Funny enough, that’s exactly who they’re planning on voting for, too! The way they put it, voting for Stein is their way of not voting for Trump but ensuring he beats Harris.
It is nice to hear she disavowed him. But no it’s not like his attempt to associate with her makes her racist too. It’s just a reminder that she has less chance of winning this election than you do. And citing morals to vote for the party that has transparently turned itself into nothing more than a spoiler is just ridiculous. It’s like rooting for the outfield fans in the home run zone in baseball. (If they lean over and catch it, it’s a home run.)
I’m not a Jill Stein voter, but I dont think she can control who endorses her so it doesnt make a lot of sense holding that particular thing against her.
Neither of these facts alone necessarily implicate the candidates. You really have to consider the context. Being endorsed by someone hardly means you keep their company.
You were just so excited to use this talking point that you couldn’t be bothered to note that he was responding to it in the very comment you used it on.
You formulated it as though you were bringing up something new: “you mean the same X who Y” is for introducing something new into the conversation in relation to X, with X here being Jill Stein. If you had just used David Duke as X and “who lead the KKK” as Y, it wouldn’t have been an absurd contribution.
Though it would still be a silly one, since people know who David Duke is, it’s not some obscure fact. He’s the single most recognizable name in connection with the KKK, perhaps along with the long-dead D.W. Griffith (but probably not).
That’s me reading English. What I was referring to is a set phrase, but it’s not a fossilization, it’s still just what the words mean if you’re actively putting them together. God, this is such an annoying, pointless argument.
What third party? David Duke just endorsed Jill Stein.
Funny enough, that’s exactly who they’re planning on voting for, too! The way they put it, voting for Stein is their way of not voting for Trump but ensuring he beats Harris.
Is there a top down order of bad-faith Democrat talking points distributed every day?
Nope just people out here trying to keep conversations in the realm of reality.
David Duke supports Jill Stein for one single reason: because Jill Stein does not support Israel and Trump does.
Duke even reluctantly endorsed Stein because she is Jewish.
And Stein called him trash and disavowed him.
If you call Jill Stein a white nationalist because of Duke you call every single person who does not support Israel a white nationalist
It is nice to hear she disavowed him. But no it’s not like his attempt to associate with her makes her racist too. It’s just a reminder that she has less chance of winning this election than you do. And citing morals to vote for the party that has transparently turned itself into nothing more than a spoiler is just ridiculous. It’s like rooting for the outfield fans in the home run zone in baseball. (If they lean over and catch it, it’s a home run.)
Shut the fuck up with this
Any anti-genocide candidate, Claudia De La Crúz is best but Jill Stein is often pushed as an alternative.
You mean the same Jill Stein that was endorsed by former KKK leader, seems like a solid choice…
I’m not a Jill Stein voter, but I dont think she can control who endorses her so it doesnt make a lot of sense holding that particular thing against her.
Its like lemmy world is just democrat bots that respond with these canned attack responses any time Jill stein is mentioned
I wanna try, I wanna try
^^^Jill ^^^Stein
Dick Cheney endorsed Kamala.
Neither of these facts alone necessarily implicate the candidates. You really have to consider the context. Being endorsed by someone hardly means you keep their company.
You were just so excited to use this talking point that you couldn’t be bothered to note that he was responding to it in the very comment you used it on.
Wasn’t called out as the former KKK leader though. So excited to call me out you didn’t check.
You formulated it as though you were bringing up something new: “you mean the same X who Y” is for introducing something new into the conversation in relation to X, with X here being Jill Stein. If you had just used David Duke as X and “who lead the KKK” as Y, it wouldn’t have been an absurd contribution.
Though it would still be a silly one, since people know who David Duke is, it’s not some obscure fact. He’s the single most recognizable name in connection with the KKK, perhaps along with the long-dead D.W. Griffith (but probably not).
Didn’t formulate it any way, that’s you assuming.
Also assuming everyone knows who David Duke is. The general public isn’t clued in on KKK facts. I’m sensing a pattern.
That’s me reading English. What I was referring to is a set phrase, but it’s not a fossilization, it’s still just what the words mean if you’re actively putting them together. God, this is such an annoying, pointless argument.
I understand, you asked me who the anti-genocide groups were supporting, not a vetted list of everyone who has come out in favor of each third party.
Didn’t ask you anything actually lol.
Ah, you were a different user jumping in, my bad. Either way, that’s what was asked originally.
My personal opinion? Claudia De La Crúz all the way.