Poll: Where do former Sanders voters go?
I think by now the Unity meme is dead.
So where do Bernie people go?
Not to Trump.
In a two-candidate matchup with Clinton, Trump garnered only 9 percent of Democratic-leaning registered voters who wanted Sanders to win the party’s nomination in combined Washington Post-ABC News polls in June and July. That’s similar to the 12 percent of non-Trump Republicans who said they would support Clinton, and it’s also lower than the share of 2008 Clinton primary supporters who professed support for McCain at this point in the campaign.
Note: Clinton backers more like McCain than Sanders people like Trump.
But Clinton faces a potentially more significant threat from third-party candidates who have gained ballot access in a number of states and are polling fairly well. When the poll included third-party candidates in the vote, roughly 1 in 5 Sanders Democrats (21 percent) supported either Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson or Green Party candidate Jill Stein, while slightly fewer non-Trump Republicans said they would back one of the leading third-party candidates (17 percent).
Johnson poses less of a threat to Clinton as he appears to siphon similar support from disaffected Republicans and Democrats — 10 percent of Sanders primary backers support Johnson, as do 13 percent of non-Trump Republicans.
But Stein draws disproportionately from Clinton’s ranks. Just over 1 in 10 Sanders Democrats said they support the Green Party candidate, compared with 4 percent of Republicans who supported a non-Trump candidate for the GOP nomination.
This explains the Jill Stein hit-piece of TOP last week.
I noticed that HuffPo is finally including Johnson in their polls. Not Stein yet.
Comments
Uh oh
If the national polls start mentioning Johnson and Stein, people might get curious about them. Either one is a better alternative than the Giant Death Meteor which has picked up an appreciable fraction of the vote.
Stein's got nowhere to go but up with Sanders folks and other independents. After the Triumph of the Hill extravaganza finally ends, and Wikileaks goes back to work, Clinton's going to start bleeding support again just like she always does.
Please help support caucus99percent!
Yep
I was kind of partial to the meteor there for awhile but it now comes in second to Jill Stein.
My ranking
Stein
Cthulhu
Meteor
Stein made me not buy my Cthulu bumper sticker
Why choose the lesser evil when you can choose the greater good?
We can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed.
- Greta Thunberg
You've always been a shill for Cthulhu
Thank you for your support.
Don't settle for the Lessor Evil!
Cthulhu 2016!
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
See your Cthulhu and raise you a Mefistofele :-D
Samuel Ramey in the title role in Boito's opera. Isn't he dishy? Yum, yum!
Here's what he's singing:
Ecco il mondo - vuoto e tondo
S'alza, scende - balza, splende
Fa carole - intorno al sole,
Trema, rugge - dà e disturgge .
Ora sterile, or fecondo
Ecco il mondo.
Sul suo grosso - antico dosso
V'è una schiatta - e sozza e matta,
Fiera, vile - ria sottile.
Che ad ogni ora - si divora
Dalla cima sino al fondo
Nel reo mondo.
Fola vana - è a lei Satàna
Riso e scherno - è a lei l'inferno
Scherno e riso - il Paradiso
Oh per Dio! - Che or rido anch'io
Nel pensar ciò che le ascondo...
Ecco il mondo.
What it means:
Behold the world, empty and round,
It rises, falls, dances, glitters,
Whirls about under the sun,
Trembles, roars, Creates, destroys,
Now barren, now fecund -
Such is the world.
Upon its huge and rounded back
Dwells an unclean and mad race,
Wicked, subtle, Proud, vile,
Which forever devours itself,
From the depths to the heights
Of the guilty world.
(I have to translate this last verse, because I have found no accurate translation elsewhere - it is frankly blasphemous!)
Vain folly is Satan to them,
They mock and laugh at hell,
They laugh at and mock Heaven.
Oh by God! And I laugh too
At the thought of what they hide [from themselves] -
Behold the world!
(And he pulls out a big straight pin, and POP!)
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
They will not include Stein, because she appeals the most.
to Bernie Voters.
