While Ms. Stein condemns both “zombie political parties” as tools of Wall Street and war profiteers, her campaign has focused largely on hammering Ms. Harris, blaming the White House she serves for relentless violence in Gaza and Lebanon.

And Democrats, as never before, are focused on Ms. Stein.

The party has prepared a negative ad blitz for the election’s final weeks, its first-such effort ever directed at a third-party candidate. Fearful that Ms. Stein might divert critical votes in places like Michigan, Democrats are also pressing their case on billboards plastered recently across swing states:

“Jill Stein Helped Trump Once. Don’t Let Her Do It Again.”

She dismisses the “spoiler mythology” that has come to define her mainstream identity, noting — accurately enough — that some of her supporters would never back Ms. Harris anyway.

She says that Democrats would do well to look inward, disputing that she bears any responsibility for Mr. Trump’s fortunes, then or now.

“Those conversations never go anywhere,” Ms. Stein, 74, said in a wide-ranging interview.

      • mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        Attention. Whether or not you agree with her, getting paid to cruise around the country telling people what your political views are is a pretty sweet gig

        • basmati@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 days ago

          The already successful medical doctor probably int doing it for money. She’d just run as a dem if she wanted money.AOC has 10x’d her net worth by grifting horny liberals that want to pretend they’re left wing.

    • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      14 days ago

      It’s not even funny calling you people blue MAGA anymore. You’re not different enough to warrant the modifier.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        Where has Jill Stein been for the past four years? Do you think this is what politics is? Disappearing from public view (only popping up to dine with autocrats), only to show up when it’s election time? Do you think this is how legitimate political parties operate?

        • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          14 days ago

          Where has Jill Stein been for the past four years?

          Where’s Kamala or Trump been? What’s your point?

          Disappearing from public view (only popping up to dine with autocrats), only to show up when it’s election time? Do you think this is how legitimate political parties operate?

          Absolutely deranged. “the news I read didn’t give something page space therefore it doesn’t exist”

          Like I even give a shit about Stein and wasn’t just making an observation about how your brain is broken with Rachel Maddow conspiracy theories.

          • Sconrad122@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            14 days ago

            Literally, they were both out campaigning for their party’s candidates in elections in 2021, 22, and 23

              • Sconrad122@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                14 days ago

                We are maybe talking past each other? You responded to a comment asking where Jill Stein was the last 4 years, which is a question attached to the argument that her lack of efforts in the off years is evidence that she is not running a serious candidacy. You responded by asking what about the two big party candidates offseason’s actions, implying that you believe their actions are deficient under a similar line of critique. I pointed out that they did campaign to increase the standing of their platform and their party through lower level elections in the off years, which seems like a pretty strong rebuttal to the implication that they are not actively working to promote their positions throughout government. Perhaps you can explain why you view that as irrelevant

                • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  13 days ago

                  Like I even give a shit about Stein and wasn’t just making an observation about how your brain is broken with Rachel Maddow conspiracy theories.

                  Two levels of comment replies (both yours) and five hours since I said this and you’re acting like we’re talking past each other when you’re just ignoring what I say.

                  But as a side note: “they positioned themselves within their major party” as your response boils down to reads as bullshit to me. That doesn’t count. The correct answer is they’ve done nothing. Harris has been sitting in a dark room doing laudanum and showing up to give policy speeches that would make Biden look bad if he gave them himself (“Don’t come”). Trump has been doing cocaine and being a media removed. (sex worker)

                  You’re just playing Calvinball filling in reasonable details to answer the question “what makes a serious candidate” so you don’t have to just come out and say “one of the two parties nominates them”

                  • Sconrad122@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    13 days ago

                    You asked a question (where have Kamala and Trump been?). I answered in what I believe was a relevant manner to the topic at hand and is a salient rebuttal of your “observation”. I don’t see how your claim to not care is relevant, you’re going to have to explain that one to me. For the record, I’m not the person you were replying to, nor have I watched a single episode of Maddow

    • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      28
      ·
      15 days ago

      Stein has already been cleared of colluding with Russia. Your image is ten years old.

      The reason you might not be aware of this is the /Politics mods banning people who debunk it.

      • FancyManacles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        15 days ago

        You’re right, it was 2015, but as a simple layman I was aware of Russian meddling by the time this dinner happened. So if Jill and the Green party weren’t aware of how bad this would look, and how worthless an olive branch to Putin would be, then at the very least they’re too incompetent to be worth a vote. Unfortunately I did not know about this gaffe by the time of the election and even voted for Stein in that election, which I still regret.

        • geneva_convenience@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          15 days ago

          It would be helpful to not leak a ten year old image in a seven year old article if there was evidence. Do present it.

          If Stein was truly colluding with Russia the Democrats would have had a legal foot to bar her from running. And they would not need to make up crazy conspiracy theories which rely on censorship.

          • Grapho@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            Español
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            15 days ago

            Everyone I don’t like is a Russian asset, the Democrat’s guide to political discussion