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.

  • eldavi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    For instance, one of her policies is an anti-genocide policy. This might seem a bit radical and extreme but it’s apparently very popular.

    it saddens me greatly that the question of genocide in this overton window is not whether or not genocide should exist; but instead the question is how much genocide is acceptable and the only incorrect answer is “zero”.

    it makes me sadder still that social media is dominated by manufactured consent so thoroughly that pointing something like “genocide is bad” only brands you a radical; a malcontent; too idealistically optimistic; or simply ignored.

    • bigbrowncommie69 [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s because “the overton window” is liberal nonsense. Genocide has always been acceptable to the liberal ideological hegemony. It only ceases to be acceptable when it’s an enemy that does it.