With the election just days away, a significant number of Americans are feeling distraught about the choice facing them in the polling booth. Although many progressives are likely to vote for Hillary Clinton, many former supporters of Bernie Sanders, like me, cannot bring themselves to vote for her and would never consider voting for Donald Trump. Others may not vote at all. Indeed, if there were no choice other than Clinton and Trump, I too would abstain from voting.
Voting is a matter of conscience, and everyone’s decision is entitled to respect, including, under the present circumstances, a decision to not vote. That said, like many progressives who would never vote for Clinton (or Trump), yet have resigned themselves to a Clinton presidency, I plan on voting for Jill Stein of the Green Party. In my view, there are at least three compelling reasons why all progressives, and certainly all those living in non-battleground states, should consider doing so, even though there is no chance Stein will win a single electoral vote.
First, as a matter of principle, progressives should prefer the Green Party’s ideals and proposals to those of the Democratic Party. While reasonable people may differ over whether all that much separates Greens from the left wing of the Democratic Party, it is clear that a progressive agenda will not be pursued under a Clinton administration because the party’s right wing is dominant and Clinton herself is not a progressive but a corporatist tool of Wall Street, the major banks, and her billionaire donors.
On matters of war and peace, there simply is no comparison. The Green Party opposes militarism and advocates for our adherence to the UN Charter and international law. On the other hand, the Democratic Party is literally in the grip of the same cabal of neoconservative vipers who brought us the Iraq War and ISIS, and are now salivating for war with Russia and Iran. The future under Clinton is bleak, and in the years ahead progressives who vote for her will be unable to attest honestly that they were misled.
Second, although Clinton’s lip service to liberal ideals has been bolstered by the most egregious media favoritism in living memory, she is at bottom an establishment elitist who appears not to have genuine concern for the plight of ordinary Americans. Consumed by a covetous ambition for the presidency, the one characteristic that defines her more than anything else, and oozing a grotesque sense of entitlement, her unremitting lust for power will ensure she pursues a center-right course on social and economic policy and hawkish approach to foreign affairs. She will do so to deflect attacks from the republican right as she aims to win a second term, a motivation that will inform every decision she makes during her first. With Trump’s defeat now virtually assured and even an electoral vote landslide a realistic possibility, it is imperative that progressives deny Clinton any basis to claim a popular vote mandate for the neoliberal and neoconservative policies she unquestionably intends to pursue and that all true progressives oppose.
Finally, in solid blue states Clinton will beat Trump by significant margins; in most red states she will lose by smaller margins, but doesn’t need the electoral votes to win the presidency. In all non-battleground states, therefore, progressives should feel no qualms that a vote for Stein may help elect Trump because there is virtually no chance their votes will affect the ultimate outcome.
On the other hand, every vote for Stein brings the Green Party closer to the 5 percent mark that will ensure the party receives millions of dollars in federal matching funds in 2020, and a guaranteed spot on the ballot in many states.
Progressives know that reform of the Democratic Party is unlikely under Clinton despite Bernie’s “political revolution.” There’s a reason Bernie and Elizabeth Warren have posted themselves as progressive watchdogs over Clinton’s forthcoming cabinet and sub-cabinet appointments. Clinton has used Bernie and progressives in this campaign and will betray both after she wins. Any thinking person understands the hypocrisy that underlies her political posturing. The WikiLeaks disclosures only confirm what everyone has known all along: Clinton and the DNC conspired to sabotage Bernie’s progressive campaign, and the intertwined Clinton Foundation and Democratic Party machine is little more than a cesspool of cronyism and brazen corruption.
On foreign policy, there is absolutely no chance of progressive reform. To the contrary, given the neocons’ influence over Clinton, herself a neoconservative hawk, things will almost certainly get worse than they’ve been under President Obama. We are headed for confrontation with Russia in Syria, increased conflict with Iran at the behest of Israel’s surrogates embedded in our foreign policy establishment, and, quite possibly, another disastrous war in the Middle East. All of this will make America less, not more, secure. Indeed, Bernie Sanders’ consistent failure to refer to Clinton’s foreign policy experience or outlook while stumping for her during the general election is proof positive that he himself appreciates the dangers her election portends.
The most effective means by which progressives can influence Clinton over the next four years, particularly on foreign policy, is to enhance the Green Party’s electoral performance this year. Helping the Green Party achieve 5 percent of the popular vote will bring it financial resources, media coverage, and exposure to voters so it can begin to overcome its status as a marginal third party. Progressives must send Clinton the clear message that they will no longer be taken for granted by the Democratic Party, and that Green votes could tip the balance in battleground states in what might be a close election in 2020 between her and a more palatable Republican.
Come January 2017, the only thing more important to Clinton than having been elected the first woman president of the United States will be her re-election as such. The risk to that prospect from the potential loss of progressive voters in 2020 will bring more pressure to bear on her than anything Bernie Sanders and the enervated left wing of the Democratic Party can muster. While even this is a long shot for progressives, it is currently the only shot they have.