Johnson is a Libertarian tool, who corporations KNOW they can control. (Claims he will end the handouts, but YMMV)
The reason they include him in polls is to say "Look at the Crazy Fringe".
Stein can, and will beat the absolute shit out of Hillary in the polls, which is why any questions about her will start
"With Regards to the Known Anti-Vaxxer, Anti-Gay, Racist Jill Stein..."
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
You forgot Misogynistic....
You are already seeing this shit. I have had to let 2 people that I was talking to about Stein know that the the anti-vaxx bullshit being bullshit...
They didn't seem surprised.
The Corporate Media screwed the pooch, it showed it's hand.
None of these assholes seem to realize that in the age of modern communication you just can't get away with that tired crap any longer and that is why they will ultimately fail.
They can't rush and shut down online gatherings like they could in the 60's and 70's.
They can't attack the movements leaders because the movement is composed largely of Leaders.
The movement is a Hydra, if they chop off one head, two even more pissed off one's will grow to replace it.
It appears that they may finally be figuring this out though, so expect the attacks on Net Neutrality to ramp up under a Clinton Presidency.
Can't have those dirty Plebs uniting after they spent so long working to divide us....
"I used to vote Republican & Democrat, I also used to shit my pants. Eventually I got smart enough to stop doing both things." -Me
"The movement is a Hydra . . ."
"The movement is a Hydra, if they chop off one head, two even more pissed off one's will grow to replace it."
That's true. And we are so interconnected, we operate something like a brain. If one pathway is damaged, the rest of us will network around it and continue functioning.
It must be scary to the establishment. To me, it feels like I'm on a magic carpet ride, this time without pharmaceuticals.
Life is strong. I'm weak, but Life is strong.
"Racist" means "I don't like you"
in some liberal circles.
In other liberal circles it means "I'm afraid."
I remember when Bernie was as low in the polls as Stein is now.
Things can change in a hurry, especially when people are looking for alternatives. There are a lot of people who usually sit out elections altogether, and if she can even pick up a fraction of that support, there will be a marked rise in the polls for her. I expect to see a small surge for her post-DNC as she picks up Bernie supporters. If her numbers remain constant, we know that the polling models are probably off.
The poll above
was before the DNC email leaks. So things can change.
What about all those lawsuits
that allege/prove election rigging? I have no idea what the timetables are for the suits, but they need to get them out there because MSM isn't reporting on them.
How can anyone in a democracy knowingly vote for a cheater whose very cheating threatens democracy?
Jill, head to head, beats Hillary by a mile on the merits
The problem is that the media is owned by the same folks who take money from Hillary hand over fist. Bernie did a Herculean job of fighting against that handicap, but did not win. He is a very great and good man.
I don't care about parsing winning strategies at this point, I'm voting my beliefs and aspirations. So, I win be working as I can, and voting as I will, for Jill Stein.
Be a Friend of the Earth, cherish it and protect it.
I assume you mean
when you write
Maybe this
"the same folks who invest in Hillary expecting massive returns in favors if she is elected"
Jill Stein is getting lots of exposure
and actually getting to talk to people, OUTSIDE the convention. Sphinxmoth went to a panel discussion today with her, Chris Hedges, and others. People are enthusiastic, and making plans.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
Giant Death Meteor!
I remember in 1968 we nominated Pigasus, a real porker of a candidate. Unfortunately the swine failed to garner many votes despite doing quite well in the debates.
May be some would join them at the Socialist Convergence?
Lens on the Democratic Convention: Dispatches From Philadelphia on Day 3 -- Chris Hedges and Jill Stein at the Socialist Convergence.
Can't embed the video.
https://www.euronews.com/live
wow
38% of non-Trump and non-Hillary people are choosing third party already?
Bad math.
If 21% of "wayward" Dems and 17% of wayward Republicans are choosing third-party candidates, to discuss them both you need to use an average: just under 20% of wayward voters from the two major parties are veering to third-party candidates.
Robocall Tonight for President
Tonight I received a robo call asking me who I would vote for. The options were Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump, or Gary Johnson. Jill Stein wasn't included so I hung up immediately. If it had been a person, I would have asked why Jill Stein was being excluded. Sheesh!
