904
Europe’s Greens ask Jill Stein to pull out of US election to prevent Trump victory
(www.politico.eu)
this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
904 points (100.0% liked)
News
28881 readers
3738 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/06/jill-stein-says-nothing-happened-at-her-dinner-with-putin/ https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-ties-vladimir-putin-explained-1842620 I'll never get tired of posting this in response.
You get that nothing had to happen at the dinner, right? That's not how networking works.
Okay, then prove that something happened. I'm not the one implying she's some sort of Russian asset with 0 evidence beyond a photo. That's you.
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.
You put the rest together.
You made the assertion, so the onus is on you to prove it.
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.
If it's widely known, then surely you can provide evidence for it right?
They just compared this with Hillary Clinton at a table with Putin at a state dinner with her husband.
So I'm out.
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.
If the evidence is quite accessible, then why is nobody linking it to me? If you can't back up your claim, don't claim it. Again, call me a troll all you want. I'm not going to insult you. I'm just asking for evidence.
This is why
Accusing me of sealioning is just as convenient as calling me a troll. I'm not sealioning. I'm just genuinely mystified at this "Stein is a Russian asset" narrative because there's never been any evidence of it and whenever I question it, I get called a troll or accused of sealioning. It's very frustrating.
Then go read about Putin like you have been told.
Not just the stuff that praises him. All of it. Don't engage here on the topic because we are pointing to the same body of evidence.
If you don't want to do your homework, stay out of these discussions.
How about you link me to something directly so I can engage in the conversation? As I've said, I read the news and I've read about Putin. None of what I've encountered or come across when reading has been evidence of Stein being a Russian asset. You could've easily found something by now if you know it exists, but instead you've chosen to insult me, accuse me of sealioning, and told me to do my own homework.
I can point you in the direction of the information, I can't understand it for you. If you read about the former KGB agent that has been using the dictatorship play book for a couple decades and can't figure out how someone like Jill Stein is a patsy, I don't have the crayons.
Her being a patsy would be an entirely different claim than her being a consensual and willing Russian asset.
The comment that kicked this whole thread off said she was his puppet. Seems like you're the one that jumped to "consensual and willing Russian asset".
You recognize that the electoral system is fucked enough that it doesn't matter if it's Greens, Libertarians, Communists, they all are relegated to the role of spoiler candidate purely from a game theory perspective? If she actually wanted to enact change her entire campaign would be focused down ballot where it's viable to get some ground, rather than taking on the role of the dog chasing the garbage truck that is the presidency. Whether she is knowingly helping Trump or Putin doesn't matter, the end result is still the same.
That's nothing. Someone else claimed I said she was being bribed.
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.
I said nothing about bribery.
Why are you making up lies about me?
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.
Vatnik delusions have reached new heights lmao
Had to reach pretty far back for that one.
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?
F to doubt what she says
No one is saying anything had to happen, but she was certainly invited there there for a reason.
You don't get put at a dinner table in Moscow with Putin unless Putin has a good reason for wanting you there.
He doesn't just sit down with random people and hope they have a good time.
Shit, and all this time I thought he just had a passion for entertaining!
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!"
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.
Ah, I see the problem. You aren't reading my posts. Let me help you:
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?
You're comparing the First Lady at a state dinner to this, which was a celebration of Russian state media's English-language propaganda channel.
Yep. You're a troll.
Oh, but as you've said, nothing has to happen at a dinner right? They could've networked outside of the dinner. In fact, Clinton has had many closed door conversations with Putin, whereas Stein hasn't spoken with him at all to my knowledge. See how disingenuous that is? And how it makes having a conversation about this a little difficult? As does calling me a troll because you have 0 evidence.
Clinton actually worked for the government therefore has reason to meet with the leaders of foreign nations.
Stein is a physician. I’m pretty certain Russia has doctors. She had no reason to be there among the others.
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.
I like how you are completely overlooking the fact that I never made any actual claim about her being a Russian asset.
You kept bringing up the asset thing.
This is what I wrote:
The asset part was a complete invention of yours.
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.