It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Why in the World is the Honest Woman Running at the Bottom ?

page: 1
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 09:39 AM
link   
First of all Im a Trump supporter by force and choice, at the moment. I was never into Bernie. Why is Jill Stein at the bottom ? How is it possible that we have 2 women running, one is a saint by comparison and the other is the most corrupt person to ever even think about running for president. Jill is probably the most honest and best person running out of all the people. Im sure she has her negatives but I could never see her being shady. All of my friends are environmentalists and they have never heard of her. Damn the media is a powerful God. Complete idiocracy.

Yes, I know indies don't win, yes I know she is at 1%, yes I think Gary is honest as well and Ill buy his edibles and yes I know for a fact that Hillary is unprecedented in her corruption and now thuggery and voter fraud. Complete idiocracy and hypocrisy..
edit on 21-10-2016 by beeeyotch because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: beeeyotch



Jill is probably the most honest and best person running out of all the people.

You answered your own question. They want someone that is easy to control and a person with a past like Hillary's is easier to control than someone they have no hold over.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: beeeyotch

All it takes is 5% of the popular vote and the Green Party gets a major boost. They'll be allowed to participate in future presidential debates and get a LOT more funding.

It's a shame most of the voting population isn't aware of this and most likely don't care.

My votes with Stein.

edit on 21-10-2016 by AgarthaSeed because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
she is not corruptible or outlandish enough to get the media attention needed to get to the top. unfortunately the media does not give attention to level headed politicians.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: beeeyotch

All it takes is 5% of the popular vote and the Green Party gets a major boost. They'll be allowed to participate in future presidential debates and get a LOT more funding.

It's a shame most of the voting population isn't aware of this and most likely don't care.

My votes with Stein.

Like me. I didn't know that. Thank you. Maybe I will go for it



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: beeeyotch

All it takes is 5% of the popular vote and the Green Party gets a major boost. They'll be allowed to participate in future presidential debates and get a LOT more funding.

It's a shame most of the voting population isn't aware of this and most likely don't care.

My votes with Stein.


As nice as that sounds, you know as well as I do, none of that matters. Look at how the media controlled Ron Paul in the past and how they pushed Bernie out. Sadly, the majority is just to f'ing stupid to know how to think unless they are told by the great protector. (the idiot box)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: beeeyotch

All it takes is 5% of the popular vote and the Green Party gets a major boost. They'll be allowed to participate in future presidential debates and get a LOT more funding.

It's a shame most of the voting population isn't aware of this and most likely don't care.

My votes with Stein.


As nice as that sounds, you know as well as I do, none of that matters. Look at how the media controlled Ron Paul in the past and how they pushed Bernie out. Sadly, the majority is just to f'ing stupid to know how to think unless they are told by the great protector. (the idiot box)



You're right, but the silver lining here is that it's more difficult for the establishment to buy out 3 major candidates. The elites would be spread thinner and probably run into some big conflicts of interest.

Wishful thinking.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: AgarthaSeed

when you own the machine that makes the money, buying out a few folks just seems so......easy.

good news is, no society lasts forever. There will be change (for better or worse) at some point in the near future.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: beeeyotch

IMO, because networking, relationships, money and "campaign machinery," are things she is not as strong in, and frankly, I personally don't see her as worldly-wise enough or strong enough in terms of understanding our military and international relationships. She seems like a committed activist though she also has some unpopular opinions that are too far to the left to get mainstream voters to pay attention.

My two cents. Not a deep analysis but personal opinion only.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: beeeyotch

In the peoples eye Jill Stein is a nobody just like the average person you, me and everyone else who isn't held on the political pedestal. It is sad, but this is the reality for TPTB.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 10:49 AM
link   
The expression "nice guys finish last" also applies to women.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Good comments, no one said anything offensive and we kept it clean,,if this was about someone else running it wouldn't have been like that, thanks guys for being wise and honest.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: beeeyotch

How is she at the bottom? Simple, she has even less of a grasp of economics, monetary, and foreign policy than the average person. While people like what she's saying, she has yet to articulate how to accomplish any of it. Hillary on the other hand is very realistic about what can and can't be accomplished.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: AgarthaSeed

Not true. A candidate is eligible for public funding if their party received 5% of the popular vote in the previous election and they can raise at least $5000 in 20 states.

To be included in presidential debates a candidate needs to be averaging 15% or higher in five or more major polls. The last time this happened was Perot in 92.
edit on 10/21/2016 by Xcalibur254 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: beeeyotch
First of all Im a Trump supporter by force and choice, at the moment. I was never into Bernie. Why is Jill Stein at the bottom ? How is it possible that we have 2 women running, one is a saint by comparison and the other is the most corrupt person to ever even think about running for president. Jill is probably the most honest and best person running out of all the people. Im sure she has her negatives but I could never see her being shady. All of my friends are environmentalists and they have never heard of her. Damn the media is a powerful God. Complete idiocracy.