You could have said Johnson, since he was the not trump/
Not Clinton option. Not perfect, but it gets the never Hillary position at least represented.
Polls only include Johnson because he will most likely siphon
votes from Trump. #JillNotHill
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - JFK | "The more I see of the moneyed peoples, the more I understand the guillotine." - G. B. Shaw Bernie/Tulsi 2020
I heard an interesting interview tonight with
…Johnson's VP William Weld, Former Governor of Massachusetts — on Alan Colmes radio show. Weld sounded sane and upbeat discussing the deconstruction of both parties taking place right now. At some point, when asked about Libertarian chances, he said, "Alan, I think there's a chance we can take this whole thing. The people are thinking in different ways than they have done before. Loyalties are shifting and and alliances are evolving."
He sounded surprised that the nation's political sentiments were so rapidly shifting. Not only were the reactions to both conventions so volatile, but his team could actually prevail in a four-way race.
They were not really on my radar, at all. But most of this is new territory.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
They beleive in laissez-faire capitalism
No government regulation whatsoever, although they do oppose crony capitalism.
Not an option for me.
I've seen lots of changes. What doesn't change is people. Same old hairless apes.
Gary Johnson
Libertarians are the darlings of Silicon Valley billionaires, psychopathic hedge fund managers, and Koch Brother sympathizers. Should Hillary Clinton get a bullet in her head from newly-released Reagan attacker Chapman, they'll all flock to Johnson.
Yeah... it sounds interesting on the face of it
But honestly I have a hard time separating it from anarchy, Somalia, and Mad Max.
Capitalism concentrates wealth. It must do so. Without any curbs or restraints there is only one end outcome.
A lot of wanderers in the U.S. political desert recognize that all the duopoly has to offer is a choice of mirages. Come, let us trudge towards empty expanse of sand #1, littered with the bleached bones of Deaniacs and Hope and Changers.
-- lotlizard
Understandable
Libertarianism taken to its extreme is warlordism.
They got the coveted Marvin Bush endorsement today.
Foreign policywise they are non-interventionist, and socially moderate-to-liberal, but in terms of economic policy they're anti-labor and pro-big business -- more so than Clinton.
You have to admit
We are getting pretty good at the rapid change thing. Back in 2012 when the legal marijuana inititive went to the voters I honestly prepared for a slim loss. No one was more surprised than me when it passed overwhelmingly. People came around very quickly in spite of the millions spent to defeat it.
I attended a meeting on Oil Ports in a small hyper conservative city on the coast. One who currently sports a 19% unemployment rate. Again I was surprised when I discovered conservative now means conserving their environment too.
I must have stumbled into an alternative universe.
You have to admit
We are getting pretty good at the rapid change thing. Back in 2012 when the legal marijuana inititive went to the voters I honestly prepared for a slim loss. No one was more surprised than me when it passed overwhelmingly. People came around very quickly in spite of the millions spent to defeat it.
I attended a meeting on Oil Ports in a small hyper conservative city on the coast. One who currently sports a 19% unemployment rate. Again I was surprised when I discovered conservative now means conserving their environment too.
I must have stumbled into an alternative universe.
Sanders to Trump voters aren
Sanders to Trump voters aren't as chimerical as they appear. The fact is, few would admit to such a thing, but in the privacy of a voting booth, who knows what can happen...?
"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."
If the object of the game is to prevent the presidency
…from falling into the hands of the Clintons at all cost — then Trump is certainly in play come November.
IMAGINE if you woke up the day after a US Presidential Election and headlines around the the world blared, "The Majority of Americans Refused to Vote in US Presidential Election! What Does this Mean?"
Revolution Texas.
I saw last night Bernie has started up this group. So maybe I will be able to write in Sanders in Texas?
#neverhillary
One huge thing that is missing from these polls
is a survey of independents. Many of Bernie's supporters consider themselves to be independents and one would expect that if independents were included the fraction of voters supporting Stein or Johnson might be even higher. Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are minority parties.
