The Green Party Presidential Candidate, Jill Stein, appeared yesterday on The Real News Network, where she explained to Senior Editor Paul Jay why she chose NOT to run as a Democrat.
In addition, she revealed how her position on Iran differs from President Obama’s, and then she delved into the details of her Green New Deal, revealing why it would be so much more effective than Obama’s stimulus plan, despite costing roughly the same amount.
Video follows the partial transcript:
JAY:
So when you run a campaign with a party that’s essentially within the realm of progressive politics, you need to kind of explain to people, I’m sure, over and over again why you aren’t doing this in the Democratic Party. President Obama recently did describe himself as a progressive candidate or president—presidency. So, first of all, why a new party? Why—I shouldn’t say new. Green Party’s been around. But why not working in the Democratic Party?
STEIN:
You know, people are hurting. We’re in crisis in so many ways. You know, let me count the ways. You know, people are hurting for jobs, they’re losing their homes by the millions. They cannot afford their health care. The students are coming out of college up to their eyeballs in debt. Our civil liberties are under attack. And our climate is in great peril. You know, really, across the board we’re facing crisis.
Yet the wealthy few who got us here, who crashed the economy, are making out like bandits, rolling in more dough than ever. And meanwhile we have a political establishment which is making things worse—not only failing to fix it, but actually making it worse, imposing austerity on people while they squander trillions on wars, Wall Street bailouts, and tax breaks for the wealthy.
So, in short, people are clamoring for something different, and there’s a movement out there for democracy and justice that’s alive and well out in the streets and in our communities. It deserves to have a voice in this election and choice come November that’s not bought and paid for by Wall Street or K Street.
And we’ve seen about as far as we can go with the Democratic Party. You know, we just had—we elected a president who claimed to be that progressive. He had both houses of Congress for two years. And people were so bitterly disappointed, they didn’t show up to the polls in 2010. And, you know, we got where we’re going.
We really need real change, not just the change of the corporate representative. We need a party fundamentally about people.
JAY:
So before we get into some of the big domestic economic questions, which certainly are going to be the overriding issues in the election, let’s take on a bit on the issue of foreign policy. Where do you differentiate, for example, with President Obama when it comes to Iran?
STEIN:
President Obama is waving the flag, you know, for keeping all options on the table, including a preemptive attack on Iran. Yet 16 security agencies for this country and other international agencies agree that there is no evidence that Iran is currently building a bomb or intending to build a bomb. It’s very clear the case needs to be made to Congress and to the American people that there’s reason for war. That’s why we have a congress empowered to declare war. And that case hasn’t begun to be made.
So where we stand is basically with a foreign policy that’s guided by international law, by national law, by human rights, not by the drive for oil. We need a foreign policy that we can stand up and defend. And currently there is no discernible threat to the United States from the actions of Iran.
We do need to watch carefully. We should be pursuing nuclear disarmament, starting in the Middle East. There are many countries who already possess bombs whose governments are extremely unstable and not necessarily friendly to the United States. So the region would benefit enormously from pursuing a very vigorous and active policy of nuclear disarmament. But attacking Iran is only going to get us into very deep trouble.
JAY:
So let me go back to my first question, then. Some people are raising the issue that, then, why aren’t people like you fighting this out within the Democratic Party, where there’s, in a sense, some access to power? And not that you can—just by joining the Democratic Party you’re going to get power, but could have primaried Obama and forced him to have this debate in some kind of primary campaign. Why not that, versus, you know, a separate-party campaign?
STEIN:
You know, I think people have been there and done it. You know. And it’s fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. I think people considered Obama really the Hail Mary for the Democratic Party. It was—people went all out, and then double that and triple that, and people really went to the wall to try to move progressive politics through a corporate-sponsored political party, and discovered that it just wasn’t [incompr.]
There were people, you know, who really tried to get someone to primary Obama, and nobody would, and to my mind that also speaks volumes about the condition of the Democratic Party. It just is a creature of its corporate funding. That’s not where we’re going to make change.
