I think third parties can perform the maximum possible damage only about once per generation. If I remember correctly, nobody had any interest in Nader or a Nader-like alternative in 2004.
(To be explicit: while I have Russian suspicions about Gabbard and especially Stein, I am not making any such suggestion about Nader. Just a comment on the electoral implications.)
To state the obvious, this woman is not on the up and up. Looks like sheâs going to figure out which way the wind blows ($$$) and take it from there.
That was my first thought exactly.
Win for Trump, win for Putin, win for herâŚ
Looks like Gabbard is aiming to prove Hillary right.
I think that restaurant is owned by Anthony Scaramucci, onetime Trump communications director.
And she recently stated that she intends to take her floundering campaign all the way to the Democratic National Convention.
Just some clarification, I was referring to this photoâŚ
I give you Jeanine Pirro.
Yeah, you can make up for not being a blonde on Fox by being especially insane.
Interestingly, thereâs been a sudden spate of calls for some âsensibleâ centrist candidate to run, either joining the Dem nomination process very late in the game, or as a 3rd party candidate. Thereâs been mention of Clinton running again. Iâve heard calls for Bloomberg to run, as an indie.
The idea being that either none of the Dem frontrunners (but Biden) has a chance against Trump, because theyâre too far left and out of the mainstream, or that regardless of whether they could beat him, theyâre too far left and their policies will divide the country and ruin its economy.
And now this. Obviously, some of it is an attempt to sabotage any Demâs chances of winning, by making voters think theyâre too far left, inexperienced, weak, etc., the rest due to fear of a Warren or Sanders actually winning and forcing good health care and affordable tuition on us (the horrors!).
Well, Clinton isnât going to run again (?), and the only 3rd party candidate who has any chance of winning is Bloomberg, and heâs not running (if you say Schultz then I will quite literally punch you). So what gives? How much of it is trying to throw the election for Trump again, and how much genuine concern that either none of the Dems can win, or that the ones who can win would be too far left?
I get the fear of some that Warren canât beat Trump. I donât buy it, but I get it. We have a history of running true blue progressives who lose spectacularly. But Trump is so unpopular, over half the country wants him impeached AND removed, itâs only going to get worse for him, and I see no way for him to winâassuming heâs even in office a year from now. So I think that nearly any Dem beats him.
What I donât get is all this âOnoez Warren or Sanders will destroy the country by giving all this free stuff to freeloaders and raising taxes and putting AOC in charge of the Treasury as so maybe weâre better off with Trump after all unless some great white hope swoops in to save the day!â.
Almost invariably, the people spewing this crap are rich, entitled and well-connected members of the political, business or cultural establishment, who havenât lived in the real world and had to struggle for years, if ever, and only listen to people who think like them, and probably fear their taxes going up. Theyâre basically Republicans who pretend to be indies, centrists or even Dems.
We should ignore them. Whether witting or not, theyâre all effectively Trump Tools, as well as clueless CW-spewing idiots brokering in false equivalences about radical lefties and free stuff and do-gooders. They fear being marginalized and being frozen out of power and are engaging in only slightly watered-down versions of classic RWTPs about socialism and radicalism. Most are waiting for the corporate wing of the GOP to take the party back so they can re-join itâincluding Gabbard.
Fuck 'em all, theyâre idiots and assholes.
There is quite a bit of wingnut welfare available in Trumpistan. Gabbard might not like the price of admissionâŚ
I think youâre exceedingly optimistic. Gabbard will run on the "âI didnât leave the Party (Dem or Communist? Inquiring minds etc.), the Party left me,â as well as the stuff I mentioned above. Nader ran on the âboth parties are exactly the sameâ bullshit, and the left-side purity ponies bought that line of bullshit, and by 2004, most people realized it was bullshit.
I think she can do serious damage, even before Putin and Zuckerberg help her.
And, for what itâs worth, it would not surprise/amaze me if it were discovered that the FTFTFNYT made that Rethugs-to-Russkies âoopsieâ on purpose, in order to give Gabbard a nudge toward a third-party run. Not saying I necessarily believe it was intentional, but given their history of fucking over the Dems, itâs not beyond the realm of possibility
On a racial purity platform.
She also went on Fox Newsâ âHannityâ Thursday night where she bizarrely defended Republicansâ specious complaints about the impeachment inquiry taking place behind closed doors. In reality, there are many Republicans on all the committees overseeing the inquiry, all of whom are allowed into every hearing.
I understand not trying to add fuel to the fire on this, but yes, there are obviously GOP members of these committees attending these closed-door hearings. Why are we not hearing from them? It doesnât make them look good that they wouldnât defend their attendance.
No idea, but the way young white men are being turned by social media, it could be enough to make a difference.
She could be the next Sarah Palin of the disaffected. Sheâs attractive enough to click with your shallow male demographic.
Well, yes.
The only people you shouldnât judge immediately and conclusively are the House Democratic leadership. In their case you always wait for more facts.
Got it now?
Serious question: What party with actual ballot access would have her?
I mean, maybe the Greens, but Islamaphobia and nationalism-for-dictators isnât especially on-brand for them.
And she will be ineligible for at least some state ballots as an Independent due to sore-loser laws.
She was highly likely to lose her primary next year anyway. This seems like Chris Butlerâs way of exiting on a high note. One of his cult members ran for president!
ETA: Me, yesterday:
âŚWhich is why she has garnered so much support to dateâŚ
Relax. Remember what happened to Starbucks Dude when he threatened to go third party?