This is something important
The corporate media narrative continues to think and play up the duoppoly when the two major parties combined total less than 60%. Ignore the
According to a recent Gallup poll, 43% of all voters are now independents. The failure of the two major parties to address the needs of real living and breathing people is leading to the death knell of the two party system in the US.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Actually, that poll is from January 2015
I strongly suspect that after this primary season, the Independent and third party numbers are going to be a lot higher. Gallup only does that poll every 2 years after Federal elections, though, if memory serves.
Please help support caucus99percent!
So much for the 90% number
Cited like a broken record by the media during the convention.
As a sanders delegate pointed out to the Washington times, the other parties - trump, Johnson, stein- have asked for our vote, but not Hillary.
C'mon, man! We all know by now that...
...it doesn't matter who votes for whom. It matters who counts the votes with what. Until we put all of the electronic vote counting machines on a giant rocket and shoot it into the sun the "winner" is always going to be a Corporate Democrat or a Republican't...
I want my two dollars!
momentum
On Facebook, the legions of Berners are now actively debating which is best, 'busting' or switching to Stein.
Based upon what I'm seeing, the #bluetogreen people are a plurality.
What $$Hillary and her bots should really fear is the almost reflexive need of many Berners to fight, and to give in support of that fight.
The number of $27 donations to Stein for President is building as we speak.
Ruh-roh Debs, you think you can bring some of that sleazy Clintonian black-magic you used in the primaries to the general?
So frustrating.
I find it so frustrating that the left always splinters. It's not only frustrating, it's depressing because the left renders itself, and therefore me, impotent by splintering.
Remember these?
United we stand; divided we fall.
Divide and conquer.
The left saves the oligarchs the trouble of dividing it. It divides itself. However, since the left is not in power to begin with, it's the left that must do the conquering. It's the left that has the uphill battle, not the Emperor.
The left is never, never going to come even close to winning that uphill battle unless it can unite and organize, bottom to top and back again. Every time I see the left starting ten new political parties that seem interested only in the Presidency or scattering in five different directions, or advocating doing nothing, my heart gets a bit heavier.
Oh, well, maybe we can work more on unity after November.
Organizing is key.
A lot of the most liberal economic social legislation happened during the LBJ and Nixon administrations. That was 100 percent the result of organized political movements.
I think there's a tendency to place too much emphasis on the presidency and presidential cycles. That was a problem with Obama. He won, people demobilized, or were too busy waiting for guidance, and the Dems in Congress went ahead with the agenda that they had planned in advance of the election, and then quickly reverted back to the pre-2006 form, as if there was no financial crisis and people were no longer angry about foreign wars.
Organizing people is a full-time job, and in a way, Sanders could exercise more lasting power through the network that he and people around his campaign have helped to build than would be the case with the presidency. FDR also had the benefit of existing social movements rallying around him. He helped organized labor gain strength, but the movements developed outside of his presidency rather than at his direction.
It's natural that people are going to disagree about tactics and pursue different strategies in the near-term. The Sanders campaign itself gained a lot of its strength from the pre-existing but dormant and/or disconnected activist movements (e.g. Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street, WTO Protests, Environmental movement, organized labor).
I agree on all but BLM, but nuance it slightly differently.
Apart from things like child labor, dramatically new measures toward social and economic justice started with FDR and Truman, who had to have been freaked by the Russian Revolutions/"red menace." I don't think it was an accident or coincidence that the son of Joe Kennedy, who worked with FDR on the New Deal, was the one to say, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." Nixon, I think operated, at least in part, in the interests of his own re-election and the viability of his Party. He was no doubt mindful of how long and how much Democrats had won the White House and control Congress between Hoover and him (Only 8 years off for Eisenhower, a war hero and university president as far as the Oval Office). Also, Nixon had a Congress that was not only Democratic but just coming off the New Deal Coalition.
LBJ was afraid of violence, too, IMO. Various civil rights organizations, some more militant than others, overlapped with the economic justice movements ("I am a Man") and MLK was coming around to opposing the Vietnam War. Those three movements were coalescing. The March on Washington had shown the strength of the civil rights movement alone. At the least sound of anything insurrection-ish from the platform, they were ready to turn off the sound and play records of Mahalia Jackson, who was on the platform (the only female).