If you look through the history of progressive politics, independent political parties have played an enormous role in driving forward key issues—abolition, women’s right to vote, 40 hour workweek, the right to organize in our workplaces and form unions. These have all been pushed forward by independent political parties, and we clearly need that in droves.
[...]
Read the Full Transcript for segment pertaining to the details of her Green New Deal.
WATCH:
Learn more about Jill Stein at her website, and by following her on Twitter.
Originally published at AlterPolitics



56 Comments

She’s still getting my support though I have 2 issues with her.
1, while she oppose military action in Iran, she does so based on Iran’s not producing nuclear weapons, not based on Iran’s sovereignty.
2, she needs to get up to speed on MMT. I will link her to Stephanie Kelton.
Congrats to the Jill Stein campaign. I may still be backing the Rocky Anderson campaign but non the less, congrats.
I of course mean NONE the less
By Rocky and Jill skimming and splitting the third party it insures o or willard.
This is my big reservation about Rocky. I think he was invited in the Greens but declined. I just question his motives.
Sigh
Psalongo
I was in the Green Party. For over 10 years. I left the Green Party. I have been very open and public about it and the reasons why. It has been my understanding, given the history of the Ralph Nader elections 2004 and 2008 that the reason the Greens decided to jettison their support of Nader and then make sure that the Greens (like Matt Gonzalez) who supported Nader is because Nader would not join the Green Party. In doing so, the Green Party lost countless activists and support. Along with their credibility.
Having said this, I am frustrated beyond believe that Rocky Anderson and Jill Stein are BOTH refusing to work together.
As Jill just correctly stated, we are facing a crisis. So I can see NO EXCUSE at all for these two campaigns not working together. If it is indeed the Greens insistence that Rocky having to join the Green Party, then I would not blame him. Hell, myself and others left. We left for reasons that are significant, substantive and have never been addressed.
However, if this refusal for them to both not work together is based on nothing more than petty fragile ego’s then it is unforgivable.
On both sides. On the Rocky Anderson AND Jill Stein campaign sides.
So, can anyone tell me WHY THEY WILL NOT WORK TOGETHER? Or do we little people not count?
Thank you, TheCallUp.
We need as much coverage of alternative candidates as possible, if only to broaden the discussion, and provide some other ideas.
Recommended to the attention of everyone.
DW
Oh yes. Agreed. Jill Stein needs attention, along with the others like Rocky.
I sure tire of the focus of the Republican Clown Car Circus.
Also
recc’ed
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/gregg-jocoy/2009/05/06/michael-cavlan
I can only hope that people will listen to this.
Enough said.
Jill gets it. In the NFL, great defense beats great offense, but in politics, the best defense is a good offense. When third party candidates spend their time refuting the “spoiler” accusation, they play defense and debate on the duopoly’s terms regardless of how strong their arguments are. When they talk about what third parties have done throughout American history, they tell a compelling story about how third parties have made a real difference in the lives of real people.
spot on
vagreen–
Excellent comment.
Blue
TheCallUp–
Thank you for the diary/video. Hard to beat The Real News Network. Recommended.
Blue
I don’t believe that she questions Iran’s sovereignty. She is for nuclear-disarmament worldwide. And she acknowledges that there is no proof whatsoever that Iran is violating its agreement as a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty.
And she says that none of Iran’s actions make it a threat to U.S. national security. And that attacking Iran would be a huge mistake.
To me, she seems steeped in reality on Iran.
Michael,
On Jill’s website she documents her progress in terms of gaining ballot access across the 50 states, as well as listing the states where she has qualified thus far (and close to qualifying for) matching funds.
I couldn’t find any of this info on Rocky’s site, but I am interested in knowing how his campaign is progressing, compared to Jill’s.
In particular, it appears Jill won’t be on the ballots in Georgia, Oklahoma, and North Carolina, “the three states with the most anti-democratic, obstructive ballot rules,” and I was wondering how Rocky was faring there?
