Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Only the tabloid crowd thinks this nonsense is important. It's always about policy.
Statements like this show a candidates judgement and rational. It's not tabloid at all. Policy is not everything, not even close. Presidents have to be prepared to handle anything that comes our way. What happens if another 9/11 happens under the next president? We all know what Hillary and Trump will do, send troops back into the Middle East and topple some dictator. That's their knee jerk reaction and I don't want a president like that. I want a president who will sit down and listen to the intelligence he is given. Stein would likely be the opposite, she probably wouldn't do a thing and issue an apology for American aggression overseas. I think Johnson is the only one with the rational and temperate to handle a situation like that. When he was governor of NM they had a huge wildfire that was a tough situation. He acted and was the leader he needed to be. He wasn't making public statements, he was on the front line commanding fire chiefs and was working to contain it. That's a leader who can make the right decisions.
I just thought it was important for people to know what she stands for. Green Party sounds nice, but the details count.
Replace "Green" with "Democratic".
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk
Like any candidate from ANY party.
^^ My thought (see above).
Now: No one such as the OP or the author linked by OP would have felt the need to such talking about Jill Stein if they didn't feel she's starting posing some threat.
Statements like this show a candidates judgement and rational. It's not tabloid at all. Policy is not everything, not even close. Presidents have to be prepared to handle anything that comes our way. What happens if another 9/11 happens under the next president? We all know what Hillary and Trump will do, send troops back into the Middle East and topple some dictator. That's their knee jerk reaction and I don't want a president like that. I want a president who will sit down and listen to the intelligence he is given. Stein would likely be the opposite, she probably wouldn't do a thing and issue an apology for American aggression overseas. I think Johnson is the only one with the rational and temperate to handle a situation like that. When he was governor of NM they had a huge wildfire that was a tough situation. He acted and was the leader he needed to be. He wasn't making public statements, he was on the front line commanding fire chiefs and was working to contain it. That's a leader who can make the right decisions.
I am all for studying the affects of what technology does to people. I remember when the fear that cell phones would give us all brain cancer. That fear existed because we had no idea what the effects were because there had been little study to do with it. With enough research, we are able to come to a more solid conclusion.
If this is what someone wants to focus on with Jill Stein, this makes me feel like the Hillary camp is just looking for anything to prevent Democrats from leaving and voting for another party. Newsflash to the Hillary Supporters, we were never going to vote for Hillary, maybe the DNC should have selected a better candidate than her.
I am all for studying the affects of what technology does to people. I remember when the fear that cell phones would give us all brain cancer. That fear existed because we had no idea what the effects were because there had been little study to do with it. With enough research, we are able to come to a more solid conclusion.
The issue is that we don't know what things actually do give us cancer and what don't. There's far too many variables to distinguish the true cause of cancer related to technology. That said, I don't think Wifi is one that has a big effect on cancer.
Quote:
If this is what someone wants to focus on with Jill Stein, this makes me feel like the Hillary camp is just looking for anything to prevent Democrats from leaving and voting for another party. Newsflash to the Hillary Supporters, we were never going to vote for Hillary, maybe the DNC should have selected a better candidate than her.
There was only three serious Democrat candidates. You have Clinton of course, Martin O'Malley and Bernie Sanders. O'Malley didn't poll well and wasn't really organized with the ground game (there is the possibility of him being a DNC shill candidate that was underfunded to give the illusion of choice of course.) But to many Bernie was too radical and also too friendly for gun rights to vote. I liked Sanders but I didn't vote in the primary because I would have had to become a Democrat just to vote in Arizona (for state-primaries, I just stipulate I want a Republican or Democrat (even Libertarian) ballot on a mail-in.)
I am all for studying the affects of what technology does to people. I remember when the fear that cell phones would give us all brain cancer. That fear existed because we had no idea what the effects were because there had been little study to do with it. With enough research, we are able to come to a more solid conclusion.
If this is what someone wants to focus on with Jill Stein, this makes me feel like the Hillary camp is just looking for anything to prevent Democrats from leaving and voting for another party. Newsflash to the Hillary Supporters, we were never going to vote for Hillary, maybe the DNC should have selected a better candidate than her.
I don't disagree that continued research should be done. But no research shows wifi is dangerous to humans. A presidential candidate shouldn't be making such statements. It's a lie what she said.
If someone is a progressive and shares her ideology, feel free to vote for her. I never said she is worse then Hillary Clinton, but she is farther from my beliefs then Hillary and I don't see her being a good leader. I'm a moderate who leans libertarian, so I align more with the right. It shouldn't be a surprise that I couldn't vote for Stein. But that's also her problem. She is nowhere near mainstream, she can only win liberals and progressives. No moderate, conservative, or libertarian would consider her. Johnson on the other hand can reach out to conservatives, moderates, libertarians, and even some social liberals.
Now: No one such as the OP or the author linked by OP would have felt the need to such talking about Jill Stein if they didn't feel she's starting posing some threat.
Stein and the Green Party are a threat to the Democrats. They have many elected officials in the most liberal cities now.
The same goes for the Libertarians to the Repubclian party. They have more elected officials then the greens, more members, and are raising tons of money relative to just a few elections ago.
It's hard to imagine it happening, but I don't think it's a huge stretch to see that the US is becoming more of a multi party country. But there are some major changes that would have to happen before we see a real multi party political system.
I don't disagree that continued research should be done. But no research shows wifi is dangerous to humans. A presidential candidate shouldn't be making such statements. It's a lie what she said.
Just like her being a borderline anti-vaxer (like Trump.)
Quote:
If someone is a progressive and shares her ideology, feel free to vote for her. I never said she is worse then Hillary Clinton, but she is farther from my beliefs then Hillary and I don't see her being a good leader. I'm a moderate who leans libertarian, so I align more with the right. It shouldn't be a surprise that I couldn't vote for Stein. But that's also her problem. She is nowhere near mainstream, she can only win liberals and progressives. No moderate, conservative, or libertarian would consider her. Johnson on the other hand can reach out to conservatives, moderates, libertarians, and even some social liberals.
Stein is a progressive more so than liberal. It's like saying libertarians are conservatives. In a way they have similarities BUT they have their differences.
Jill Stein is also, at best, on the fence about whether or not vaccines cause autism.
I'm a former Bernie supporter, but that is more than enough to make me forget about voting for her.
She's pandering. She knows better; she's disgusting. A leader should lead, and say, "No folks, that's not true".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
