The short version:
- I’m a former Democrat, former Green, now unaligned, left-of-center, independent.
- It was Bill Clinton’s first term that chased me out of the Democratic Party.
- I proudly supported Ralph Nader’s Green Party candidacy in both 1996 and 2000, and have no regrets (Gore lost all by himself, get over it).
- I have been a fan of Bernie Sanders since he became Mayor of Burlington, VT 35 years ago and was thrilled to be able to give him my vote for President earlier this year.
- I have had serious reservations about Hillary Clinton, and have taken heat about expressing these opinions here on Daily Kos.
- Nevertheless, I believe that a vote for Jill Stein (or Gary Johnson) is a foolish, unproductive, and dangerous act, and I urge all Greens and left-leaning independents to join me in supporting Hillary Clinton.
(and 7, this is a personal blog, my opinion only, so, yes, the word “I” is used a bit in the above)
The long version:
I don’t need to get into much detail on #1 and #2 above; I’ve told the story many times before. With the election of Bill Clinton, the “third way” of the Democratic Leadership Council had officially replaced the progressive liberalism of the Democratic Party I grew up in. That, and the arrogance of my local Democratic State Assembly member, telling me he didn’t care what I think because “Who else are you going to vote for?” made me realize that I did have other choices to explore.
For me, Ralph Nader entered the Presidential electoral arena at just the right time. Here was somebody who I had considered a hero since my 1960’s childhood. In ‘96 I volunteered for the campaign. Going to hear him speak when he visited Sacramento (where we lived at the time) was an experience unlike any other political event I’ve ever been to. Here was truly one of the most intelligent and thoughtful people to ever seek office, speaking for hours without a single sentence that could be considered pandering for votes.
In 1996 Nader didn’t even come in third. Ross Perot took that title, and with it a certain amount of blame from the Republicans for contributing to Bob Dole’s defeat.
In 2000 I again supported Nader, and for all the same reasons. My votes for Nader (and other 3rd party candidates) were never “protest votes.” They were not votes against the Democrats or “the system” — they were votes for progressive ideas and intelligent candidates I had vetted as best representing my beliefs and desires for our nation, and the possibility of getting something done.
It is quite popular to blame Ralph Nader for Al Gore’s defeat — We’ve all heard warnings about “the Nader Effect” as a caution against voting outside of the two party stranglehold. The only problem with this warning is that it isn’t true.
The “Nader Effect” is based on the faulty assumption that if Nader had not run, every one of his votes would have gone to Gore. Exit poll data from 2000, however, shows that just would not have been true. (It also ignores that the national vote total doesn’t matter. All we need look at are the couple of states where Nader had more votes than the spread between Gore and Bush.)
According to exit polls, 30% of Nader voters would not have voted at all in a two-way battle between Gore and Bush. Another 24% of Nader voters would have supported Bush in a two-person race (don’t assume Nader supporters were all liberals, many 2000 Nader voters voted for Perot in ‘96). That would have left Gore picking up only 46% of Nader’s voters.
A number of Gore voters also reported that if it were not for the “threat” of Ralph Nader, they too would have stayed home on election day. In addition to the regular third party voters and others who would never come out for a major party candidate, Nader’s presence on the ballot brought out disaffected Democrats and independent to support Gore and actually increased his vote count!
And then there’s the small problem of the huge number of Democrats who dumped Gore to vote for Bush (in Florida 12 times as many Democrats voted for Bush as did for Nader). It’s time to stop blaming independent voters and Ralph Nader. If Al Gore had simply gotten the damned Democrats to vote for him, he would have been President.
The major parties don’t want to tell you this because they need “the Nader Effect” to scare you into compliance. The Greens and other third parties don’t want to tell you this because they don’t want to admit how powerless they are.
I go over all this now to tell those of you who are considering a vote for Jill Stein that I know where you are coming from. I agree that the two-party duopoly is a corrupt mechanism. With so many people refusing to vote at all, I would never belittle your vote as a mere “protest” vote. I believe that third parties and independent candidates bring new people into the voting booth and deserve credit for that. Anybody who cares enough to show up and cast a ballot gets some respect in my book.
What I question, however, is whether Dr. Stein is the choice we — as political progressives — have been looking for. At the end of the primary season, when my candidate, Bernie Sanders, was officially out, I considered supporting Dr. Stein. I started reading about her, her political history, her positions, etc. What I learned scared me out of any possible support I may have previously considered.
My concern rises from many more points than I will list here, but for a few:
- A doctor, who in one statement agrees that childhood vaccinations are a life-saver, then a moment later says that the anti-vaxxers have “a reason to be concerned,” is nothing but a political panderer.
- A candidate who says that canceling all student loan debt can be done using quantitative easing, and then explains that as a “magic trick that basically people don't need to understand any more about than that it is a magic trick," shows that she herself doesn’t understand her own policy suggestions (either that, or she thinks we’re all morons).
- Similarly, her flip-flops (often in the same day) on Brexit, and other issues, demonstrate complete lack of knowledge and understanding of the issues, and a tendency to speak just to “be part of the conversation” whether she has something to contribute or not.
- More pandering to crackpots with her suggestion that “we should not be subjecting kids’ brains to [wi-fi].”
- Look here for a much more comprehensive listing of why Jill Stein’s ideas are terrible.
Dr. Jill Stein is not a serious candidate with a possibility of overturning the two-party system. She is a small-time agitator, with a limited range of expertise, who plays to fringe cranks and conspiracy theorists.
She is not a replacement for Bernie Sanders. Despite starting in “small town” politics, Sanders has had a long career as an Independent in Congress, working successfully with Democrats and Republicans alike. Stein’s full elected experience is two terms in the Lexington, MA Town Meeting.
Jill Stein is not a replacement for Ralph Nader. While Nader had not held elective office, he ran with over three decades of name recognition as a nationally known leader, challenging the corporate politicians in their home court, testifying before Congress countless times, and educating the public through his books and national advocacy organization.
And don’t even get me started on liberals or progressives who think Gary Johnson represents any of your views beyond, possibly, the legalization of marijuana. You’ll get your legal weed with Johnson, but you’ll lose your health care, your Social Security, your environmental protection, your public education, and that’s just to start.
There is only one serious candidate in this election with actual qualifying experience and an idea of how our government actually works. Hillary Clinton is flawed — in my opinion — she’s more like the moderate Republicans of old than a true Democrat. But this election season is unpredictable, things are uncomfortably close, and Clinton will need every possible vote in every state to be sure of victory.
I get it. You’re angry. I’m angry too. But I don’t need to love my candidate or my President. I just have to feel secure knowing that the person with their finger on the button is reasonably sane.
In this crazy year, Hillary Clinton is the only candidate of any party — “major” or “third” — that I would trust with my vote and with my country.