Thank you DW for reading and for your encouragement for third party discussion.
I agree. Well said!
Thank you so much!
Excellent thread and discussion. Recommended!
A most excellent point, vagreen.
My pleasure, TheCallUp, in fact, the video this diary includes and the diary, really deserve, I consider, to be front-paged, as the issues discussed by Jill Stein are important to many members of this community, and the solutions she offers are worthy of exposure and discussion. The political class, in its more common “expression” through the kubuki of D vs R has failed utterly and entirely to provide meaningful leadership, has deliberately destroyed the Rule of Law, condemned this nation to endless war and the national “security” state of mean suspicion as the basic policy, foreign and domestic, of the “Homeland”, and elevated the “health” of banks, corporations, and the wealthy above and beyond any and all other concerns … as Stein says, we have reached a “breaking point” and the traditional “ends” of of R’s and D’s, alike, are destructive rather than instructive and not likely to change …
DW
Thanks for posting this. I would love to see a permanent presence for the Green Party — “Green Corner” — here at FDL so we can keep track of what Jill Stein has to say and how her campaign is progressing. I am especially keen on helping with ballot access and matching funds.
Thank you again.
I agree with all your sentiments. Stein’s is a voice of reason and sanity in a country that, for corporate-party calculations, will do whatever it can to muzzle her, or marginalize her — make her seem irrelevant to the discussion and contest at hand. “Keep moving, nothing to see here.”
A self-perpetuating reality in America: Most on the Left love Jill Stein’s policies, and are disgusted by the 2 parties, but won’t vote for her, because they believe “she cannot win.” She cannot win, of course, because they won’t vote for her.
Thank you. :)
That is a great idea.
Yes, those are fair points but I think it important to acknowledge the “Ralph Nader argument” and take it on directly. Stein almost certainly will not win and she will take more vote from Obama than Romney and, theoretically at least, assist Romney. IOW: a vote for Stein is a vote for Romney. How do we as Progressives respond to that argument?
A couple of thoughts:
1) The primary goal must be forefront: the resurgence of Progressivism and the implementation of Progressive policies is the aim. The Democratic Party — or the Greens or any other party for that matter — is just a vehicle for enacting Progressive policies. This is the fundamental dysfunction today in the relationship between Progressives and the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party thinks that Progressives serve the party and Progressives, to date, have been too timid to object.
2) We must stop focusing myopically on the immediate election. The Conservatives got their heads stoved in for years while they steadily built power. We must be willing to do the same, if necessary. However, since the American People largely side with the Left on major policy questions I don’t think there must be much time in the wilderness.
3) A significant vote for Stein and the Greens will send a shudder down the Democratic Party’s spine and, hopefully, will force the Democrats to move Left. The Dems’ knee-jerk response will be to attack the Left and perhaps move even further Right. It may take a few dismal election cycles before the Democratic Party realizes its errors. If it doesn’t, the Greens may by then be in a position to supplant the Democratic Party (which lost its purpose when it abandoned Progressivism).
Obviously, there must be pithier responses developed for when potential Green voters raise the Nader Objection but these points may provide a framework.
I nominate you! Do I hear a second?
I am furious, both at the Jill Stein AND the Rocky Anderson campaign at this point. I will still promote the Rocky Anderson campaign and work to ensure that he is on the ballot in Minnesota. It will be up to the Minnesota Green Party to determine IF Jill Stein will be on the ballot here.
I have had no answer to the repeated question to BOTH campaigns now as to WHY they will not work together. Which is it’s own answer.
C’est La Vie.
As an aside- I found a quote from Glen Barr at Black Agenda Report that works perfectly.
Obama and the Democratic Party are not the lesser evil.
They are the more effective evil.
