Thom Hartmann writes that Jill Stein is determined to help elect Trump, as she did in 2020. Her votes in swing states were enough to give Trump the electoral college. She’s pushing the same strategy now, aiming to tip the balance in crucial states towards Trump. As Hartmann points out, Stein has a relationship with Putin. NBC noticed that she sat Putin’s head table with Mike Flynn in 2015. Cozy. Why is a Green Party leader dining with Vlad?
Hartmann writes:
Jill Stein doesn’t give, as the old saying goes, a flying f*ck about democracy. Instead, she’s all about how famous she can become and how much money she can grift off her repeated presidential campaigns. It’s a damn dangerous game.
Fresh off her 2016 political quacksalvery, in which she handed that year’s election to Donald Trump, this professional grifter — who’s been doing real damage to the Green Party for over a decade — is trying to get Trump back into the White House.
As her Wisconsin campaign manager, Pete Karas, told Politico:
“We need to teach Democrats a lesson.”
Arguably, Democrats have already learned that lesson.
In 2016, Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin to Trump by 22,748 votes; Stein carried 31,072 votes. In Michigan the story was similar: Clinton lost to Trump by 10,704 votes while Stein carried 51,463. Ditto for Pennsylvania, where Trump won by 44,292 votes and Stein pulled in 49,941 votes.
Had Clinton carried those three states she would have become president.
Those slim margins may be a distant memory, however, given how hard Stein is pounding on Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania Democrats against President Biden’s unfortunate support of Israel’s brutal bombing campaign in Gaza. As Newsweek reported last week:
“In Michigan, a battleground state where the Greens are campaigning hard, and which has a large Arab American community, 40 percent of Muslim voters backed Stein versus just 12 percent for Harris and 18 percent for Trump, according to a late August poll by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
“Michigan has more than 200,000 Muslim voters and 300,000 with Middle Eastern or North African ancestry. Biden won there in 2020 by 154,000 votes, while Trump carried the state with a victory margin of just 10,700—or 0.23 percent—in 2016.
“In Wisconsin, the CAIR poll showed Stein on 44 percent and Harris on 29 percent, while she also leads the Democrat candidate among Muslims voters in Arizona.”
I moderated the 2012 presidential debate between Stein and Libertarian Gary Johnson; she and Johnson both had the smell of cheap political hustlers to me then, a feeling that’s only been reinforced in the years since.
Stein certainly hasn’t done much to advance the stated goals of the Green Party. Back in the day, it was the Greens leading the charge against climate change and in favor of instant runoff voting, having considerable success with the latter.
David Cobb, a Texas environmental attorney, ran on the Green ticket in 2004 and was a regular on my radio program that year. He explicitly told people listening to my show in swing states to vote for John Kerry instead of him, calling it his “safe states” strategy.
He refused to campaign or even appear in battleground states, a statement of both high integrity and real patriotism.
Stein has neither. This is her third run for president (Howie Hawkins was the Green candidate in 2020 and was not on the ballot in most swing states.)
Instead, she’s bragging about how she’s going to hand the 2024 election to Donald Trump. Presumably, since her dinner with Putin, she’ll be spared the imprisonment that Trump says he’s preparing for the rest of us in politics and the media. As Stein boasted to Newsweek:
“Third Way found that, based on polling averages in battleground states, the 2020 margin of victory for Democrats would be lost in four states — Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina and Wisconsin — because of third party support.
“So they can’t win. There’s a fair amount of data now that suggests the Democrats have lost. Unless they give up their genocide.
“We’re doing outreach all the time to a lot of different groups, but it’s really been the Muslim Americans and Arab Americans who have really taken this campaign on like it’s theirs — like they have enormous ownership over this.”
Running for president and keeping an iron grip on the once-noble Green Party has become Stein’s singular mission. And she’s killing the Party — and its once-sterling reputation — in the process. As Alexandria Ocasio Cortez said:
“If you run for years in a row, and your party has not grown, has not added city council seats, down ballot seats and state electives, that’s bad leadership. And that to me is what’s upsetting.”
