Advocating for a green new deal. Believing that jobs, health care and education are basic human rights. Government is obligated and bears responsibility to end poverty, oversee a just economy and guarantee equality in the application of freedom and justice. "Power to the people" is the theme and slogan of the presidential nominee's candidacy.
I love all of that, along with the need for government to become involved in radical justice, protecting human rights and the environment. I find little with which to disagree in the Green Party platform, or in the 2016 Presidential candidacy of Dr. Jill Stein. Their perspective on these specific issues represents my politics more closely than the more moderate and diverse platform of the Democratic party. But in spite of that, realizing that our two party system is still the predominant factor in national elections, I couldn't think about casting a ballot for Stein, because I knew Stein didn't have a chance, and I knew that taking a vote away from Clinton could be detrimental to her chances.
And in spite of finding quite a lot of agreement with the Green Party's platform, I think Stein and the party are very misguided in making another attempt at the Presidency. It's pretty clear, from the numbers, that she siphoned off enough potential votes from Hillary Clinton to keep her from winning. At this point now, she needs to step down, endorse the President and spend her time between now and election day campaigning for him.
The only major disagreement I have with their party platform, or in Stein's candidacy, is their illusion that they could make a difference by running as a separate party, against all of the other candidates. Stein in particular seems like a very well informed, well educated, well rounded individual with a genuine grasp of American problems and the ability of its government to work toward resolution. But I have to question their thinking, really, when it comes to what they thought they might accomplish by running as a third party candidate for the Presidency.
They were considerably short sighted in thinking that by running, they would not siphon votes off from the Democratic nominee. If they didn't give that any consideration, then they were derelict in their ignorance. Running against the two major party candidates, did they not see that they did not stand a snowball's chance on a hot stove of winning enough votes to carry one state, and knowing that would be the case, that taking votes away from the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, would completely doom any chance they had of seeing even one point of their agenda bear any fruit? Did they openly, or secretly, prefer Trump over Clinton?
Maybe they thought that they would not get enough votes to make a difference in any specific state, though that would call into question the sincerity of their belief in the things for which they are advocating and be defeating the purpose of running a third party candidacy in the first place. If there hadn't been a Green Party, it would not be accurate to say that its members would have unanimously supported Clinton's bid for the White House. That's not necessarily predictable, but it is plausible.
If Stein and her party had taken a close look at how the election was shaping up in August or September, and realized that a Trump victory would mean no hope that their agenda and platform would be advanced, and that as the more progressive wing of the left, they would be subject to even more political grief than they would ever have endured under a Clinton presidency, she could have made a difference. In fact, had Stein decided to abandon her candidacy, and throw her support to Clinton, not only is it much more likely that Clinton wins, but that she and her party would have a real voice in the Democratic party. Because in the long run, had Clinton picked up 80% of the vote that Stein got in Wisconsin and Michigan, and slightly more than that in Pennsylvania, she would have been elected President. The whole experiment with the orange headed buffoon, who worked to undo everything that the Green Party stands for, would never have happened.
So not only did they fail to achieve their own party's objectives, by winning the Presidency, they also failed to put themselves in a position to have any influence in the government at all. Trump opposes and worked hard against everything they stand for and believe, and want to do. But it would have been a sure bet that they would have had a voice, probably a pretty significant one, in a Clinton administration. Their issues have certainly not been ignored by President Biden.
There are those who say that Stein's candidacy in 2016 wasn't the cause of Clinton's loss, and that most of those voters would have stayed home if they hadn't had a Green Party candidate, but I strongly disagree with that statement. Green party voters are pretty politically savvy, and they understand that they are among the "vermin" that Trump claims are poisoning our blood. Is that a group that stays at home if they don't have a candidate to their liking? No. She did take votes away from Clinton, enough to make a difference. That wasn't the only cause of her loss, there were other factors including things that get judged in hindsight that weren't as easy to see before the election itself, related to Clinton's campaign. But there is a valuable lesson to learn here about owning and taking responsibility for all of the issues across the party spectrum, because while they may not attract voters from the other side, they will certainly be considered by those who share similar values.
I realize that it goes against our stated democratic principles to frown on, discourage or otherwise discredit third party movements. On the other hand, one of the things that the Democratic party in this country has been particularly skilled at doing is having a broader vision and a bigger platform. They are the party of inclusion, and the spectrum of who is welcome within its ranks is broad and inclusive, sometimes to their own detriment. But being more friendly to its progressive wing will not be detrimental to Democrats at this point in particular. The support of a group that was able to put together a campaign drawing more than 1.5 million votes in 2016, and which did wind up taking enough votes from Clinton to make a difference in the election makes it worth considering the issues they want to bring to the table.
We are at a point where the critical issue facing voters is the survival and strengthening of our constitutional democracy. The Green Party, along with Libertarians and other independents need to come to grips with this reality and realize that nothing in their platform or agenda will matter if a Democrat is not elected to the White House in 2024. They are, in Trump's mind, part of the "vermin" he detests. So make common cause, accept what is an open invitation through the door and work to build a united front against an intrusion of fascism unlike any we have ever see. On the other hand, Democrats need to be more flexible in broadening their agenda without creating conflict.
So stand down, Green Party. Get your candidate to endorse Joe Biden.
No comments:
Post a Comment