Me, I have used the term, I do not support the Evil Of Two Lessers
Or EOTL
“In particular, it appears Jill won’t be on the ballots in Georgia, Oklahoma, and North Carolina, “the three states with the most anti-democratic, obstructive ballot rules,” and I was wondering how Rocky was faring there?”
It appears from what I have read that five states, of which my state of Georgia is one, are so hostile to third parties that as a practical matter it is impossible to get on the ballot. That is why the most optimistic projections call for being on the ballot in 45 states. That is the fault of the corporate states rather than Jill or Rocky.
For those that are sick of the Uniparty, Jill and Rocky have far more in common than any other alternative. Like Michael Cavlan, I do wish they would cooperate even if they do not run together.
Michael:
From what I see the Justice Party is only on 2 state ballots:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2012/03/06/justice-party-utah-petition-is-valid/
Is that correct?
The Greens are on 20 and petitioning for all but 3 and well on the way to securing federal matching funds:
http://www.jillstein.org/ballot
If this accurately reflects the current state of national Third Party Progressivism then it may be time to coalesce around Jill Stein and the Greens, at least for 2012.
At he moment Rocky is only on two states. We are in the midst of the ballot access process right now.
Rocky is taking the same tactic as Ralph Nader did in 2004 and 2008.
Inn Minnesota he will be an Independent or perhaps with the Minnesota Open Progressives. Which is at the moment a Political Action Group.
Which is the precursor to a new political party. Or something even more important than that quite frankly.
The hardest aspect to overcome regarding the Nader argument is the fact it is a point that is parroted across the main stream media by most all ‘serious’ establishment pundits.
It is ‘conventional wisdom’ that ONLY a Democrat or Republican could ever win. Overcoming conventional wisdom is difficult.
It is systematic — this marginalization of all candidates outside of the corporatocracy. Consider what the media did to Ron Paul in the Primaries (and he is even a Republican), and multiply that treatment by 100, and you have a third party candidate’s reality.
Unlike Paul, third parties have ballot access to deal with, getting into televised debates (much less getting questions from the moderators), and overcoming every other road block the corporatocracy has created to marginalize them.
The sad reality for third party success is:
1. Candidates need to have instant national name recognition (and be very well liked) — i.e. celebrity status. George Clooney or Matt Damon come to mind. Yes, it is sad that in American politics where the best ideas are supposed to win, celebrity/likability is the most vital necessity.
2. They need to begin to campaign VERY EARLY (well before the two major parties get rolling). The name recognition alone, will help to get their voices/faces on main stream media television to articulate their case, and their pointed critiques of sitting Presidents and policies will get written about by many major publications.
3. Ballot access should be easier, since party affiliation becomes overshadowed by their celebrity. “Please sign to get George Clooney on the ballot” is much more likely to garner signatures on a petition, than “Help to get George Smith for the Green Party on the ballot.”
4. The main stream media would instantly see the ratings potential by allowing a George Clooney to appear in a nationally televised Presidential debate. How could they resist? Movie producers will pay him $15million+ just to appear in a movie. They draw eyeballs.
The two major parties are ideal launching pads for unknown candidates, but third parties need to be catapulted by someone bigger than them.
Before you all decide to coalesce around Jill Stein I strongly suggest that you ask yourself one very important and critical question.
In 2004 and 2008 Ralph Nader did not run as a Green. His running mate in 2004 was Peter Camejo (RIP). In 2008 it was Matt Gonzalez. Both members of the Green Party.
WHY did they all decide to not run as Greens? After all, there was the ballot access issue. Something critical to any third party effort.
That was then. This is now.
What is making me furious at BOTH campaigns is the flat out refusal to work together. Rocky COULD run with the Justice Party. Jill COULD run, on the same ticket as the Green.
So the fact that BOTH campaigns refuse to, even though there is popular support (I assume) from within both campaigns tells me something. This tactic, this strategy would aid, assist BOTH campaigns and BOTH parties. It would be mutually beneficial.
Something is up. To quote Shakespeare. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.
WE ALL DESERVE BETTER THAN THIS
All of us.
