At first glance, Jill Stein is a very harmless candidate. With her inseparable Palestinian keffiyeh around her neck, her anti-militarist positions and her intentions to vote for 1% in the US presidential elections on November 5, this far-left environmentalist has absolutely no chance of entering the White House.
This 74-year-old retired doctor, with light eyes and short silver hair, is still considered by the Democratic camp to be a thorn in Kamala Harris’ side.
In the crucial state of Michigan, which has more than 300,000 residents of Middle Eastern or North African descent, Jill Stein is addressing many voters disappointed by Vice President Joe Biden’s support for Israel in the Gaza conflict. The environmentalist - who fights for a $25 minimum wage, the abolition of student debt and the creation of green jobs financed by massive defense budget cuts – also appeals to the left wing of the Democratic Party and to the former Bernie Sanders supporters who feel betrayed by the centrist Democratic establishment.
For Bruce Schulman, professor of history at Boston University, “Votes going to the Green Party can be seen as fewer votes for Harris and the Democrats”. During the last elections, “Key states were decided by 40,000 votes, in some places, recalls the researcher. If these elections are as close as expected »some third-party candidacies, such as Jill Stein’s, could swing the election.
Advertising blitz
Many in the Democratic camp remember the 2016 elections, during which the environmentalist was already a candidate: at the time they attributed part of the responsibility for Hillary Clinton’s defeat to Jill Stein. This garnered a total of about 132,000 votes in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, while former Secretary of State Obama lost these three key states by 77,000 votes.
“There were enough pro-Stein voters to change the outcome, just like Ralph Nader (a previous environmentalist candidate for the 2000 presidential election who opposed Bush to Al Gore, editor’s note) he had done it in Florida and New Hampshire”, Hillary Clinton bitterly noted in her memoirs What happened (in French: It happened like thispublished by Fayard), published in 2017. This time, the democratic camp intends to respond to the environmentalist’s candidacy.
In the final days of the campaign, the party spent more than $500,000 to fund campaign ads aimed at dissuading voters in swing states from voting for Stein and other third-party candidates. “Jill Stein already helped Trump once. Don’t let him do it again.” We specifically request a series of giant advertising panels installed on the sides of the roads in several countries oscillating states.
The Republicans, for their part, intend to take advantage of the divisions on the left. According to several American media outlets, in recent days voters in the crucial states of Wisconsin and Georgia have been bombarded with text messages and recorded phone calls from two conservative “super PACs” (these “political action committees” that can directly finance a candidate but can spend generously in advertising or on-the-ground actions), encouraging them to vote on November 5 for the environmentalist candidate.
Interview between Time.news Editor (E) and Bruce Schulman, Professor of History at Boston University (B)
E: Welcome, Professor Schulman. It’s great to have you with us today, especially as we delve into the intriguing candidacy of Jill Stein in the upcoming presidential elections. Her presence seems to evoke a mix of support and concern from various political factions. At first glance, she appears to be a long shot, yet many are treating her as a significant factor in the upcoming race. What are your thoughts on why she remains relevant in this election cycle?
B: Thank you for having me! Jill Stein’s relevance can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, her platform resonates with a core constituency that feels disenfranchised by the mainstream Democratic Party. Issues like the $25 minimum wage and the abolition of student debt are particularly appealing to younger voters and progressives, especially those who felt let down by the Biden administration’s policies.
E: Certainly, her focus on ecological sustainability and social justice aligns well with many current concerns. However, given her relatively low polling numbers, do you think she poses a tangible threat to Kamala Harris and the Democratic campaign?
B: While it’s true that she might not pull in a large percentage of the vote nationwide, her impact could be quite significant in swing states like Michigan, which hosts a considerable population of voters of Middle Eastern descent. These voters may feel aligned with her anti-military stance, particularly in light of the recent Gaza conflict and Biden’s supportive stance towards Israel. If she captures even a small portion of the vote there, it could indeed cost Harris critical votes—especially in tight races where even a few thousand votes can make a difference.
E: That brings us to the ghost of 2016, when many Democrats blamed Stein for siphoning votes away from Hillary Clinton. How do you believe this historical context shapes the current atmosphere around her candidacy?
B: Absolutely, the memories of 2016 loom large. Many in the Democratic camp are acutely aware that key states were decided by narrow margins. In that context, any third-party candidacy—even one perceived as harmless—can tilt the scales. There’s a palpable fear among Democrats that a repeat of that situation could again lead to electoral disappointment. That’s why you see the Democratic establishment keeping a wary eye on Stein and similar candidates.
E: With Stein’s historic footing among certain voter demographics, do you think her campaign is more about competing for votes or is it more about amplifying specific issues that the mainstream parties might be ignoring?
B: I think it’s a blend of both. On one hand, she certainly aims to win votes, as any candidate would. On the other hand, her participation serves to spotlight critical issues—like military spending and climate change—that are often overshadowed in mainstream discourse. Stein’s presence in the race might push the Democrats to address these matters more seriously, especially if they see a potential loss of votes to third-party candidates.
E: Interesting! As we move closer to the elections, do you foresee any shifts in voter sentiment due to her campaign? Could she influence the political landscape even if she doesn’t secure a significant number of votes?
B: It’s entirely possible. The mere act of campaigning can shift discourse and priorities. If she gains traction, it may force Harris and her team to clarify their positions on certain issues to capture those voters. Even if Stein ends up with a modest number of votes, her ability to spark conversations around critical concerns could affect the platform of the Democratic Party moving forward.
E: Thank you, Professor Schulman, for your insights. It seems Jill Stein’s candidacy is as much about the politics of the moment as it is about the future trajectory of the political landscape in the U.S. A development worth watching closely as we approach November!
B: Absolutely! It’s going to be a fascinating election cycle. Thank you for having me.