit-1c69023c94ac0c3fcf4c23b361b9159a
Dismissed on a technicality:
The election commission’s attorney, Angela O’Brien Sharpe, wrote to Strange on Friday saying she had dismissed the complaint because it names commissioners as respondents and they can’t ethically decide a matter brought against them.
The courts will decide otherwise because the state law is quite clear.
Good clarification. As of right now she IS on the ballot. But this may change. So you are correct.
Sorry, if you can’t follow the rules, you can’t play the game. No ability to field electors, no ability to offer a candidate. Bet all the others fail as well, and we don’t have any Russian aided spoilers helping Comrade Trump.
Well I guess she DID follow the rules because they have decided to keep her on the ballot after all. They denied the Democrats demands: https://apnews.com/article/wisconsin-jill-stein-harris-trump-lawsuit-1c69023c94ac0c3fcf4c23b361b9159a
Jill Stein isn’t paid by any russians, and she’s not helping Trump. She’s running her own campaign.
She runs in the same circles as the rest of the people financed by Russia.
Doesn’t mean there’s proof that she is bought and paid for by the russians. In fact, Stein “attended at her own expense to spread a message of peace and diplomacy” and gave a speech in Moscow “in which she criticized the excessive militarism of both Vladimir Putin and U.S. leaders.”
They added: "The Senate Intelligence Committee later investigated the trip and found no wrongdoing whatsoever. "
https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-ties-vladimir-putin-explained-1842620
So you are entitled to your beliefs, as am I. And I don’t believe she is a russian asset. And I am voting for her. Thank you.
According to her official campaign statement. Regardless, someone can work with someone and benefit from funneled votes without requiring to be paid.
She also did not cooperate with the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/30/politics/jill-stein-russia-documents-senate-request/index.html
Everyone is, of course, free to vote for whomever they wish. But they do deserve the facts.
A Pew Research Center survey, released Wednesday, found that if the election were held today, Harris would shore up 46 percent support from registered voters. Trump followed closely behind with 45 percent, Kennedy brought in 7 percent of the vote and 1 percent picked none or other.
Jill Stein is sharing that 1% with all the other third party candidates besides Bobby Brainworms.
Ok, I have no reason to question any of those numbers. Not sure what point you are trying to make though…
I was pretty clear with what my point was.
Not to me, I have no idea what your point was. But you can choose not to explain, if you prefer. I respect and support your right to do that. Just as much as you respect and support my rights to vote for whatever candidate I want to vote for.
Jill Stein is sharing that 1% with all the other third party candidates besides Bobby Brainworms.
Basically she’s not going to win so it doesn’t matter if she’s on the ballot.
Is that clearer?
Basically she’s not going to win so it doesn’t matter if she’s on the ballot.
Then you definitely don’t need to be upset that I’m voting for her. You have nothing to worry about, right? :)
I never have been upset, I’ve told you that I support any decision you make.
Including shitting in your shoe and running a marathon or having a sword fight with me, if you want.
I never have been upset, I’ve told you that I support any decision you make.
Awesome. So we have no problems.
How do they get to 270?
How do they get to 270?
Does it matter if they don’t? And if you feel sure they won’t, then you have nothing to worry about, right?!
Removed by mod
Yep, here to convince us that Stein isn’t still just one of Putin’s useful idiots trying to get us a 2nd Trump administration like she did in 2016. And it wasn’t just Wisconsin that she handed to Trump in 2016.
Here are the Stein votes from 2016 vs Trump’s margin of victory in those states.
Michigan: 51,463/10,704
Pennsylvania: 49,678/46,765
Wisconsin: 31,006/22,177
Without Stein on the ballots in those states, there would have been no Trump administration.
Also, from OP’s article:
There are signs in some swing states, including Wisconsin, that those behind third-party candidates are trying to affect the outcome of the presidential race by using deceptive means — and in most cases in ways that would benefit Trump. Their aim is to to offer left-leaning, third-party alternatives who could siphon off a few thousand protest votes.
Everyone, including Stein, knows Putin helped her last time, whether she knew it then or not. She must realize he’s helping her again and she knows what the likely result is. She knows she can’t win the presidency, all she can do is help Trump win.
Voting is a fundamental American right, and every citizen has the right to vote for the candidate they believe in, without being accused of ulterior motives.
The idea that supporting a third party is somehow working for Trump or any other major candidate is both historically inaccurate and logically flawed.
Throughout American history, third parties have played a crucial role in shaping political discourse and pushing important issues into the spotlight.
The abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage, and labor rights were all advanced by third parties before being adopted by the major parties.
The notion that a vote for a third party “dilutes” the vote is rooted in a fear-driven mentality rather than in democratic principles.