As Peter Rothpletz wrote for The New Republic in an article titled Jill Stein Is Killing the Green Party:
“As of July 2024, a mere 143 officeholders in the United States are affiliated with the Green Party. None of them are in statewide or federal offices. In fact, no Green Party candidate has ever won federal office. And Stein’s reign has been a period of indisputable decline, during which time the party’s membership—which peaked in 2004 at 319,000 registered members—has fallen to 234,000 today.”
Stein brought along a Fox “News” film crew when she crashed the 2016 Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, cementing her reputation as a hustler who’ll hook up with anybody who’ll provide her with fame or fortune.
There are, apparently, no Democrats in America clean or pure or virginal enough for Stein; as Rothpletz reports, she even attacked Bernie Sanders for being a “DC insider” and “corrupted” by corporate money.
Meanwhile, her campaign, theoretically opposed to giant monopolies and defense contractors, has taken money from Google, Lockheed Martin, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, and McKinsey.
Stein is working hard to win the votes of disaffected Muslims in Michigan and Wisconsin, among other swing states, and could well deny Harris the White House this year just like she so proudly did to Clinton in 2016.
The unfortunate reality is that our system of democracy — created way back in 1789 — essentially requires a two-party system because we have first-past-the-post, winner-take-all elections. The result is that third parties alwaystear votes away from the major party with which they are most closely philosophically aligned.
And the Electoral College, by creating swing states, amplifies the problem.
Most other advanced democracies use a parliamentary or proportional representation system where the party that gets, for example, 12 percent of the votes gets 12 percent of the seats in Parliament. This allows for multiple parties and a more vibrant democracy.
However, it wasn’t until the year the Civil War started, 1861, that British philosopher John Stuart Mill published a how-to manual for multi-party parliamentary democracies in his book Considerations On Representative Government.
It was so widely distributed and read that nearly all of the world’s democracies today — all of them countries that became democracies after the late 1860s — use variations on Mill’s proportional representation parliamentary system.
The result for those nations is a plethora of parties representing a broad range of perspectives and priorities, all able to participate in the daily governance of their nation. Nobody gets shut out.
Governing becomes an exercise in coalition building, and nobody is excluded. If you want to get something done politically, you have to pull together a coalition of parties to agree with your policy.
Most European countries, for example, have political parties represented in their parliaments that range from the far left to the extreme right, with many across the spectrum of the middle. There’s even room for single issue parties; for example, several in Europe focus almost exclusively on the environment or immigration.
The result is typically an honest and wide-ranging discussion across society about the topics of the day, rather than a stilted debate among only two parties.
It’s how the Greens became part of today’s governing coalition in Germany, for example, and are able to influence the energy future of that nation. And because of that political diversity in the debates, the decisions made tend to be reasonably progressive: look at the politics and lifestyles in most European nations.
But until America adopts proportional representation nationwide (which would require a constitutional amendment) or instant runoff voting (which could be done by law), a vote for a third-party candidate will always damage the party most closely aligned with it. Jill Stein understands this well, but chooses to ignore (or to intentionally exploit) its consequences.
The Green Party — that I safely voted for in 2000 when I lived in non-swing-state Vermont — deserves a candidate who’ll work to produce real change rather than simply run repeated vanity campaigns that cripple our admittedly flawed electoral system.
It’s time to say “good bye” to Jill Stein and rescue — and then improve — our democratic republic.

Definitely true that we are locked into a bad system of both representative politics and election process (winner-take-all).
LikeLike
Trump intends to exploit all those gray areas or loopholes in the complex electoral process, if given the chance.
LikeLike
Dienne,
In case you had not noticed, the electorate in this country is not leftist. The farther left a candidate goes in the general election, the worse are his or her chances. Why is a fascist like Trump polling even with a centrist like Harris? For those of us who live in the reality-based world, courting the votes of left wing cranks is a sure loss.
LikeLike
No, Diane, Obama won by the largest margin in recent history because he ran left (he was lying but that’s beside the point). Bernie filled stadiums and parks when people believed he was “socialist” while Clinton and Biden could barely fill elementary school gymnasiums.
But if you are correct and the public does prefer right-wing policies, then why is Stein a threat to Harris?
