I’ve seen some speculation recently that the Libertarian Party may do historically well in the presidential election this year, but Steve M. is the first analyst I’ve seen tackle the prospect of Green Party candidate Jill Stein getting significant backing from the Bernie or Bust crowd.
The first caveat here is that this about the worst time to ask anyone how they’ll behave in the voting booth in November. Feelings are about as raw as they’re going to get on both sides of the political divide. If you count yourself as someone who is disappointed or even hurt that Hillary Clinton (if you’re on the left) or Donald Trump (if you are on the right) is going to be your party’s nominee, then you are definitely in a small minority. The vast majority of people haven’t been paying close enough attention to be hurt or disappointed. Many more don’t even have a party and they’ll be choosing between two people that are presented to them rather than thinking about what might have been if different people had won the nominations.
Anger will subside and bitterness will dissolve. In the end, there will be a clear choice, and most people will have little difficulty making it.
Yet, the schisms in the two major parties are historically large this year, both nominees have big negatives, and there is no Ross Perot in sight. It would not surprise me to see both the Libertarian and the Green parties get larger than usual numbers of protest votes.
Of the two, Clinton will have the easier time avoiding this, but she has to take actions to unite the left. Trump’s problem is deeper because the people in his own party who are opposing him are opposing him more for his bad temperament and poor preparation than for any specific policies. Many just don’t think he can do the job or that he should be trusted with it. Very few people on the left share those misgivings about Clinton, and certainly not to the same degree.
It will interesting to see if the Libertarians or the Greens can get traction. For New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson is expected to be the Libertarian nominee, and he’s polling at about 10% in some recent surveys. He’d need to average 15% to get into the debates. Jill Stein has a steeper hill to climb.
I suppose that if the election looks like a blowout, more people will feel it’s safe to cast a protest vote. If the race looks competitive, fewer people will make that choice. If Trump hemorrhages any significant amount of votes to Johnson, it could cost him some states that you might not expect to be competitive, like Georgia and Montana. On the other hand, Gary Johnson might actually appeal to some young voters who are still pissed off about Bernie Sanders not getting the nomination. A lot will depend on whether Johnson can get into the debates. If he does, he could pull from both sides.
In any case, the third parties are a factor we need to keep our eyes on, because there is a lot of political disenchantment in the land, and it needs a place to go.
When you escape the intellectual blinders of the “two” party system, you will understand that my vote for Jill Stein is not a “protest” vote. It’s a vote for the candidate whose policy proposals I favor.
Specifically:
http://www.jill2016.com/plan
Do these sound like good ideas to you? Then maybe you should vote for Jill Stein too.
You say you won’t vote for her because she can’t win? I say you can’t expect her to win if you won’t vote for her.
Eric, I would feel more comfortable about her if she had ever served in a legislature or dealt with one in a high executive position. Given that both Stein and Trump have done neither, I don’t have a lot of confidence in the only populist candidates.
So, it comes down to a choice between:
I think I’ll take door #2, but I’m open to anyone that can stop #4
I’ll take Stein working falteringly towards worthy goals over Clinton working efficiently towards unworthy ones.
Me too!
Don’t forget that behind door #2 is a raging sociopath. But he’s cool with you because goddammit, he’s got the balls to deport those fucking illegals.
No but he’s got the balls to reject TPP. And HRC is also a raging sociopath with delusions of persecution. She has visions and can’t tell reality from fantasy to the extent of not knowing if she is being shot at. Or was it all deliberate lies?
Trump “maybe has a program”
Glad I’m not drinking coffee right now.
I have even more left-wing policy proposals.
You say you won’t vote for me because I can’t win? I say you can’t expect me to win if you won’t vote for me.
Then I’ll vote for you before I vote for Hillary Clinton.
Might as well, since voting for me is just as effective as voting for Jill Stein.
When Hillary starts her first war, you can reflect on the part you played in having effected it.
Oh, yes. It’ll be all my fault.
I’m essentially murdering babies because I won’t passively sit back and let Donald Trump become the next president.
You’re hilarious.
Given how likely Trump is to destroy the world, I’ll take my chances with Clinton.
She is the one supporting all the wars and wants a more “aggressive” stance with Russia.
I’m feeling very comfortable with her. And I feel like I cannot vote for H. Clinton. The amount of corruption (which in my definition includes receiving large sums of money from people with business in front of you) is too much to ignore.
That is just about the stupidest thing I’ve read today. And I’ve read a lot of stupid things.
Christ what a bunch of precious snowflakes there are here.
So you’re cool with the three billion the family’s pocketed from the ultra-wealthy over the last fifteen years? Great. I’m too delicate to accept that our political process is owned by the ultra-wealthy. And I also see, judging from what’s happened during her husband’s eight years and Obama’s eight, much being done for the bottom 90% of the country. The idea of one in five children going to bed hungry also offends my delicate senses.
I also have been against all the wars since Vietnam that we keep inventing to further increase profits for our military-industrial complex, to include energy companies. Maybe you are tough enough to like warfare all over the world. I don’t like the civilians who suffer and die. I guess that makes me weak.