By the way, my point above is directed at Presidential elections.
I will second your nomination of TheCallUp, wbgonne, and hope, further, that Firedoglake might consider interviewing Jill Stein, and possibly Rocky Anderson, for that matter, on a regular basis as the election “season” goes on … Frankly, I consider that it would not diminish FDL’s reputation as a progressive blog, but actually would enhance that reputation were alternative candidates to be “covered” even just a little bit … such coverage would not amount to endorsement … any more than coverage of Republican candidates and Barack Obama equals endorsement. Such coverage is simply a public service, nothing more and nothing less.
I would seem that among those who comment here, that there would be, and is, substantial interest in alternative ideas and policies.
I have NO idea if the readership, which is said to be vast, would have that same interest … my consideration is that those who read FDL would, and do, have that interest.
DW
Michael, have you any clear idea WHY Anderson and Stein will not combine their “interests” Is it ego, or something else?
I know that you support Anderson and would hope that you might be able to discover why Rocky Anderson has, apparently, no interest in collaborating with the Green Party.
Equally, I would hope that someone might be able to ask the same question of Jill Stein and her faction of the Green Party.
The answers would be both useful and revealing …
DW
Even though it is not getting much coverage, Jill is in the midst of a Green Primary (and winning it handedly). I am sure that Greens working w/ the other primary candidates will want theirs to be considered for Jill’s running mate.
I am sure there is a lot of different considerations for Jill at this juncture. She probably also wants to see what Rocky accomplishes on his own, and how popular he is in different states. If he cannot get on the ballots on any more than 2 states, then his value gets diminished somewhat, I would think.
Flattered that you and wbgonne would nominate me for anything, but I am not a politician, at heart. :) Thanks though. I appreciate your kind words.
Excellent analysis, TheCallUp, yet we know that there is great hunger for substantive change, and a greater interest, broader and deeper, in alternative candidates, even at the Presidential level, than there has been for quite a while in this nation … suggesting that exposure and the time to consider alternative policies and possibilities might well lead to very different “dynamics”, if not “this” time, then the next …
The main value of ideas being “spread” is that ideas gain currency by being shared and examined.
DW
The call up.
I know. That is the Green Party strategy. They expect the Rocky campaign to fail. It will not. I cannot speak for other states but I can virtually guarantee that Rocky will be on the ballot in Minnesota. I cannot same the same for Jill Stein. Who won “handily” in Minnesota.
As for the reasons WHY they both apparently are refusing to work together? Even though it is possible and in fact even smart. As in benefiting both campaigns AND helping us all coalesce around their campaigns?
I am frankly flabbergasted. I have received no word from either campaigns.
We can thank Anthony Noel from the NPA for that.
DW
The very fact that both campaigns have been asked this and both refuse to answer is, itself very telling.
I agree to some extent but then you run into the problem of celebritization, which is what would happen, for example, if Roseanne Barr were to become the GP nominee. I think that is probably a losing proposition long-term even if it would give a boost immediately: it is like a sugar high and it will wear off fast, IMO. And there will be the inevitable backlash from having a celebrity candidate. At this point, it may be better to plod along with an unknown like Stein while the movement builds momentum. In any event, it looks like Stein will be the GP nominee. I truly believe a Jill Stein candidacy can take off within the atmosphere we now have where so many Progressives are so bitterly disappointed by Obama and the Democrats. People are desperate for a new vehicle but most are unaware of the Green Party and/or do not take it seriously. If we can change that we Progressives can make a national impact in 2012. But we must get going now.
I do not wish you to be a politician. I hope that you shall continue to provide the rest of us the opportunity of examining other ideas. That, TheCallUp, is worth more than a dozen politicians dancing on the head of a “pin-up” notion of democracy and social justice filtered through the bombast of “free enterprise” or “the market” … any day of the week, of the month, or of the year.
