And you might be shocked, shocked! to learn that these pundits and the overwhelming majority of media institutions generally have been covering up, blacking out, ignoring or downplaying just such a candidate from the upstart Green-Rainbow Party, Dr. Jill Stein. Stein isn’t taking money from the usual suspects, so she won’t owe any favors to lobbyists and influence-peddlers. Not only does she have the freedom to speak the truth and advance practical solutions as a candidate, but as governor she could help voters hold our elected officials accountable and get to work running state government for the people, not the insiders.
Electing someone like Stein could be the start of a triple transformation — of our politics, our government, and our economy. Suddenly instead of soundbites, backbiting, and negative ads, we’d have roll-your-sleeves-up creative problem-solving and grassroots participation. Instead of government steeped in secrecy and influence-peddling, we’d be on a path toward transparent and responsive government, and a reshuffling of priorities so that our tax money is serving all the people of the Commonwealth and not just the well-connected few. And instead of an obsession with propping up the old Wall Street economy, we’d have fresh new ideas and programs that will revitalize the Main Street economy and jumpstart the secure green economy of our future.
Clearly the pundits are ready for this. Take globalization cheerleader Thomas Friedman of the NY Times, for example. Friedman’s recent column “Third Party Rising” makes an impassioned case for the need for a new third party: “We need a third party on the stage of the next presidential debate to look Americans in the eye and say: ‘These two parties are lying to you. They can’t tell you the truth because they are each trapped in decades of special interests. I am not going to tell you what you want to hear. I am going to tell you what you need to hear if we want to be the world’s leaders, not the new Romans.'” He knows that the time is ripe for a third party to emerge… two years from now… that can really take advantage of today’s voter outrage. And perhaps following his own advice from 2006, when he called for the formation of a “Geo-Green party” to address energy security, environmental security, economic security, and Social Security, this third party could take on a mantle of ecological wisdom and social justice.
But if you take the conventional media wisdom at face value — that they are truly disgusted and disgruntled — you’d have to draw the conclusion that there is no good choice on the ballot November 2nd. In all too many cases, taking your guidance from the mainstream media, your local newspaper, or even that pollster that called you up and asked you which way you were leaning, you simply would not know there was an alternative choice. In most other cases, you’d just nod your head in agreement with faint praise for Stein as a genuine outsider, and then again at the instruction that since she cannot win, it is not worth voting for her. If you caught the spinfests after any of the debates she was actually included in, you’d get the same feeling. Maybe she made a couple of interesting points, but her placement on the ballot is just a cute little ritual of those strange Green-Rainbow people. Nothing more to see!
But say you tuned in to the debates she was in, or found yourself at JillStein.org or her Facebook page. And say you caught a glimpse of her tearing a giant hole in the careful stories of the three business-as-usual protectors. Challenging Governor Patrick on his devastating cuts to social services while protecting tax giveaways to big business; asking Tim Cahill for a single shred of evidence that high-stakes testing was helping educate our youth; or pitting the efficacy of single-payer healthcare against the private, for-profit health insurance bureaucracy and addressing it directly to the former CEO of Harvard Pilgrim, Charlie Baker. Who would you trust – the doctor, environmental health researcher, and public health advocate, or the CEO whose salary tripled while Harvard Pilgrim’s health premiums more than doubled?
You just might start feeling a little rebellious if you were fully informed of the choices before you this November. You might start thinking that you’re mad as hell, and your vote this year could be your weapon of choice. You might start believing that instead of simply endorsing business-as-usual by picking the least-worse of three uninspiring choices, you’d rather your vote be counted as an undeniable message that you’re sick and tired of being so sick and tired all the time. You might get so disgusted of being told to vote against your values and against your interests in order to vote against some over-hyped straw man of pure evil, that you’d start toying with the idea of voting FOR someone. Voting for your values AND your interests. You might even take some comfort in the idea that many of those voting for Scott Brown were voting against the political machinery of Massachusetts out of protest, not out of support of the other duopoly party. Maybe having a choice on the ballot that could provide a constructive outlet for voter disgust is just the thing this state needs at this point in history.
The truth is that there is an alternative to politics-as-usual on the ballot this November, but she represents a force that the mainstream media does not want to unleash. But the perfect storm for a voter revolt is growing beneath the surface. And there’s only so much the main media can do to keep it off people’s radar screens. And there are countless ways that this emerging grassroots force can break open the lid and let Stein’s message shine. Her unique voice is resonating with those it reaches, so getting it out to the people of the Commonwealth can be a real game-changer.