LikeLike
Bernie lost the primaries. The elections are decided in the general, not the primaries.
If this country were leftist, which it’s not, Trump would not be a contender.
Obama was not a leftist, not in the primary, not in the general, not as president.
Your hero Jill Stein, friend of Putin, regularly polls at 1%.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bernie was cheated out of both primaries, but I’m not rehashing that – you already know but you’ll never admit it.
LikeLike
News flash! Whoever gets the most votes in the primaries wins the nomination.
Brookings: why Bernie Sanders lost in 2020:
https://search.app/Pyo7EXBXYyKGq2ed7
CNN: were the 2016 primaries rigged? No.
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/04/politics/bernie-sanders-2016-election-donna-brazile?cid=ios_app
After considering the “rigging” issue, CNN wrote:
The Democrats lining up, quietly for now, to run in 2020 are taking their cues on policy and messaging more from Sanders and his progressive idealism (some would say he’s an ideologue) than Clinton and her political pragmatism (could you trust her?).
Those are thoughts for later. Right now the question is whether the Clinton campaign’s dominance over the DNC (which was alleged at the time, too) helped her win and whether, without it, Sanders would have been the one on the ballot against Trump in November.
The numbers would suggest the answer is still no. Plus, as Brazile notes in her article, Sanders’ entire strategy was to run from the outside, drawing the party to him and not benefiting from the its largesse.
While Clinton did not clinch the nomination until the second-to-last day of the primaries, she had a strong lead in delegates for the majority of the process. One reason it took her so long to lock it down was that California’s race, with its treasure trove of delegates, was not until June. Still smarting over its limited influence, California is looking to play in the primaries much earlier in 2020.)
Clinton won three of the first four contests. She won the entire South. The whole thing. She won most of the Northeast. (Sanders’ performed best in the upper Midwest and in states with caucuses, which are a better measure of the intensity of a candidate’s support than its breadth.) And she won the Democratic coalition of minorities and women – the people Democrats thought then and still believe they need to show up to win in November.
The other way Clinton dominated the race in 2016 was through her accrual of “superdelegates,” the party elders from each state that also get a say in the nominee. Partly because of the 2016 race, Democrats are already looking, through a “unity commission,” at scrapping that system going forward. (Don’t count on it.) Clinton had 602 superdelegates to Sanders’ 47, by the way. If 426 of those superdelegates had sided with Sanders, he could have won. But she still had a clear advantage in pledged delegates.
Sanders ran strong and beat Clinton in states like Michigan and Wisconsin, parts of the Democratic wall she would go on to lose in November.
He trounced her among young Democratic voters, who did not show up for her the same way they did for Obama.
None of this is to say that Democrats shouldn’t have treated the process differently, but it doesn’t change the fact Clinton dominated the process from start to end. Or that Sanders, surprised by his own success, didn’t have the infrastructure to win a long campaign.
There’s also the simple fact that Sanders ran in the primary of a party to which he was proudly not technically a member.
Sanders ran a strong race, to be sure, and surprised every Democrat in the country. That’s beyond doubt. But so is the fact that, despite her flaws, Clinton didn’t need the DNC to win the nomination.
LikeLike
A Jill Stein voter doesn’t believe in the lesser of two evils argument. They would never vote for someone like Harris or Clinton. I’m disgusted that there isn’t a candidate with a chance of winning I can vote for who is going to do anything about the slaughter of the Palestinians, but what are you gonna do. It’s a two party system.
LikeLike
You think Palestinians are saying “there’s no difference between electing Trump and Kamala”? If Netanyahu wasn’t confident that Trump had a good chance of winning, he could not ignore the pressure that Biden and Harris have put on him. If Trump is defeated, and Kamala is incoming president, everything changes for Netanyahu. If Trump wins, it’s full speed ahead. A vote for Trump or against Kamala is a vote for Netanyahu.
LikeLike
Trump has said he will stop pressuring Netanyahu for a ceasefire. Trump will let him do as he wishes. No restraint.
