So you think that he beliefs his target audience to be Democrat voters?
Or do you think he wants to siphon off votes of Trump?
Because that would also help Harris, but contradict your statement regarding Stein being there to damage Harris and help Trump.
So you agree that the nazi guy is helping Harris by him alienating progressive voters from Stein.
Then you have to conclude that he is just very very dumb, or you have to agree with my statement, that he wants to harm Stein and help Harris. Which brings the important question, what does the nazi guy gain from helping Harris?
As the guy was leading a large organization, him being dumb is unlikely. Him being good at scheming and manipulating on the other hand is very much on brand.
So you claim Steins goal is to siphon votes away from Harris in order to help Trump.
So the target audience of Stein under that premise are center/progressive voters. The target audience clearly is not Trump voters.
So even if Steins goal is solely to siphon votes from the Dems, any vote that goes to her is a "win" for her. And the opposite, any voter deciding to go back to Harris is a "loss" for her.
Him endorsing Stein is clearly aimed at achieving the latter. You said it yourself,
Stein’s campaign exists solely to harm the democratic nominee
So her target audience are solely potential dem voters. And these are alienated by that endorsement, as is also very clear in this thread.
So there is two options:
A - the guy is a total moron
B - he is achieving exactly what he wants
A seems unlikely to me, as nazi leaders are despicable and evil, but smart and scheming.
Given that more Iraqis were killed by the Clinton era sanctions, crippling food and medicine access for Iraq, as well as the general hawkishness of the Dems, as evident again with Israel today, it wouldn't have made a difference.
When it comes to invading and murdering brown people, both parties are pretty similar. Heck Hillary Clinton always got a hard on for escalating to war with Iran.
Why do you think a literal Nazi would be honest in his public endorsements and not just doing it for tactical reasons?
Think about it. Trump supporters gonna Trump. This "endorsement" is aimed at harming Steins campaign with moderate and progressive voters, as is evident with the reaction here.
Now the question is, why he wants to do that, as it helps the Harris campaign. What does he think he gains from helping Harris?
And how do you do that? How do you change the entrenched power in the Parties? They do not care about protests. They do not care about opinion polls. They do not care about the local levela delegates. In fact they are happy to oust Senators who try to run on a no genocide platform.
So unless you are one of the billionaire donors to the party or you start assassinating the paety elites i dont see any other way than to not vote for them.
"Enlightened" atheist centrists are often pretty similar to what they claim to be smarter about than people who follow religion and ideology.
And thinking one is "immune" because of their ability to "think critically" is a very solid step to vulnerability. You'll finde the same wordings for Q-Anon and other conspiracy theorists referring to themselves.
It causes the body to release adrenaline and noadrenaline.
In the short run that is stimulating. In the long run it is detrimental to your body.
Very simplified speaking it is chemically related to amphetamines, which are shaped in a similar way like dopamine, adrenaline and the other stimulating hormones. So they all end up interactinf with similar parts of your hormone/neurotransmitter system.
And most of the people in the area became Christians and later Muslims. Some stayed Jewish. And these are the Palestinian people inhabiting the land since thousands of years. They are the descendents of that biblical people.
Now their distant relatives who have left come back and rob them of their land. But this is a new development. And for obvious reasons 2024+ years ago there was neither Muslims nor Christians who could have been in conflict with Jews.
The leverage is denying the power. If the Dems get punished for genocide they will stop genocide.
This is how AIPAC works. It funds both sides, to it can punish the side that is not in line. By always voting for someone no matter what you show tham that your opinion doesnt count. Your needs also dont count. You as a humam being dont count as long as you give them your vote.
That is why declaring support up until the election harms you politically if you disagree with the actions of the government.
If people had joined the uncommitted movement instead of attacking it since half a year, the Dems would have been pressured into ending genocide and could win by a landslide on a no genocide platform. But theyd rather let Trump win than end genocide. Which goes to show what kind of people they truly are.
You vote dems, they know genocide is not a deciding issue for their voters. So they will continue genocide and probably expand it, as it is normalized.
You punish them for it and they need to provide a non genocide platform four years down the line.
It is particularly sad that the "there is no time" argument is brought since January. It was also brought against exchanging clearly mentally declined Joe Biden out of the race. I have the feeling there is a lot of gaslighting and also social media propaganda by the Dems establishment, to keep their base in line. Of course it goes with attacking everyone who demands to pressure the dems to stop genocide as Putin or Trump shills.
The online discourse on the center/center left side has become significantly more aggressive and centered around whoever is in power in the party at the time. When you look at how people here lash out, it looks a lot like the donald or conservative on reddit in 2016, 2020 and now again (minus the donald). So with that Trump still wins strategically as he crushed the political culture on the vocal Dems side too.
But just with Biden stepping out of the race, the same people who attacked everyone as Putin bot for saying Biden is too old, then said how they always supported Harris and how great a move the change it. It lacks consistency, it lacks principles it lacks morals.
It is clear to me that there is no empathy towards anyone, especially not racialised people. Ironically the third party movement has many black and muslim Americans, who are at a much greater threat from Trump. But they understand that the white Liberal is not their ally. And they understand that normalizing genocide abroad, will normalize genocide at homc.
Meanwhile the only people who seem to not care about Trump being elected is the Democrats establishment, whod rather hand the election to Trump than listen to the American people and uphoald American as well as international law.
So your argument is that any basic logic is a strawman, because you dont want to face the logical contradictions in your statements?
Lets go back to the start:
What do you think he wants to achieve?
Who do you think is his target audience for the endorsement?
What do you think are the goals of Steins campaign?