;~DW
Yes, not to be too Machiavellian but the Greens have the power (relatively speaking). I know nothing about the internal machinations of either the Stein or Anderson campaigns (I’m not really interested either) but the stronger generally defeats the weaker so the weaker should probably attempt to forge an alliance or else get out of the way. IMHO.
Agreed, and it suggests that the rest of us might wish to engage in a wee bit of “telling” ourselves.
If politicians, as a class, are more puffed up on thweir egos and themselves, then it would seem to be about time to consider the whole concept of “representational democracy” to be a sham and a destructive lie designed to give a veneer of legitimacy to a corrupt and essentially despotic, trivial, and abusive “system”.
What think you, Michael, contemplating, as you are, a run, if not for the money, than for the opportunity of working FOR the people?
DW
Personally, I’d love to see Jill and Rocky on the same ticket. I am merely throwing up some possible considerations being made. I actually don’t know what the true story is.
But logically, it would seem a bit premature to join w/ a candidate from a different party when you are currently competing in a primary within your own party.
If “the people” do the “catapulting” then comes the recognition of what is truly “bigger” … an idea whose time has finally come, I consider, wbgonne, and, just so you know, I find your thoughts and perceptions to be very much “spot on”!!!
DW
I agree. I don’t think Roseanne Barr is a viable candidate. She isn’t even doing well in the Green Party primary.
Another problem would be that the Democrats, keenly understanding the value of star power, would probably try and hijack a George Clooney from joining w/ Greens.
They’d try to pull him into Democratic fold, demonstrate how easily they can raise money, manage the media, and surround him with their ‘seasoned’ advisers — to slowly transform him into just another partisan establishment ‘Obama’.
Personally, I am thrilled about Jill Stein as a candidate, and feel like I’d be throwing my vote and energy away by not supporting her.
Thank you DW. I appreciate that. :)
DWBartoo
That is the reason that I am running. To expose the complete corruption of the said system.
Those that have an interest is protecting that system and its abuses, in a word hate me. They will do anything to smear what we are doing in Minnesota.
They will fail. Please refer to to George Galloway winning in England. The very same George Galloway who spoke for us all when he dressed down Minnesota US Senator Norm Coleman.
I intend to do the very same thing.
It is true. Conventional wisdom had been that America as a country still would not support an African American for President. And we all turned that ridiculousness on its head, by electing Obama.
The internet certainly provides opportunities to work around the main stream media, but being entirely ignored by the MSM is a hard obstacle to overcome in a national election.
Even though I love that occupy won’t allow itself to be co-opted by any parties, they do suck up a lot of the grass routes activism oxygen on the left, and sort of hold the reigns on the most viable movement on the Left.
If they all (on an individual basis, of course) decided to do something ‘radical’ and not vote Democratic, but explore third parties, some of that energy could be routed towards Stein.
Ah, Michael, I appreciate the Irish of ye, and quite certain I am, that you’ll be a true credit to those lessons which I’m most certain you’ve well learned.
I consider you’ll be a help to the true health of the nation, and the people, in more ways than many can imagine …
‘Tis time for a cessation of the tired old and corrupt “games”, as we need embrace a different, far more honest and compassionate view of what “serving” the people, their society, and the nation ought really to mean … and MUST be INSISTED to mean.
;~DW
Which is why putting the word, and the evidence, out, as you have done is the means by which ideas catch fire and spread more quickly than conventional methods of thought-control, may counteract or inhibit them.
Your diary will, I am certain, be shared beyond the confines of FDL …
That is the means, that is the method … ideas which speak to actual reality have a way of becoming mainstream in ways the masters and the political class, which includes the media, cannot imagine or derail.
DW
DWBartoo
Grin. Thanks. Even with the Gerald Fitzgerald stage Irish accent.
I have no doubt that what you say is and will be true.
Here in Minnesota, one of the campaign themes for the US Senate race is
A Sick System Needs A Nurse
Along with
Support The Fightin’ Irish- Cavlan US Senate 2012