Eli Beckerman
Social media coordinator, Jill Stein for Governor
In any forum or debate or radio performance, jill Stein has been less than a shining example of intellect, political acumen or innovation…she has been a totally disappointing flag bearer for her cause…I’m not even sure what the cause is anymore after listening to her…might be a nice, bright woman, but she is a weak candidate…if she gets 1% of the vote i would be surprised…and if Baker wins by 1 % of the vote, her 1% would be a shame. My progressive vote is going to Patrick/Murray. I’m not into just sending a message…
“So long, and thanks for all the fish.”
would have a bit more interesting take on this year’s election.
<
p>Think Carlin.
Just yesterday, according to the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, she made quite an impression at the AARP forum. I’d say this is one of the very few news accounts of a debate that has actually treated her like a credible candidate:
<
p>
<
p>And according to the AP article:
<
p>That you haven’t picked up on Stein’s “cause” via the scripted and controlled debates, or through the mainstream media, is not surprising. Put simply, she’s running to fix the mess on Beacon Hill and get it working for the people of Massachusetts — bringing down the cost of health care by cutting out the wasteful for-profit health insurance bureaucracy, creating a surge of good-wage green jobs in weatherization, local food production, and active transportation and public transit, and putting an end to the rampant insider-ism by shining daylight on the secret dealings (think Cape Wind) and bringing people’s voices into the process (kind of like Patrick’s empty promise of changing the way we do government, but with none of the strings, or deception, attached).
<
p>My earlier post contrasts her with Patrick if you want that part of the story.
Winning an election requires running a campaign which consists of many components. I am not going to enumerate them here, but suffice it to say that Stein’s campaign is lacking. She has no visible organization compared to the other campaigns. That just makes it even less likely for people to take her candidacy seriously.
<
p>A candidate cannot just put their vision out there and hope that everyone will come to their senses and vote for them. The political world just does not work that way.
<
p>
I couldn’t agree more.
<
p>She’s running a $150-200k campaign, and they’re running multi-million dollar campaigns. They’re running with the blessing and backing of business-as-usual, and that’s whose bidding they’re doing. Of the three, Cahill sounds the most populist, but he’s no outsider and is fueling his campaign with tainted money.
<
p>Stein is fighting the pay-to-play system, so ALL of her money is from grassroots, clean-money donations from OUTSIDE that system. She’s only one fighting it, and voting for Patrick is an endorsement of it. Sure, he’s got a bigger, better, more powerful organization behind him, in addition to the long-entrenched Democratic Party machine… and he’ll owe a heck of a lot more favors when he’s reelected than Stein or any Green-Rainbow Party candidate because they refuse to pay that game of legalized corruption.
<
p>Our democracy is broken, and there’s a lot that can be done to fix it. Denying that it’s fundamentally broken is NOT the place to start.
She also failed to qualify for public financing. Organizing and organization is a vital part of a campaign.
<
p>Neither is a quixotic campaign.
<
p>If a candidate doesn’t start early enough and can’t inspire a reasonably-sized army of volunteers to do the campaign grunt work, there is no way (s)he’ll inspire enough voters to get elected. Think Deval Patrick back in 2005. He wasn’t swimming in money, but he was all over the state making his case and lining up people to ensure he’d get a good showing at the caucuses in early 2006, where he surprised a lot of people (but not those of us who were doing the work). The result of all that work was a solid core of early supporters, many who worked to convince others to support him and volunteer.
<
p>Why haven’t I been visited by a Stein canvasser or gotten a voter ID call? Has anyone?
<
p>I’d submit Patrick’s first campaign as the model to follow for any “outside” candidate.
<
p>Lots of things get a whole lot easier when you’ve got $$$ to burn. Grassroots organizing is one of them. Kudos to both Patrick, and then Deval, for turning establishment-funding into truly impressive, truly grassroots campaigns. But please don’t ignore the establishment funding and the strings that go along with that.
<
p>Democracy is about ideas as much as its about money or organization. Using ideas to build organization and raise money is a key part, but I think your assessment is trying to compare apples to oranges. Working outside of the system to CHANGE the system is always going to be way harder than working within the system and PROMISING to change the system because you never have to actually deliver and you have the establishment backing you BECAUSE of that.
should have read “Patrick, and then Obama”
It all boils down to this: It ain’t working.