That’s why I voted for Sanders. And that’s why I’ll vote for Jill Stein if Clinton’s nomination is inevitable. But if not enough people vote for Clinton this November, then don’t blame it on my weakness. Blame it on your inability to smell something very rotten.
You echo this persistent note among Democratic Party apologists: that those who condemn it from the left are “precious”, “pure”, “delicate”, chasing “ponies” or “unicorns”, or in some other way insufficiently manly to do the hard but noble work of accepting political reality as it is.
And those of us who won’t vote for Hillary are supposed to be the misogynists?
Please eschew the “precious snowflake” crap.
Yes, they do sound like good ideas to me, in fact, they sound like Bernie Sanders. And there the comparison ends. I don’t expect her to win even if we both voted for her. She has about as close to zero chance of winning as I do.
Sounds great:
1) How does Stein propose to accomplish these things?
a) Will the legislature pass laws to support Stein’s agenda?
b) To what extent, if any, can these agenda items be passed by executive order?
c) How many of these programs will be subject to challenge in court? Can they survive this?
2) What is the CBO estimate of costs for these programs? Who bears the burden?
” … they’ll be choosing between two people that are presented to them … ”
Or just not bothering.
Any analysis of third parties has to start with where third parties are actually on the ballot now and where they could get on by election day. That takes a bunch of states off the map.
Then you look at the independents they likely can attract and the party members they likely could attract if the major party candidate starts floundering.
Then state by state tote up their probable impact on that state’s popular vote and total electoral vote for only those states where they are on the ballot. Is there a disjoint set of states where neither will be on the ballot?
The worst part of it is that third parties do not put up full slates even in the states they are on the ballot. And spoiler strategies mean that third parties by not playing to win forfeit their downtickets, while screwing up the campaign of another party.
Both of these argue for Democrats organizing a 50-state wave election strategy to swamp the GOP with Trump functioning as an anvil thrown to a drowning party.
I’ll be damned. You sound like you might actually like to win, really win this thing. No voting for Jill Stein or some other who the hell is that candidate and actually trying to win congress?. Phuking amazing.
Heh heh.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/green-partys-jill-stein-on-the-feminist-case-against-hilla
ry-clinton-20160526?page=2
Ian Welsh:
http://www.ianwelsh.net/ethical-political-redemption/
Is that he wants pot legalized. If Clinton and the Dems adopt that stance Johnson ceases to be a factor and she gains 5 points the first week after announcing the stance.
It’s a complete no-brainier. Solidify the youth vote and grab a few pot-smoking Republ along the way.
Can we just get on with it? It’s been 35 years between joints, and I’m getting impatient.
.
That is entirely your own fault,
Not even Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr nor Obama
Can be blamed for your lack of testicular fortitude
On this front.
I’m sure Clinton is waiting to see what happens in July.
Of course, Sanders has already called for the removal of it completely from scheduling (requiring Congress).
Swing for the fences: go for schedule V.
But wait, if any Republicans decide to vote Democratic, it means that the Democratic Party must have adopted the whole GOP platform. At least that’s the logic I keep reading on this blog.
There is no chance that libertarians vote Clinton. There’s a lot of identity politics at play and libertarian voters are not the ones who are targeted by LEO to begin with.
No, but a lot of Drug War single issue voters potentially would.
Drug WarRant endorsed Obama in 2008 and Johnson in 2012. I’m pretty sure the site is likely to endorse Johnson again in 2016, although the commenters are mostly fond of Bernie Sanders.
My wife wants to know why it was up to Hillary Clinton to unite the party in 2008 when she lost and it is still up to Hillary Clinton to unite the party in 2016 when she won. She wonders why Hillary is always the one to get the heavy lift. (All I’ve got in response is a shrug. Somebody help me out here.)
I don’t doubt that many of the Berniacs intend to sit this one out, but Hillary has zero chance to reach those voters. They will do what they will do. Same for Sanders himself for that matter.
One person who is definitely not sitting this one out is Barack Obama and he is going to do everything he can to make sure his entire coalition turns out for Hillary. And I think he can do a lot given his still overwhelming popularity numbers among young voters.
I don’t think the Clinton campaign sees Bernie as an asset on the campaign trail and they won’t ask him to do much more than endorse. When he gets off the stage, the President gets on. That is going to be a very, very good thing for Hillary.
New Yorker – The Surreal Presidential Debate You Didn’t See: Libertarians in Las Vegas
I’m so surprised a Libertarian could have this attitude:
“You couldn’t even approach one quarter of the pyramid pile of pussy that I swim in, on a regular basis.”
Marie, I rooting for John McAfee in this one.
I want him to win and be allowed into the debates with Donald Trump.
The corporate controlled media masters minds would explode at that verbal LSD fest.
He might be one of the few to be able to get teh donald off his shtick, and at a loss for words.
Hand gestures from the orange apparition to the loony tech wizard would be priceless on live TV.
A set of debates for the ages.
Here’s a recording of the debate
McAfee has an odd persona. “Mask of sanity” is what comes to mind in watching his shtick. More effective in-person with one or a few individuals instead of the group or on camera because it employs a hypnosis or Svengali quality. On that stage is comes off as both dull and slightly creepy. That’s not going to be competitive with either Trump or Sanders.
Muti-run retreads do not catch fire.