Jill Stein schooled on House of Representatives in brutal "Breakfast Club" interview
Jill Stein schooled on House of Representatives in brutal "Breakfast Club" interview
“Asked how many members of the House of Reps there were, Stein guessed 600-some before hosts corrected her.”
Wouldn't a serious politician not being paid by the Russians actually, like, fucking know that?!
Is not problem. She received excellent education from People’s University of Harvard, near the warm-water port city of Boston in Massachusetts oblast. Do not worry about these silly details.
/s because internet
If Jill Stein and The Green Party were serious, they would advocate for progressive policies from within the Democratic party, push for ranked choice voting in each state, and run for local elections.
There is a ton of work that needs to be done before a third party is a politically viable strategy, there is no way Jill Stein isn't aware of that.
Make sure our local Lemmy Green Party Propagandist sees this.
He blocked me, so doubt he’ll see it :P
Sinema+Gabbard vibes.
Stay far away.
"The one thing AOC has done that you haven’t is win some elections.”
Goddamn.
Any Lemmy Green Party shills trying to convince people to vote for Stein over Harris want to weigh in?
Anyone?
The most notorious of them blocked me, so they’re not even seeing this. :)
Ha, you know what... I think same here.
yeah where is /u/[email protected] when you need him?
She appears incapable of recognizing reality, and we don’t need another candidate like that. By staying so obstinate her votes will likely go to Trump. If she doesn’t understand that political reality, she shouldn’t be anywhere near a general election.
A normal person would learn from their multiple failures, but not Stein.
Giving her the benefit of the doubt that she isn't a Russian agent, if she doesn't understand how the Electoral College works, then it makes sense she doesn't see herself as a spoiler and a waste of a vote. Clearly in the past 20ish years, she must have come across FiveThirtyEight and, so even a guess of 538 would be somewhat reasonable. 600 just shows lack of reasoning skills and/or knowledge of how the electoral college is made up.
Insert photo of Jill Stein dining with Putin and various other fascists.
Look she's a full of shit opportunist. A distraction for people who think they're too moral to vote for corporate dems.
I never read much about her but I’m really shocked at this level of ignorance.
The more you look for it the more you recognize that a lot of the people in charge of politics (and business for that matter) aren't smart or knowledgeable or even master strategists, they're just the sort of person who skirt through life through some combination of charisma and utter willingness to say whatever it takes to please the people who can advance their career.
Like you expect the dumb shit they say to be an act by a keen mind who understands politics deeply and is manipulating the public into advancing their interests, but they're often just fucking idiots with no principles who whenever they've been stymied due to their idiocy just let it slide off their back and move on to a new path with utmost confidence.
Jill Stein isn't going to slink away into the darkness after a public demonstration of political ignorance for a lady whose whole public persona is supposed to be about politics, she's just going to forget about it and keep the scam going. Not knowing the basics of government isn't going to stop her from saying she knows how to fix the problems with government. Not being on the ballot in states is unimportant for whether it sounds good to her in the moment to say they can win in all 50 states. They're all just unimportant "facts" and you can just keep talking and most people will forget or not know that you're an idiot.
Jill Stein may be an idiot politician with laughably unrealistic positions and a totally unworkable take on foreign policy (even dining with Putin) but she’s also a physician who practiced internal medicine for decades.
She’s not an idiot in general. I think she’s just unbelievably naive about people and their motivations.
If they were serious, they would be building Party infrastructure down ballot. Taking over state houses and local government positions. Doing an every four Year presidential run doesn’t help in the slightest. The most progressive messaging that has actually made some semblance of an impact is Bernie.
It's not about getting seats at the moment. With the two party system that's not a pragmatic use of resources. Until we have ranked choice voting, they seem to believe the best use of resources is what they are doing. Give Dems an ultimatum to pull further left or get spoiled.
I would have had to guess too, but I'm not in politics where that's something I should know. What I do know and would have answered is "not the right proportion to the population".