<
p>You can point fingers at all of us and say we’re bad for not seeing the light and voting for Stein, but as my first grade teacher said, there are three fingers pointing back at you. When all is said and done, no one will remember much about Stein’s campaign except that she got some small percentage of the vote and that it did nothing to further the goals you talk about here. She and her supporters have to take some responsibility for this.
<
p>If you keep banging your head against the wall and blame others because your head hurts, well I don’t know what to tell you.
like banging ones head against a wall. Trying to get Democratic officials to act like Democrats can feel like that though. I think what we’re trying to do is get rid of the headache.
Because you don’t have to deliver. Stein can promise the world because she’s not going to get elected – Patrick has to promise what he can accomplish because he’s governor.
<
p>The Green Party, like the New Party, the Labor Party and lots of other parties before them don’t have to deal with the issue of governance. In a democracy, real leadership means having two qualities – the ability to campaign and the ability to govern. Patrick has demonstrated that he can campaign – Stein, in my estimation, has demonstrated that she can’t. Her debate performances have been just barely okay when they need to be spectacular; her literature is thin on concrete proposals; and her website is right out of 1999.
<
p>Patrick has also demonstrated that he can govern. Maybe not to the levels we’d like, but when it comes to economic development, supporting smart growth (which Stein by opposing 40B is against), supporting public transportation, passing pension and ethics reform, negotiating contracts that reduce costs and avoid layoffs, ensuring we’ve got balanced budgets he’s done great. Stein might be better at governing, but given the legislature’s stand on the positions that really differentiate her, I doubt it.
Watched the debate. No Stein shine. Look, I’m well to the left of most Democrats, including my candidate, the Governor, and I think I share many ideas and values with people who vote Green. But Jill Stein repeatedly comes off as someone without much of a clue. When she talks about, say, her green jobs solutions, there’s neither specificity nor anything, really, to convince a skeptic that she has much understanding of what’s behind her claims or what it would take to implement them. Aiming at state wide office by running a well meaning person of–certainly–progressive values but minimal grasp of either organization-building or campaign dynamics nor the nitty gritty of public policy is not, IMHO, a plausible way to build a progressive future.
Because our voting system does not feature instant run-off, a vote for Stein is nothing but symbolic. I hate to use the cliche, but a vote for Stein is one less vote for your next-favorite candidate. If the candidates were all the same, that would be fine. I strongly disagree that is the case.
<
p>Empowerment, where are your poll numbers that suggest Stein has any reasonable chance? I feel silly even asking this question.
<
p>I wish Stein would ally with the Democrats and work to reform the party from the inside. Instead of the quixotic attempt at statewide office, I wish she would run for office in her town or perhaps for state rep. She could ally with other progressive Democrats and hopefully accomplish a few things.
For Blue Mass Groupers claiming they are so progressive, I’m surprised more people are not supporting Jill Stein. She’s the only one with a real progressive POV, all the others seem to be delivering the company line and hoping you all will drink the kool-aid.
I think a significant number of the people here prioritize party: they are Democrats first, then progressive.
I think a lot of folks here are reality based liberals/progressives. That means that folks here will call out a Democrat when they’re way out of line, or when they’re not sufficiently progressive. It also means that the folks around here are perfectly willing to support a non-Dem progressive, when that candidate has a reality-based campaign.
<
p>Dr. Stein’s campaign is important, and I’m certainly not a person who begrudges her efforts nor the efforts of her supporters. Still, as detailed above, her campaign isn’t ready for prime time. Failing to get public funding is A1 evidence of that. Don’t list excuses about PayPal or anything else: just get it done. They didn’t.
<
p>Personally, I think the GRP should have run a strong candidate for Sec of the Com this year, as well as perhaps a campaign or two for Governor’s Council.
the other candidates are all the same?
But they are all presenting predictable lines within their party, nothing’s new with their platforms.
<
p>Now Jill Stein- has a new perspective that is progressive and she’s willing to tell it like it is and present real facts that challenge the old boys’ network.
thanks for the laughs.
I am neither a member of a political party nor working for one. I’ve been completely swayed to support Jill Stein’s campaign after following elections and campaigns in MA my whole life.
<
p>Like you say in your disclaiming, “My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person – save me.”
<
p>
Love,
Charlie