LikeLike
I’m sure there are Palestinian sympathizers who say if politicians just stand by and do nothing about the slaughter of the Palestinians, we’re not going to vote for them. I hope what you say is true about a Harris presidency NYC, but I don’t see any evidence that a Harris admin would take any real action against Israel. Yes, the odds are much better that a Harris admin. would do something to reign in Israel, but I’m skeptical that anything would change. Yes, Diane, Trump’s position on Israel is much worse, and his unpredictability terrifies me. I’ll definitely be voting for Harris, I just wish there was a stronger stance by her against Israel.
LikeLike
Trump has said he will bring back his total ban on Muslims.
LikeLike
My part of the country is far Right. Anyone who runs to the left of Trump is considered a communist. I know that is not representative of the entire country, but a democrat running on a slogan of being a socialist would not get 10% of the vote in Tennessee.
Sanders may call himself a socialist, but I have never heard him advocate nationalization of oil companies, a frequent stance during the era of Eugene V Debbs.
LikeLike
Harris isn’t going to win Tennessee if she runs on Bush’s platform. Which she pretty much is. Why waste effort and votes going after Tennessee rather that Michigan and Wisconsin?
LikeLike
D77: tragically, I see no reason why any candidate would consider any voter in Tennessee. One party has its electoral votes, senate seats and house races wrapped in the flag and the other party is just waking up a bit.
I think we are all penalized when some people are ignored in our two party system. Still, the Murdock influence on Britain and Brexit laid open the shortcomings of the parliamentary approach to representation.
prior to the era of Gingrich, the American left occasionally got a bone in their dish, but after 94, the right has governed with regard to any but the few.
LikeLike
Roy – agreed. So would you be in favor of getting rid of the Electoral College?
LikeLike
People who vote for Jill Stein are like our Putin-defending poster here.
This poster now claims that Bernie and AOC are completely untrustworthy and both of them are lying to the American people for their own personal gain. Don’t listen to the untrustworthy Bernie and AOC, this person says – listen to the trustworthy Jill Stein!
If you trust the people who told you that Putin invaded Ukraine to fight Nazis, you should vote for Jill Stein.
Which people are bigger liars? The ones who told us that Putin was fighting Nazis in Ukraine? Or Bernie and AOC, who told us that defeating Trump and electing Kamala is of vital importance for the health of our nation?
I think we all know the answer to that. When someone is more likely to believe Putin than believe AOC and Bernie, they are either a Trump voter, a Putin troll, or suffer from dementia. They have every right to their hate of Bernie and AOC and the Dems, and their love of Putin. And we have every right to marginalize them they way we would marginalize any fascist who posted here about how evil Bernie and AOC are and how wonderful Putin and Jill Stein are.
LikeLike
There is nothing lower than not trusting Bernie and AOC.
LikeLike
Why do you believe there is nothing lower than not trusting Bernie and AOC? Or are you putting words in my mouth again, because you just can’t help responding to me. You seem so angry just because I have pointed out that oddity that you defend the NYT from any criticism the same way you used to defend Eva Moskowitz from any criticism – by belittling and attacking the people who criticize them. I always wished that you’d defend the NYT and Eva Moskowitz by defending their actions, not by belittling and attacking their critics.
Since you are professing to be confused about my post, let me explain again:
The same people who said Putin was fighting Nazis in Ukraine have attacked Democrats with claims so exaggerated that they are lies. When I have pointed out that both Bernie and AOC have made it clear that the Democrat candidate is NOT the evil person that the Putin-defender has mischaracterized the Dem as being, that person has said that AOC and Bernie would lie for political reasons.
There is something wrong with pretending to care about progressive ideals, except you trust Putin and Jill Stein and condemn Bernie and AOC.
You are free to disagree with that. And I can’t stop you from putting words in my mouth as you frequently do. Carry on!
LikeLike
One simply must always trust Bernie and AOC.
LikeLike
One simply must always defend Eva Moskowitz and the NYT sane-washing reporting by belittling their critics.
LikeLike
JILL STEIN HAS WITHDRAWN BUT IS STILL ON MANY BALLOTS LIKE IN OHIO.
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
LikeLike
?? Is she planning to join RFK Jr. and endorse Trump?
