Because her ideas are mostly so stupid that even the media can’t get behind them…
As for her ideas, yes, they’re dumb. They fall right in line with what many of the “Obama isn’t liberal enough” crowd believes. The real reason why she gets no media coverage is because every vote for her is a vote taken from Obama. The press will not do anything to support that.
Actually, according to this NY Post article, some of her ideas aren’t so stupid after all (at least when compared to Obama):
Back in the Great Depression, FDR was more focused on getting people back to work than on handing out money. He set up the WPA and the CCC to provide employment for out-of-work Americans — jobs building needed infrastructure: bridges, post offices, courthouses and other federal buildings.
The idea was that taxpayers should get something out of helping the unemployed.
The Green Party’s Stein has a similar suggestion, and comments: “If you don’t have work, you’d go to an employmentoffice, not an unemploymentoffice, and you’d get a job, not sit home, depressed, with a check.”
At its peak, the WPA employed over 3 million men and women who would’ve otherwise been jobless.
And the Civilian Conservation Corps put the unemployed to work improving national parks and other pieces of federal land.
When I hike in the Smokies, it’s often on trails that were built by the CCC — and of course we’re still using many of the buildings and bridges that the WPA built.
By contrast, what will we have to show in decades to come for today’s 99-week extended unemployment benefits and other government giveaways? Not so much.
Looking at voting patterns suggests that much of the USA is cunning enough to realize “If I don’t vote for one of the top two candidates, my vote has a far smaller chance of changing who wins”, yet not smart enough to realize “If I’m not in a swing state, my Presidential vote already has an infinitesimal chance of changing who wins” or “Unless I enjoy politics for its own sake, the cost of researching and voting greatly outweighs the expected utility of my vote changing things for the better.”
“We know higher education pays for itself,” she says, citing the GI Bill.
Evidently not…
Hmm. Maybe if I put up a Jill Stein yard sign and a bumper sticker on my car, a few wavering Obama voters might take the bait. Could make a difference.
Because her ideas are mostly so stupid that even the media can’t get behind them…
As for her ideas, yes, they’re dumb. They fall right in line with what many of the “Obama isn’t liberal enough” crowd believes. The real reason why she gets no media coverage is because every vote for her is a vote taken from Obama. The press will not do anything to support that.
Actually, according to this NY Post article, some of her ideas aren’t so stupid after all (at least when compared to Obama):
Back in the Great Depression, FDR was more focused on getting people back to work than on handing out money. He set up the WPA and the CCC to provide employment for out-of-work Americans — jobs building needed infrastructure: bridges, post offices, courthouses and other federal buildings.
The idea was that taxpayers should get something out of helping the unemployed.
The Green Party’s Stein has a similar suggestion, and comments: “If you don’t have work, you’d go to an employmentoffice, not an unemploymentoffice, and you’d get a job, not sit home, depressed, with a check.”
At its peak, the WPA employed over 3 million men and women who would’ve otherwise been jobless.
And the Civilian Conservation Corps put the unemployed to work improving national parks and other pieces of federal land.
When I hike in the Smokies, it’s often on trails that were built by the CCC — and of course we’re still using many of the buildings and bridges that the WPA built.
By contrast, what will we have to show in decades to come for today’s 99-week extended unemployment benefits and other government giveaways? Not so much.
Looking at voting patterns suggests that much of the USA is cunning enough to realize “If I don’t vote for one of the top two candidates, my vote has a far smaller chance of changing who wins”, yet not smart enough to realize “If I’m not in a swing state, my Presidential vote already has an infinitesimal chance of changing who wins” or “Unless I enjoy politics for its own sake, the cost of researching and voting greatly outweighs the expected utility of my vote changing things for the better.”
Evidently not…
Hmm. Maybe if I put up a Jill Stein yard sign and a bumper sticker on my car, a few wavering Obama voters might take the bait. Could make a difference.