“The race for the White House is too close for comfort,” write parties from around Europe, calling on Stein to throw her support behind Democrat Kamala Harris.
Green politicians from across Europe on Friday called on U.S. Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein to withdraw from the race for the White House and endorse Democrat Kamala Harris instead.
“We are clear that Kamala Harris is the only candidate who can block Donald Trump and his anti-democratic, authoritarian policies from the White House,” Green parties from countries including Germany, France, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Ireland, Estonia, Belgium, Spain, Poland and Ukraine said in a statement, which was shared with POLITICO ahead of publication
I don't have to prove anything happened. She was put at a dinner table with Putin in Moscow. Something that only happens if Putin finds you useful. He doesn't sit at random tables and strike up conversations with whoever he finds.
Putin and his regime himself are US ideas. They sponsored fascists in the name of realpolitik and are now whining they are making fascist things. The brave mujhaideen of afghanistan all over again
The current russian governement have zero interest to present themselves as the US-sponsored fascists they are. It would sabotage their whole legitimacy.
If you dont vote for stein coz she ate with putin, then you should not vote for the dems lmao
Look. Nobody here is saying that the Democratic party is perfect. In fact, most of us are aware it sucks too. But, while we live in a democracy with an electoral college, and a two party system, we vote for the candidate who has the most chance of making a good change (but also has a chance to win). Even if Stein won, and she's the perfect person with all the perfect ideals and policies, she still wouldn't be able to do shit as president, because the president can't do anything significant without support from the house. IIRC there's not a single green party member in the house to support her. She'd be dependant on the DNC for anything that isn't awful.
Since she only pops her head out for presidential elections, and doesn't seem to ever do anything to grow her party in the house, I don't see this ever changing until someone who actually has the chance to win (due to the aforementioned electoral college) comes in and could be persuaded to make changes like ranked choice voting, etc.
There's no such thing as the perfect president, certainly can't be perfect for everyone. But if you have morals, and it seems like you do, how can you ignore the fact that you're throwing out your vote for someone who can't possibly win, in turn depriving a better candidate of your vote, when you know all that does is increase Trump's chances, and Trump will be worse on everything you care about?
Your evidence for Jill Stein being bribed by Putin in her sitting next to a German ambassador at a table, and Putin sitting down in a seat at the other side of the table?
The Democrat misinformation campaign is in full swing here.
Also, pretending that Putin and his cronies just sat down at a random table where Jill Stein happened to be sitting is silly and I think you know that.
I did in my previous comment. You just don't like the fact that you are only put at a table with the extremely calculating dictator of Russia unless he has good reason for you to be there.
And if you expect me to prove that about Putin, you're just a troll.
Calling me a troll is an incredibly convenient way for you to get out from under the burden of proof here. Kind of hard to have a discussion with someone if they're just going to call you a troll when you ask them to provide proof of something they're claiming.
Yeah, it is hard to have a discussion with someone under those circumstances. But when you refute widely known information because they don't have an affidavit, you get called a troll.
Because anyone with half an attention span knows how putin works, due to the fact he's been operating the same way for a couple of decades. The proof is in the world media and the actions of those he sits with at dinners like the one jill stein attended.
I'm not answering how old I am because that's none of your business, frankly. You can call me an idiot or a troll, I don't really care. I just asked for proof of something and so far all I've gotten are replies about it being self-evident because "that's how Putin works" or other various forms of non-proof.
That's basically what this person seems to be suggesting. Like she just happened to be sitting there and Putin and all of his closest people were like, "let's go see who this lady is and what she's up to!"
Ah yes the dude is such an all-knowing chessmaster chad dangerous dictator but he lets people take photoshoot of his secret election interference meeting.
Please name this particular group you think I work for beyond 'people who don't trust someone who sits at a dinner table with the dictator of Russia at a state celebration in Moscow for English-language Russian state TV.'
Please continue to have the conversation with the imaginary version of me you have invented because you will no longer be having one with me.
Try being honest next time. And if you want to know what someone thinks beyond what they're saying, ask them. Don't just tell them what they're saying because you'll probably be wrong.
Except it's not what I'm suggesting at all. I haven't suggested anything. I've posted what Stein has said happened, which she says was a dinner at a RT anniversary gala where Putin only briefly sat at their table, no introductions were made, and no English-Russian conversations happened. If you have evidence of something else happening there, as you seem to be suggesting, then provide it.
I've read all of your replies. Why would I believe that happened without evidence? Have you proven that she's networked with Russians or Putin? Suggesting something might have happened isn't evidence of the thing happening.
Repeating things isn't providing evidence. As I've said in another comment, being at a dinner table with someone isn't evidence of collusion. Putin sitting at a table with someone, even if he's the one who chose to seat himself there, isn't evidence that that person is colluding with him. He's sat at dinner tables with Hillary Clinton. Does that mean Clinton is a Russian asset? You'd recognize that claim as absurd without evidence surely?
Well, sure. I'm not saying that Russians didn't have a nefarious reason to invite her there. It's entirely possible and maybe even likely that they did it because they saw a third party candidate as a useful tool to sow some sort of election discord in the US. But that claim would be entirely different than the claim that Jill Stein did it because she's an asset or that this was her idea or purpose for being there. I'm disputing the latter, not the former, because her attending a gala for RT is not evidence of collusion and this was the implication being made. I can find all sorts of pictures online of Hillary Clinton and other politicians having dinners with Trump or Putin, but that doesn't mean the photos are evidence that they were in collusion with either of them.
Of course she says nothing happened. It's like a child getting caught with their hand in the cookie jar covered in crumbs, and they will insist they did nothing wrong. Never expect someone to be honest when it's against their interests.