LikeLike
I googled the latest news about Jill Stein and there were no stories about her withdrawing from the race. There were several stories about the Democratic Party warning that a vote for Stein was a vote for Trump.
https://search.app/FHCRdtJfu2k74Mek8
https://search.app/X7QPagWVjbzuh78V8
LikeLike
Does anyone else remember how Jill Stein raised several million dollars for a recount after the 2016 election ? I heard nothing from her after that–no recount, either. But she’s back. I guess she spent all that money, and needs to make some more.
LikeLike
Stein probably made a deal with Traitor Trump for a seat on his Gestapo cabinet, like the convicted rapist, fraud and felon made a deal with Christain Nationalists to implement their Project 2025, if he’s re-elected with their support at the ballot box.
Anyone supporting Traitor Trump is a sucker, a born loser, for falling for the serial liar and lifelong cheater’s BS.
If Traitor Trump wins all deals are off. The malignant narcissist has a long history of making deals and breaking them once he gets what he wants.
The traitor broke 53% of his campaign promises during his first and only term in the White House.
Biden has only broken 3% of his campaign promises.
LikeLike
This quote from above reveals how dishonest Jill Stein is:
“There are, apparently, no Democrats in America clean or pure or virginal enough for Stein; as Rothpletz reports, she even attacked Bernie Sanders for being a “DC insider” and “corrupted” by corporate money. “
If you believe Bernie Sanders is corrupted by corporate money, as Jill Stein and the other Putin-defenders do, then you clearly have the same values as JD Vance — a lie is always fine because you tell yourself you are lying for some higher purpose. Folks like this have no ethical core.
LikeLike
I suppose the best choice I have is not to vote. I will not vote to endorse the 2 party system that sucks. I will not vote for the lesser of two evils; they are still evil.
LikeLike
Yes, that’s what the so-called “good” Germans said about the Nazis and the opposition parties. “They are both evil, and I refuse to vote for the lesser evil”. In fact, most ethical and moral people now recognize that the Germans who stood back and let the MUCH GREATER EVIL happen to other people were complicit in that MUCH GREATER EVIL.
You are choosing the GREATER evil. Just like the Germans in the 1930s did.
It’s not even as hard a choice for moral people as the train problem is.
You can choose to stop the much greater evil, or you can stand by and let the much greater evil happen because the much greater evil that happens won’t affect you.
You don’t even have to make a choice that harms someone who would otherwise not be harmed. You just have to vote for a Democrat who will do a lot less harm than the Republican. If you won’t, that speaks to your own ethical issues.
LikeLike
Give the guy a break. He’s being real. And you don’t know what his life experience has been. We need, all of his, to stop the partisan bickering and just freaking love one another.
LikeLike
Bob: Hope your place made it through Hurricane Milton Friedman.
LikeLike
Bob,
Give me a break. I’m just being real. Maybe it’s because I have relatives who died because of people who could see no difference between a greater evil like Hitler and a “lesser evil” like FDR or Truman or LBJ – you don’t have a clue what my life experience has been. You don’t have a clue about why I am worried about what will happen to this country if the “greater of two evils” gets in power again. Newflash: It ain’t gonna be “love”.
Have to laugh at your call to “freaking love one another” – I’d settle for just treating one another without constant snark, derision, and personal attacks.
Despite the constant contempt you clearly demonstrate toward me, I hope you and family and home remained safe in the hurricane. I wish that for all Trump supporters, too, and I also wish that for the people who I criticize for standing aside and refusing to lift even a tiny finger to prevent our democracy from failing. You aren’t doing them any favors by letting them think they are doing something morally superior. Because the repercussions of empowering Trump and the Republicans are going to affect their families, too. It’s not good for children to live under authoritarian rule, period. Even the children of the “favored”, who may get more material goods, are harmed in the long run.
LikeLike
HMMMM…What’s that saying about glass houses and stones?
LikeLike
LisaM,
I forgive you.
LikeLike
another option would be for Harris and the Democrats to change their policy with regard to unconditional support of Israel and its horrifically misguided policies. By speaking out, I think she could avoid losing the election. As simple as that…….but do powerful American Jews care enough about defeating Trump to let her talk?
LikeLike