Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the most unpopular major party candidates in our history. That has caused many people to consider voting for one of the third party candidates.
This article on Jill Stein, medium.com/... is misleading, dead wrong, and naïve to the point of silliness. Before I expand on those comments, let me emphasize that this is not criticism of anyone who supports her, nor is it specific criticism of her. John Oliver did a very good job Sunday night of showing that neither Stein nor Libertarian Gary Johnson is even remotely qualified to be President.
Tony Brasunas wrote that there are four reasons to support Jill Stein.
First, he argues that because the outcomes of Presidential elections in most states are almost never in doubt, i.e. they are solidly Democratic or Republican, your vote doesn’t matter in those states. You can use your vote “to send a message.” This is just wrong and naïve. Currently, according to fivethirtyeight.com, there are at least 15 states in play this year. There are many other states that lean strongly one way or the other but do not consistently vote that way. For example, Maryland and Massachusetts are among the strongest Democratic Party states, but both have Republican governors. Louisiana just elected a Democrat as governor. A Democratic governor just left office in Kentucky.
By voting for a third party candidate what message could you possibly send and to whom are you sending it? That you want more progressive government? The conservatives and corporate Dems will be delighted to see you vote for a third party candidate. You are out of their hair and they can keep doing what they are doing. Jill Stein is polling below 2%. I think she polls best in Oregon, as she did in 2012, but still with only about 4%. The actual message being sent to those in power is "no worries."
Next, Brasunas argues that the major party candidates are ignoring the most important issues or hold positions contrary to those of progressives. This is true of Trump. It is not of Clinton. Here is a link to the issues section of her website www.hillaryclinton.com/.... What important issues is she avoiding? How many of her positions are not consistent with contemporary progressive thought? Yes, there are some differences but her program overall is the most progressive we have seen in a nominated candidate in a long time. Only Bernie’s would have been better. She has moved closer to him as he repeatedly says.
The third reason Brasunas says you should vote for a third party is that the Democratic Party cannot be fixed. This is juvenile. How can anyone say the party cannot be fixed when hardly any effort was made to fix it until Bernie came along, and he came along too late for this cycle. Just demanding change doesn’t bring change. If you want change you have to work for it. The other side does. Of course the DNC favored Clinton. Until Bernie announced, Clinton was expected to win the nomination essentially by acclamation. That doesn’t excuse the dirty tricks that occurred, however.
The argument that Bernie was cheated out of the nomination does not stand up to the facts. Some of the most notorious election manipulations, such as what was done in Arizona, were done by Republicans. With the possible exceptions of California, Iowa and Nevada, I don’t know of any case where the primary results were tipped. And because the caucus system is so flawed, random screw-ups, which almost always happen, can get viewed as manipulation. But there were some cases of outright fraudulent behavior, but nothing that altered the outcome. Even the scandalous conduct of the California primary that may have tipped the state to Clinton did not change the ultimate outcome.
I am sorry to say that Bernie lost because he began his campaign too late and did not have the time he needed in many states to build winning campaign organizations. He has said that, himself. One cannot expect to win the Democratic nomination without winning New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, among others.
The DNC can be fixed. It will take of time and effort by a lot of progressives around the country, but it can be done. There are organized efforts here in Oregon and in other states that we hope ultimately will lead to massive reforming of the operation of the Democratic Party and returning it to being the party of the people. The effort required to succeed in this would be far less than what it would take to build a truly viable national third party.
Finally, if by some miracle, a viable national third party could be built, we could have chaotic results in Presidential elections with no party winning the necessary 270 electoral votes. This would throw the election to the House of Representatives where each state gets one vote. Republicans control two thirds of the states and thus would easily take the White House. Furthermore, the Democratic Party probably would be far more damaged by the creation of a progressive third party than would the Republican Party, making it more likely that the Republicans would control even more states and even more of the federal government.
His final point argues for a change to a third party to correct all of the incompetence and evils of the governments we have had for quite a long period now. That our government has failed to serve the people properly for as long as most living people remember cannot be debated. The economy is screwed up because government failed in its responsibility to protect the people from predatory capitalism. Our government has not been progressive, regardless of the party in power. However, much of the time we have had divided government, one party in control of the White House while the other party controls at least one house of Congress. That is a major cause of our malaise. Changing the Presidency does not necessarily bring any other significant changes, especially the ones we need that are so bitterly opposed by Republicans. And certainly putting the Presidency in the hands of a third party candidate, without any of her party members in Congress only would make things worse.
The best strategy to build a true progressive movement is to build it inside the Democratic Party. That is what has happened in Oregon. Even though there still are some things to fix, I think we now may have the most progressive Democratic Party in the nation. Oregon has become a leader in enacting progressive legislation. Republicans know this and they are trying to stop it before the success here spreads to other states. Outside Republican money is pouring in, even to local races, to try to stem the progressive tide here.
Don’t let that happen. Get active in the Democratic Party. Canvass or phone bank for local and state Democratic Party candidates. This is how we really can win.