BTW, JFK had integrated interstate commerce via the ICC, defining interstate commerce broadly, and had begun work and negotiations on the Civil Rights Act, things often overlooked because LBJ took up the torch after the assassination.) The Great Society, however, was totes LBJ and Sargent Shriver.
BLM - How much net strength Bernie got from Black Lives Matter is really debatable in my opinion. They were much harder on Sander than they were on O'Malley or Hillary at a crucial time in his candidacy, giving him an undeserved black eye (no pun intended) just as he was trying to become known to the general public. Those interruptions of his speeches lead to (or created an excuse for) the "Black Twitter" barrage, which was also the start of calling all his supporters racist. The attacks on Bernie from that perspective never let up and neither did characterizing his supporters as racist.
BLM approved Sanders' platform back in August 2015, but I don't know how much support they gave him beyond that. I don't believe they ever approved Hillary's platform before the convention, but by then few were paying attention.
BLM confronted Hillary in a small room will into the primary, him at the Netroots Nation convention early one. One was 100% disruptive and got tons of coverage and visibility that made Bernie look bad, the other not so much. After what they did and the furor it caused, they could have been lots more helpful to him. So, I think BLM was a net negative to him, and not an inconsiderable one.
Please do not misunderstand: BLM has every reason and right to do what they did and are doing and then [strike]some[/strike] tons. I strongly support the right of protest, including by BLM. But, I cannot say I believe BLM net helped the Sanders campaign. I don't fault them for that. Being fair to Sanders was not their mission. They had other fish to fry and I think they've done a great job with their mission.
In the beginning Bernie took more heat from BLM.
There was an incident in Seattle in August where people hijacked his event.
I think he actually earned some points from many people for giving the activists the chance to at least talk. A lot of people who came to see him speak were pissed, but not as Bernie. Washington State was also one of his strongests states too, so maybe the thing about "no publicity being bad publicity" was also true.
Overall he seemed to have a lot more success than Clinton connecting with BLM activists. The movement is not centralized and people have a variety of tactics -- many people don't support any politicians -- but as the race went on, his numbers improved.
There was also a convergence in Chicago.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-protesters-20160312-story.html
And in Ferguson:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ferguson-activists-bernie-sanders_us...
Sanders had some high profile BLM protests in 2015 of his events, but unlike Clinton, they didn't really carry into until 2016.
I think more of the attention actually shifted to Bill and Hillary in 2016, but they never became a big part of the campaign, because the major media helped to bury the stories in a way that they did not with the Sanders protest in Seattle.
e.g Bill had the interaction right before the NY primary when he told activists at a public event that they should stop criticizing him and do more to stop "black on black" violence; he was completely out of touch. The story had resonance on black twitter, but the mainstream press buried it. The same was true at the Clinton fundraiser where a person was hauled off, or another protester being elbowed in the head at a Clinton rally.
There were even protests at the convention last week:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/hillary-clinton-black-liv...
Overall, I think Sanders also became a better and more appealing candidate because of his interactions in 2015 with BLM protesters, because he recognized the importance of the issue and made an effort to include it into his stump speech -- he brought people into his campaign to help educate him too.
Those who were already fans of Sanders likely see it that way.
However, I did not note people of color who were behind Hillary before Netroots, the #Berniesoblack contingent, changing their minds because BLM endorsed Bernie's platform and not hers. Also, the Mothers of the Movement stood with her at the convention.
In any event, it's moot now.
If you pay attention to the media
There are no other parties. They simply don't exist. If you don't vote for Clinton you have only two choices. Vote Drumpf or stay home. Absolutely disgraceful reporting!
“The first duty of a man is to think for himself”
We all reinforce that myth by using "third Party"
There are many parties other than Democratic and Republican, not only one other party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_St...
There is only one national party with an international affiliation, though, and that is the Green Party.
