If you criticize the Green Party, it's because you aren't doing anything for it. You are why they suck.
Statistically, more people vote in presidential polls, and for less local elections. "Voter turnout in the United States fluctuates in national elections. In recent elections, about 60% of the voting eligible population votes during presidential election years, and about 40% votes during midterm elections. Turnout is lower for odd year, primary and local elections. "
www.fairvote.org/…
How are more local Green candidates supposed to get elected more when statistically less people vote for them? Does that make sense to you? If more people voted in off-year elections, or for more local candidates in general, then there would be more local candidate participation. If there was more local candidate participation, then more people would vote for more local candidates. But chicken or egg, if you don't start somewhere, you don't get anywhere. Your lack of participation is why they "f[×@]king" suck.
You know the Green Party is the only party that doesn't accept corporate cash or SuperPAC funds, right? Without corporate cash, people power is the only thing driving the party. If you aren't participating, you are why the things you care about fail. You get-in what you put-out, and so far I'm hearing all talk. Criticize the Green Party all you want. But what I hear is, you aren't doing enough for it to be of value to you. Makes sense, and sounds very much like a (white-male) entitled-American, do-everything-for-me perspective. Kudos. You’re why corporate cash wins elections every time.
Almost all of the Bernie campaign was volunteer-based. I phone-banked and knocked for Bernie with ONLY other volunteers. I Berned so hard I went to every convention until the National Convention, and I can tell you from experience, that almost all of the Democratic conventions were nearly all volunteer-based too. You get what you pay for, and the Colorado County Convention was bureaucratically abysmal. Dan, if you had helped, would it have been better? Probably. But you're too busy complaining and not doing.
I've realized the only way to get change is to make it. When you say there should be more locals running, it means you should be running. The beauty of satire is its truth. Any #Berner in any district that doesn't have a Green candidate already, should be running themselves. Bernie showed us that most of us care about each other and future generations as much as ourselves, and we don't have to settle for the collusion of lies and money within the rest of the 2-party duopoly. Having been through these primaries, we now know most people would vote for Bernie were the media and elections not rigged against him from before the first primary vote. That's huge.
Your perspective is self-fulfilling, but so is any. When more people choose to engage rather than criticize, change happens. When more people choose to criticize rather than engage, nothing happens. You are making change harder by targeting those engaging rather than participating yourself. One could call that victim blaming. Dan, you are the problem.
I'm gladly supporting Green Party Colorado Governor candidate Harry Hempy over John Hickenlooper, or "Frankenlooper" as anti-fractivists call him. Hempy isn't a polished, piano-playing singer and entertainer like Democrat Frackenloopy, and he doesn't have Big Oil and Gas whispering convoluted rhetoric in his ear to confuse the masses, or stuffing his campaign pockets. But he has the right values, and isn’t that how we should be voting? Isn’t that how we get our values represented? Please, tell me more about how the only party that doesn't take corporate or Super-PAC donations should be doing more for you, while you’re doing nothing for them. Who do you think funds and mans their campaigns?
Yes, Noam has a point: for the sake of SCOTUS appointees, swing state neoliberals should go Hillary on the aggregate. But this is a four year band-aid to a major democratic wound that Hillary will not fix; and our constitutional rights, financial and environmental securities, and civil liberties are still at risk as long as campaign finance isn't addressed. Big Oil, Media, Pharma, Prisons and Banks have already donated heavily to #$hillary. The DNC won’t disclose its donors. Thinking she will side with the people over her donors (while keeping them secret when possible) is naive at best, and history says otherwise.
Fanatics are easy media ratings, so MSM eats it up; but #Drumpf isn't even liked by a majority of Repubs, so the bar is low. Few establishment candidates spoke at the RNC, and those that did referenced Drumpf as little as possible. They don't want him either. Meanwhile, if any 3rd party candidate gets 15% of the popular vote, they are guaranteed federal funding in the next election cycle. Gary Johnson is almost there. We can end this ridiculousness by voting Jill AND Hillary on the aggregate, and get Jill national platform exposure in 4 years. But if you want more local Greens, you need to tell people to start voting in local elections. Because movements don’t start unless someone starts them, and Dan, you’re all talk.
Greater good is always better than lesser evil. Always. If you're progressive, or a neoliberal in a blue state, your greater good is Jill Stein. Let's get her, and the Greens on the map. Because if we don't, they won't.