Yes, I know indies don't win, yes I know she is at 1%, yes I think Gary is honest as well and Ill buy his edibles and yes I know for a fact that Hillary is unprecedented in her corruption and now thuggery and voter fraud. Complete idiocracy and hypocrisy..
That's easy. Clinton is an establishment insider. The media and system are now intent on placing her in power, as the piper of choice. Stein puts forth policies that are actually aimed at many systematic problems that people are either ignorant if or people that benefit from don't want to change.

The system is completely stacked against Stein.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   
I sincerely hope progressive voters in the USA will wake up, not be bound by the control meme of voting for the lesser of 2 evils, and choose to vote for the greater good.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: beeeyotch

All it takes is 5% of the popular vote and the Green Party gets a major boost. They'll be allowed to participate in future presidential debates and get a LOT more funding.

It's a shame most of the voting population isn't aware of this and most likely don't care.

My votes with Stein.


You're joking right? Who do you think sets those rules, and who do you think will change those rules if a third party hits the magic number?



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Watching all the way from Australia (can't avoid it really), I only heard once in in passing, about 2 months ago that there were others running as well. I'd bet everything I own that 9 out of 10 non-Americans didn't realize that.

In all honesty, if Americans vote for either front runners, they deserve what they get. We had 15% of our people vote for independents and minor parties in our federal election 4 months ago (6% percent did in the previous election). The incumbent party got back in with a majority of 1. It should have been 50%, not 15%. Now they complain about how bad the politicians are and how bad a job the government is doing, and support for the most prominent patriot party is up 10% in 4 months!



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 08:22 PM
link   


TL;DR of video. Sample of polls intentionally under represent Independent Voters and Over Represent Democrats (more strongly) and Republicans (Slightly).

Also many of the polls (CNN ORC, Quinnapiac, Foxnewspolls, Reuters) simply exclude voters aged 18-49 and have biased pre-screening questions to chase off non CIinton answers. eg. like "Knowing that Donald Trump is racist, sexist, misogynist, would you rather have CIinton or Trump as a role model as your children" and they pump you through these types of questions before asking you who you are voting for.

And when you work backwards from these intentional and blatant skews, Jill is actually doing 4-5x better than they let on to.

Many polls don't even have Jill as an option.

Now when you factor in the media blackout (Where Donald and CIinton get 10,000x more media coverage than Jill but Jill is NOT doing 10,000 times worse..

When you factor in the Facebook censorship, video feed slowdowns, post removals ect, that happen around Jill's support groups.

When you factor in that the MSM allowed Gary Johnson into the media 2 months before Jill, and when they finally gave her a micron of coverage, they rushed to get former CIA McMullin 'constitutionalist' to join the race in hopes its 3 - 2 split on 'pulling votes'

When you factor in ADDITION the new amount of Independent voters since DEMEXIT after the DNC Coup.

When you factor in ADDITION the amount of voters who identify as GREENS.

Jill actually is at over 15% and qualified for the final debate. But there's no way they would give play to that.
edit on 2016 by BlubberyConspiracy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cinrad
Watching all the way from Australia (can't avoid it really), I only heard once in in passing, about 2 months ago that there were others running as well. I'd bet everything I own that 9 out of 10 non-Americans didn't realize that.

In all honesty, if Americans vote for either front runners, they deserve what they get. We had 15% of our people vote for independents and minor parties in our federal election 4 months ago (6% percent did in the previous election). The incumbent party got back in with a majority of 1. It should have been 50%, not 15%. Now they complain about how bad the politicians are and how bad a job the government is doing, and support for the most prominent patriot party is up 10% in 4 months!


Lots of people are in the US election, all told I bet there's 40 different choices. Most of them only make it onto the ballots in a couple states though. If you don't practically coast into ballot access in all 50 states you're not considered a strong enough candidate to be taken seriously.

More importantly, keep in mind that parties are basically voting blocks. If you're an outsider you don't come into the office with the ability to rally any major, influential voting block behind you. Because of that, the bar is higher and you not only need good plans on what you're going to do, but how you're going to convince Congress to go along with it. This is where Jill Stein goes off the rails. She points out the wrongs in the country but she doesn't really propose good solutions to fix it, and when she does have a solution she can't explain how she's going to play the existing parties off of each other in order to get her legislation through.

Honestly, I think that it's impossible for a third party candidate to run on a platform of "I will do this". I instead think the only real power third parties have is to say "I will stop this", and do so by leveraging their power of a veto, and more importantly by stopping the overturn of their veto through strategic concessions to each side. Essentially stopping X and leaving it to Congress to create a new plan instead.







 
13
<<   2 >>

log in

join