It assumes that votes are owned by the two major parties, which they are not. Our electoral system is supposed to represent the diverse views of the electorate, not just those of the dominant parties.
Suggesting that Jill Stein is a “Russian stooge” dismisses legitimate political discourse and attempts to silence alternative viewpoints. It’s a tactic to coerce voters into conformity rather than encouraging healthy debate and democracy.
Democracy thrives on diversity of thought.
I must admit, I do find it slightly ironic that you champion diversity of thought in bold typeface, except for the thought that Stein might be working with Russia. That thought is apparently special and should be barred. This is hypocritical.
There is nothing logically flawed with the idea that she may be coordinating with American rivals in any way, shape or form. Plenty of people throughout history have worked to harm our country for their own best interest, and rationally it would behove us to consider the possibility instead of granting her some immunity to suspicion that no other politician receives.
except for the thought that Stein might be working with Russia. That thought is apparently special and should be barred. This is hypocritical.
I don’t “bar” that thought at all. You are free to think that. I don’t think it. News orgs don’t seem to think it, and I would think hat would be a major front page article if there were evidence of it.
But you are totally free to think that. And say that. But I don’t agree/belive that, so I would reply the same.
There is nothing logically flawed with the idea that she may be coordinating with American rivals in any way, shape or form.
Again, that would be major news. So I personally don’t think that.
It very much was in the news. Every time that news is presented to you though, you simply pivot to her campaign statement about it being a speech about peace. To a dictator.
It very much was NOT in the news as proof. In fact, newsweek wrote about it. Plus The Senate Intelligence Committee investigated the trip and found no wrongdoing whatsoever.
I know that you lean conspiracy, I get it. You want it to be true. Bu there has been no conclusive proof that she is paid for by the Russians. The Russians tried to divert left leaning voters away from Clinton by boosting Stein’s candidacy. There is ZERO evidence there that Stein was contacted by Russia or even aware of the way in which her campaign was being hijacked.
You believe she is, I don’t believe she is. It’s that simple. Just accept it and move on.
Harris will win by a landslide anyway, so you don’t even have to worry about it. lol
Not changing my vote, tho!
Have I ever claimed she was paid by the Russians? This is you trolling, saying I am saying something that I have never said.
Also, you cannot say she was not contacted by Russia when she was inside of Russia. Russia is full of Russians, as I imagine you knew.
You cannot dispute basic facts, but you can make up lies like “she was never contacted by Russia” when she very provably went to Russia and sat with their leader.
Have I asked you to change your vote? Or do I simply like facts being straight?
edit: Oh, and she never actually complied with that investigation, by the way. I forgot that detail.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/30/politics/jill-stein-russia-documents-senate-request/index.html
Removed, civility.
Ah, it’s our 55 year old transracial troll friend again. Hello. I never was able to find your reddit account.
I’d prefer we keep this conversation focused on the article and please stay civil in tone so we can live up to the standards of this community. Thank you!
Ah, I see. Well, it is a social media comment section, and I’m pretty sure casual chit-chat is not banned, but sure I guess.
Ah, it’s our 55 year old transracial troll friend again.
Ah, I see. Well, it is a social media comment section, and I’m pretty sure casual chit-chat is not banned, but sure I guess.
Do you feel that falsely accusing someone of being a troll is “casual chit-chat”? And what does my age have anything to do with in regards to this article?
Thank you for respecting and supporting my right to vote for who I believe in. And my right to post political news articles to a political sub. As I respect and support your right to do so.
Let’s move forward by trying to stay focused on the article and try to adhere to the rules and tone of this community. Thank you!
Yes, very typical casual chit-chat for a social media community, no question about it. And note, I don’t really think it’s falsely, but I suppose that is just my opinion.
I mean, we talk about things independent of the article all the time, but sure, that’s reasonable and fine.
I don’t really think it’s falsely, but I suppose that is just my opinion.
It IS your opinion. And it IS false. You may want to look up the definition of an internet troll.
I mean, we talk about things independent of the article all the time, but sure, that’s reasonable and fine.
But I won’t be responding to you any further in this thread unless you want to keep the topic of our conversation to content of the article I posted. Thank you.
Oh come now, we all know what a troll is. Someone trying to stir up shit, usually by taking some sort of baiting stance with the potential to generate strong disagreement. It’s extremely common for them to masquerade as damn near anything that might be convenient for that purpose, that’s probably the single most common style.
Fair enough. Well I don’t have anything to say about the article, so see you later I suppose.
Free Palestine.
Associated Press - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Associated Press:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
Not a good look Democrats.
Is the state law being quoted here unfair? And was there a loophole or other process to get around it that the Green Party missed? Not sure how this is the fault of Democrats.
Agreed!