It's actually a harder question than it seems... If you're asking about the number of seats, that's easy. 435 in the House, 100 in the Senate.
But if you ask about the PEOPLE, suddenly a lot harder due to deaths, resignations, and vacancies.
I legit couldn't tell you the number of people right now without looking it up and I'd like to think I'm pretty plugged in.
I think you’re overthinking it. This was the actual reported exchange:
Later in the interview, Rye attempted to demonstrate the Green Party’s failure to build power from a grassroots level. She asked Stein how many members of the House of Representatives there were.
“How many total are there? What is it, 600, some number?” Stein said, before Rye set the record straight.
I don't think anyone would fault you for saying there are 435 members of the house, especially because that number is also wrong (there are six additional non-voting members).
If she had answered more correctly than the number of voting seats I wouldn't have a problem with it...
Blyat!
Link to interview: https://youtu.be/KGm2Fe4G3AA
That's a bit disturbing - how can someone with so little knowledge of how the system works change it without breaking it?
The Green party has some good positions that I'd be willing to support (such as having the US join the International Criminal Court), but at the same time I sense a big change from the days when Ralph Nader was the candidate.
Where I live we get lots of local candidates who are some combination of democrat-green-progressive-working family alliances. Building coalitions from the bottom up like that, and showing that people with “green” in their bio can really be elected, is the way to move things forward. At the national level, the two-party system is far too entrenched to have a third party be anything but a defacto spoiler that turns off their own supporters more that anything else.
Salon - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Salon:
MBFC: Left - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
https://www.salon.com/2024/09/12/jill-stein-schooled-on-in-brutal-breakfast-club-interview/
Alleged russian agents aside:
I actually have no problem with a politician not remembering the exact number of House representatives there are. That number actively does not matter because it is never a case of "I need 435 to vote for this". It isn't even "I need 218". It is "After checking with everyone, we need to convince five more people to vote with us".
But there are definitely ways to answer that convey that. Guessing a number and hoping you got it right is... not.
Also, because I had no idea and other people in this thread are outright wrong:
435 in the house. 100 in the senate. And 3 electors for DC and Puerto Rico (?) who don't get a say in legislature because Yes Taxation Without Representation.
Would you trust a brain surgeon who didn’t know and understand the various regions and structures in the brain? Or an electrician who wasn’t exactly clear on what the building codes allowed regarding which gauge of wire could be installed and what material it was made of?
A President shouldn’t have to know everything, but they should at least know enough to ace a high school civics exam.
Would you trust a brain surgeon who didn’t know and understand the various regions and structures in the brain?
Yes. Because surgeons are the grease monkeys of medicine and I care more that they know exactly what they are doing to a specific part of my brain rather than are reciting generalist brain facts.
Or an electrician who wasn’t exactly clear on what the building codes allowed regarding which gauge of wire could be installed and what material it was made of?
Very different scenario. That electrician is doing a specific job in my house, not wiring up an entire grid.
Which is kind of what it is. Getting a bill passed is very much about knowing what specific parts of Congress you need to interface with. And being a leader is actually having people who canvas the other congress people and figure out who to focus on.
Maybe it is just my engineer brain but I always prefer to work with people who know what it is important and are able to quickly look up the other stuff.
Also, because I had no idea and other people in this thread are outright wrong:
Who?
which is how you get the number 538, like the website or the total number of electoral votes
No. Just no fuck that. That's the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard.
The President is the head of the Executive Branch of the US government. As much as it is analogous to a corporation, the position of President is akin to CEO.
Do you think it would ever be acceptable for the chief executive officer of an organization responsible for the well being of hundreds of millions of people to not know how many board members they have?
You might not know this if you grew up in Russia, but the number of Representative in the US House is something we learn very early on. It is one of the first and most basic civics lessons Americans learn.
It's one thing for ignorant adult Americans to not know there are 435 Reps. But the President of the United States? Are you having a fucking laugh?