Sam Smith - Democrat Krysten Sinema narrowly won the Arizona Senate race for the Democrats. Green Party's Angela Green came in third with 2.4% of the vote. This is another example of the sort of race the Green Party could have done itself a favor by leaving it early and endorsing the Democrat. If Sinema had lost, a lot of the blame would have been put on the Green Party.
This is a third party problem that needs to be faced. One advantage if the GP did so would be that it would encourage Democratic candidates to take Green positions in return for the Green candidate leaving the race.
3 comments:
" One advantage if the GP did so would be that it would encourage Democratic candidates to take Green positions in return for the Green candidate leaving the race."
Under that premise, Democrats should have learned in 2000 that they need to move toward GP positions, if they don't want to risk "spoilers" from the left. Unfortunately, Democrats only seem to be finally catching on that the country's mainstream is more to the left then the Republican Lite Democratic Platform they have been promoting since the 1992 election. If the Democrats don't actually communicate to the GP about this strategy, then there is a risk that Democrats will think they "own" the GP vote like they think they "own" the Black or Hispanic vote, and do very little to support those voters after they get elected. The new Democrats would understand the GP is trying to help them, but I doubt the old guard/DNC types will.
"What a load of commie bull!" -- General Jack Turgidson, Dr. Strangelove, 1964
The Green Party or any other third party cannot be made to take the blame for the deficiencies of any of the other parties to attract candidates by putting forth policies that voters want to vote for! End of story.
What naivete to think that the Green Party would gain anything by advocating for the corporate democrats they are running against! The only leverage any candidate has is before the election; once a corporate party candidate wins, they take their marching orders from their donors, not from a bowed-out Green party candidate.
Its just too bad "if Sinema had lost, a lot of the blame would have been put on the Green Party." What would happen can't dictate what candidates and parties honest strategy is; why do you think they formed a new party, because the other two/one does what they want?
This type of thinking is way outdated, especially from someone in a state where ranked choice voting eliminates this kind of thing.
You could have chosen to play up the ranked choice voting aspect of this race and what it could have done to eliminate the issue. Rather, you chose to blame the Green Party for putting forth their platform and not running away because a close race might go to one side or the other in the one Corporate party.
"What do you think we are, dumb or something?" -- Lena Lamont, Singing In The Rain, 1952
Wise up and cheers, Tom
Watch Jimmy Dore on this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YB4Tv-WWen8
"People don't owe you their votes! There are other parties in the country. They get to vote for who they want. That's how Democracy works! You get more choices, not less, you stupid corporate tools!
Do you understand that those people wouldn't show up to vote unless there was something for them to vote for? Do you understand that environmentalists are not going to vote for frackers? And if you need their votes you'd better go get their votes - that's how politics works!
If you need Green Party votes or environmentalists' votes, you gotta go get them!
Voter shaming never worked and it never will work. Its the most immature response to loosing an election I can think of. Talk about not being grown-up..."
Cheers, Tom
Post a Comment