A longtime GOP operative helped the Green Party’s Jill Stein get on the N.H. ballot. Democrats smell mischief.
A longtime GOP operative helped the Green Party’s Jill Stein get on the N.H. ballot. Democrats smell mischief.
The operative, Jefferson Thomas, might seem like an unlikely ally for Green Party stalwart Jill Stein.
"According to FEC filings, the Synapse Group has worked for Republican Governor Doug Burgum of North Dakota, who ran for the GOP presidential nomination this cycle, as well as GOP candidates for Congress. Synapse has also been paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for field and canvassing work by America PAC, the outside spending group started by allies of Musk that has spent millions of dollars this election cycle to boost Trump and oppose Democrats."
You're viewing a single thread.
I think this is a losing issue for Democrats to be putting effort into.... while third party candidates may be spoilers in our current system the solution is not to try and disenfranchise those parties - it's terrible optics and, if you want to capture green voters there are so much easier tactics.
That 3% that third-party candidates typically earn makes a big difference when polls are showing 49% to 48%. It’s fair to question a Republican’s motive to support a candidate with opposing views to their own party.
I think it’s really important for people to know that fringe parties are being propped up to divide the left.
Might make voters realize a pragmatic choice will result in an outcome more aligned with their goals.
The Democrats can retaliate with Libertarians.
Sure, but retaliation like that shouldn't be possible. It's a mark of a terrible, failed democracy.
If a corporation can fund 2 parties, why can't anyone else?
I don't think corporations should fund parties either.
So if an American gives $200 to the Democrats wt:thon couldn't give $100 to a Green Party candidate and $100 to a Libertarian Party candidate?
No. Nobody should be donating to political parties because it inevitably leads to the rich having too much influence, and wasting billions of dollars on a pointless advertisement arms race to nowhere.
So how do parties get their money? From the government based on past votes?
If 80 million Biden voters each contributed $125 to his campaign, that'd be $10 billion. What corporation would match that?
Any of the following:
-
Campaigns are each given X million for their campaign as public funding if they qualify for the ballot. Say with three qualifying candidates, the DNC, RNC, and the greens each get 10m, use it wisely.
-
Campaigns work based on a shared pool of funds. If candidate A raises X funding, all candidates then recieve X/num candidates funding that they are permitted to spend.
-
No funding is allowed to be spent at all, for any candidate. Candidates can only ever explain their policy on information cards presented at the ballot, on public posts on the internet, press interviews, at debates, etc.
I'm sure there are other ways. But the point is, no candidate should have a monetary advantage over the other. In an actual democracy, all ideas and therefore candidates should be given equal thought, and therefore funding. Whether it be $0 or $100 billion, all campaigns should be equally funded/defunded.
-
Yep, and the reason they rely on non-Democratic operatives for this stuff is because the DCCC will blacklist you if you help a third party/independent campaign.
If you need the expertise to get on the ballot, your best chance is to hire someone that worked for one of the big parties before.
Instead of handwringing about spoilers, maybe democrats should run on some of the policies that are overwhelmingly popular instead so there's no room on the left for someone to run.
But voters and politicians aren't one and the same. Voters have every right to call out spoilers. Politicians, I don't see doing it all that often, but even still you have a point there. They could listen more to what people actually want rather than being afraid of alienating centrists.
Instead of handwringing about spoilers, maybe democrats should run on some of the policies that are overwhelmingly popular instead so there’s no room on the left for someone to run.
The spoiler effect is the result of geometric distance between candidates, not the strength of policy positions. You don't know what you're talking about.