YEAH, THE GREEN PARTY IS A FRAUD Here is their tally of electoral success from the apparently unupdated web page from the national party.
At least 117 Greens hold elected office across the United States as of September 15, 2020. Below are 108 Greens currently serving in elected office, who were elected to those offices. Another eight currently serving have been appointed to elected office, and a ninth changed to Green after being elected.
Since 1985, Greens have won at least 1220 races, including at least 145 partisan races.
At least 109 Greens currently hold elected office
Behold the mighty tally of going on four decades of Green Party success, 1220 races, INCLUDING 145 PARTISAN RACES! So, less than the number of Democrats in state legislatures perennially governed by Republican-fascists any given years, THAT NUMBER IN GOING ON 4 DECADES!
And it becomes more obvious. Going down that list I noted one of those held an office I was unfamiliar with, Town Meeting Member from Shrewsbury, Massachusetts. As someone who attended dozens of town meetings before my town ended that absurd anachronism, for the most part, I'd never heard of someone being elected a "member" of town meeting and saw it was, apparently, something they did in even larger towns to make the absurdity of that form of government less obvious. Apparently a "member" is someone who gets elected to represent a district at the town meeting - I would bet easil 9 times out of 10 they are the only person running for the position, they would be better understood as volunteers if not just people looking for attention. Arlington, MA, apparently is supposed to have 225 such "Members" who conduct the town business at town meeting, or at least get to ask questions and vote on it. In my town, in Maine, everyone could do that though I was never at one where the percentage of the town's population present ever reached more than about 10% at most. And it was largely a matter of the totally uninformed being led by the people who knew what was going on. You've never seen the fraud of town meeting in reality instead of Hollywood lore in action until you've seen a couple of people on the floor run it. Easily 99% of what was endorsed by the town council passed, though on a few notable occasions havoc was wreaked by some loudmouth swaying a bunch of idiots who didn't know what was going on. Exactly twice did I ever witness anything productive outside of the town warrant at a town meeting, and that's in more than three decades of attending them.
As an aside, I'll never forget the brawl I got into at a couple of lefty blogs over the fraud of the traditional New England style town meeting with, as it turned out, a bunch of romantic big city old lefties who had never, once attended one.
You can probably bet that the majority of the Green Party's roster of successful politicians mostly run unopposed or fill offices more honestly considered volunteer positions. I'll bet in a lot of towns they have to beg people to fill them. And its on the basis of that that the Greens have had their most notable success in American politics as spoilers, putting Republicans into the presidency and other offices, including Senate seats and in House seats, probably less often on a percentage basis in legislatures though I would say they played a part in putting Paul LePage and Jock McKernan into the governorship of my state, one of the reasons I despise that fraud so much.
They're whining and complaining about HR1 having provisions to discourage spoilers in elections WHICH IS SOMETHING I SUPPORT ENTIRELY. Hard experience of entities on the play-left who not only end up helping Republican-fascists but on occasion getting caught taking their money as they do that says that any abstract principle of fairness to make-believe play-parties and their dupes should be folded and stuck where the sun don't shine. That's where the Green Party and all other "third parties" belong because they are crap.
I grew up in the Presbyterian church and sat through many a congregational meeting. It wasn’t until I was a pastor that I realized what a sham they were.
ReplyDeleteIt wasn’t the ultimate expression of the people/congregation, it was control by who shouted the loudest and represented the lowest common denominator. There was no “wisdom of the crowd” or of the people, there was only small-bore demagoguery.
I can’t imagine it works any differently when the stakes are more important than what color the carpet in the sanctuary should be.
I was witness to only a part of a long protracted struggle in a Quaker meeting over whether or not to accept the lovely old soapstone sink for the kitchen - which was bought at an auction by the clerk of the meeting without prior consultation of the meeting - AS A DONATION would be accepted or not. It was not a little of my disillusionment with the concept of consensus as a way of making decisions. Not to mention at least that Quaker meeting. People will turn anything into a pissing match. I remember once in an historical society meeting (I was there to hear the speaker and they had the friggin' business meeting first) listening to a long protracted pissing match between a dear little old lady who had her heart set on having an old burying ground put on the list of National Historic Sites and an antiquarian asshole who objected to accepting the donation of the property "because of the precedent it set". After about twenty minutes I pointed out that as a private entity they could do anything they wanted to do and not even do it again because the idea of a "precedent" wasn't anything they needed to bother with. I may as well have been speaking Latvian to them. As I recall, I left before they were done.
Delete