I don't think that list has been updated recently. For example, I don't see the Modern Progressive Party or the Progressive Unity Party.
We need a term other than "third" party to mean a political party other then Democratic Party or Republican Party. Maybe just "younger" political party?
just use the party name
"I am a Green Party supporter." Everybody knows what that is. If you just throw all non-established parties into one bucket you are misrepresenting the situation. The various parties' platforms differ widely, as you would expect.
What needs to happen is the media needs to recognize these parties as political realities and take them seriously. I think the Greens are on the right path (as is the Libertarian party), hoping to get on the ballot in all 50 states (why is that even necessary every 4 years?).
“The first duty of a man is to think for himself”
Democrats and Republicans
have worked hard to make it as difficult as they can for other parties to get ballot access, media attention, etc. ever since Wallace ran and won the electoral votes of five states. No one but a Democrat or a Republican has carried a state since then--and that was 1968. I have not checked, but they may have also taken measures after Perot ran. Even though he did not carry a single state, he got a respectable number of popular votes.
We can work on the state level to get this changed, but Democrats and Republicans will resist on their own. If they don't, the DNC and the RNC will pressure them to
Stein and Johnson...
polling so close to each other among Dems & Dem leaning Sanders supporters...makes me sad. It's odd to me that so many folks who are looking for other options seem to be of the mindset that Greens may never ever ever be considered an option. I see knee-jerk responses that could have been lifted from DNC talking points. Were Democrats really that effective in turning lefties against Greens? It seems obvious that all opinions shaped by a party that we now reject should be reevaluated. Maybe it's happening a little? Maybe that spring will unwind?
I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but "Greens don't get enough done" is very empty criticism after this Wag the Dog Democratic Primary fiasco resulting in the nomination of a corrupt military hawk. Clearly, Greens are stepping up their game and meeting deadlines for ballot access. They're doing this with the help of a lot of Sanders supporters, but maybe that's the way it should be all of the time--Lefties helping each other and working together.
Again, I know I'm preaching to the choir. I recognize some members here who refused to tolerate that type of bullshit on the other site and never allowed dishonest attacks on Greens to go unchallenged.
I think the Greens are successfully suppressed
The media ignores them, other than an occasional derisive snort. They get the same treatment Bernie originally got. I have personally talked with four disappointed Berners who were unhappily ready to fall into line for Hillary, Because Trump. None of them even knew about Jill Stein, and all of them were very interested when I suggested they check her out.
I live in NM. If Hillary needs my vote in this state, she's already lost big time.
Please help support caucus99percent!
I will gladly and proudly be voting Green in November.
Damned proud that I am not voting for Trump or Hillary.
However, I do have issues with the Green Party around practicality, organization, etc. I will defer any discussions of specifics until after November, though.
I'm registered Green, and I will be voting for Jill Stein
Neither Hillary nor Donald represent me -- both are anathema to my values.
Voting is so much simpler if you don't get involved in trying to guess how to vote strategically so as to thwart who you think is the worst candidate of the two big parties.
Be a Friend of the Earth, cherish it and protect it.
Greens are now asking for team builders.
Market strategists, etc. They are going the Sanders method, ground-up. Some of us have had recent practice here.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Then this may be the time to become active inside the Green
Party.
I'll take McCain over Trump
Beware the bullshit factories.
30% to Stein/Johnson/Trump, and how many stay home?
I keep saying, I think she's only going to get about half of the Sanders voters.
She'll get some Republicans, though.
Pence's recent statement about overturning Roe v. Wade and his history of supporting re-training or whatever for gays is going to leave a mark. We are in MIchelle Bachman territory at the VP level and only heaven knows what at the Presidential level.
I don't think Hillary could possibly have been any luckier with an opponent. Makes me wonder.
This is a really good read
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/dont-blame-bernies-neverhillary-voters-...
“The first duty of a man is to think for himself”
"A vote for Stein is a vote for Trump. Nope.
Let's assume a universe of 3 voters. Two have voted, as follows.
1 vote Hillary
1 vote Trump
Here comes another voter, who votes for Stein. New Totals.
1 vote Hillary
1 vote Trump
1 vote Stein
Oh, look! Someone voted for Stein without voting for Trump. He still has only one vote. Imagine that! The tautological reality is, a vote for Stein is a vote for Stein (duh), just not a vote for Hillary (or for Trump).
As Axelrod said, a loss to the candidate is on the candidate, no one else.
I don't credit Republicans with much, but I have to give them this: I've never heard them whine about third parties and they have a few of those running against them in every Presidential election. Also, they haven't spent a generation whining about Perot's two runs.
If I had a nickel for every time a Dem told me Nader caused 2000
I could probably afford to go to one of Hillary’s fundraisers.
It's not about reality, it's about what lie they want to tell
Trump will mock Hillary with wild (truthful) accusations and her (true if not reported) poll numbers will drop. Then the Real Masters will decide who they want for president. They have already decided of course, but they could change their minds - for example, if Stein polls too high they could sacrifice Hillary and have the Dems blame the "purity left" like they did in 2000, if they think that Trump is controllable enough. They could even "elect" Johnson, though that would be even more dangerous to their plans than Trump.
On to Biden since 1973
I think they would elect Bernie before Trump.
If they can predict it, they can plan for it and work around it.
Trump is a wild card, a loose cannon, unpredictable.
Hillary is their wet dream, a smart, totally predictable, neoliberalneocon whose election will not be on their heads. Let her be pro choice and pro gay, so they don't have to worry about the religious right. They could care less, as long as it's on her and not them. I don't know if they'll love her for two terms, but I bet they love her now. Four years from now....Ryan probably. He has been through this process before, he will have been Speaker, third in line, for quite a while; and his youth and shredded abs will be a nice contrast to a President who will then be 73 and counting.
Hail Hydra!
Hail Hydra!
Johnson, Stein polling at record highs
This year is different
Latest polls
Electoral College
The popular vote is irrelevant as to the outcome of U.S. Presidential elections. No younger party candidate has won a single state since Governor Wallace. Even Perot, with his infommercials and billions did not win one state.
Old joke:
Hillary does not have to get the most votes, only more than Trump.
We can, however, show in this election that a growing number of voters want a country that does not keep listing rightward. The only way it stops listing rightward is if Democrats push back hard at Republicans. Democrats have not done that in decades.
I am sorry that Johnson voters are making a much stronger statement than Stein voters, though. Sigh.
Electoral College procedures
According to the Constitution, if takes an absolute majority of Electors in the Electoral College to elect a President. If neither Hillary or Trump get a majority of the Electors (say because of Johnson and Stein), the President is chosen by a different process: each of the States has a single vote, the majority of which determine who is elected President (the population of States is not a factor here).
Others have sketched out the possibilities, but suffice it to say, that it will be complicated.
I am not a scholar in this area, so if any here are, please recount the rules and history of what has happened when the election has been decided by the States, rather than by the Electoral College. If I have misrepresented anything in the above, please also explain.
Be a Friend of the Earth, cherish it and protect it.
Voting for Stein will not affect the electoral college vote
unless Stein gets an elector. I very much doubt that will happen. No younger party candidate has taken a state since Wallace got the electoral votes of five Southern states by running on a racist platform and Republicans and Democrats have worked together every since to make it harder for other parties to get ballot access or win. Wallace got votes in the Northeast, too, just not enough to get any electoral votes.
A tie in the electoral college has not occurred in over 200 years.
The electors already represent the outcome of the vote in the states unless an elector goes rogue. I don't know if the Framers intended that or not, but that is how it is almost always gone. (Any elector who is "faithless" should probably plan on moving to a new state.) Here is a link to an article about a tied electoral college.
http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2012/11/an-electoral-college-tie-expl...
See also http://www.270towin.com/content/electoral-college-ties/
There is a new moveon petition to get Stein into the debates
I don't know how to link to it, except through FB. Here is my link:http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/allow-jill-stein-to-particip.fb51?sourc...
Don't know if you can see it.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
My settings are currently public, so it's safe (cas)
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.