Jill Stein: On War, Trump Is Safer Than Clinton

The Green Party’s Jill Stein has spoken an inconvenient truth, that on the existential issue of a strategic war with nuclear-armed Russia, Donald Trump is less dangerous than Hillary Clinton, writes John V. Walsh.

By John V. Walsh

According to Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein, “On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary’s policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia. He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia.”

Yet, a glance at the front page of the New York Times or the editorial page or many other pages on any day gives a sense of the different environment in which we find ourselves. Absolutely nothing but evil is to be attributed to Donald Trump.

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein.

To do otherwise is to court risk. After all, who wants to find oneself labeled as a sexist, racist, homophobic deplorable? (“Bellicose,” “hypocritical, “lying” and “murderous” are notably missing from the litany of deplorables.) What would the neighbors say? Or the other parents at the private schools? Or the other students huddled together in the “safe spaces” in the colleges?

The ruthless stifling of discussion is not only true of the Times, the Washington Post, NPR, the New Yorker and other outlets charged with molding the opinions of the lesser orders. The intimidation spreads like slime on the surface of a dying pond so that even supposedly iconoclastic online outlets fall meekly into line. And so the key issue confronting us in this election cannot be discussed: that is a dangerous state of affairs for all of humanity, war with another nuclear power, Russia.

Into this menacing atmosphere steps Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate for President of the U.S. Here is some of what she says in an interview on Oct. 12, headlined “Jill Stein: Trump Is Less Dangerous Than Clinton; She Will Start Nuclear War With Russia”:

“It is now Hillary Clinton that wants to start an air war with Russia over Syria by calling for a no fly zone.  … We have 2,000 nuclear missiles on hair-trigger alert. They are saying we are closer to a nuclear war than we have ever been.

“Under Hillary Clinton, we could slide into nuclear war very quickly from her declared policy in Syria. … I sure won’t sleep well at night if Donald Trump is elected, but I sure won’t sleep well at night if Hillary Clinton elected. We have another choice other than these two candidates who are both promoting lethal policies.
“On the issue of war and nuclear weapons, it is actually Hillary’s policies which are much scarier than Donald Trump who does not want to go to war with Russia. He wants to seek modes of working together, which is the route that we need to follow not to go into confrontation and nuclear war with Russia.”

In making this statement, Stein is doing more than making a pitch for her own candidacy although she is certainly doing that. She is doing more than muttering the cliché that both major parties are the same, which we hear endlessly without so much as a qualifying word. She is saying that in the midst of the bipartisan sameness, there can be a decisive difference from an accidental candidate on a critical issue, one of survival. In short she is saying that Trump is the lesser evil on the key issue of survival. That is “lesser evil” – big time

Not only is her statement very non-PC, it will also cause her difficulties with some of her own supporters. A number of Democrats are supporting Stein in “safe states,” those places where Hillary is a shoo-in, like California. Certainly the expectation from such folks is that Stein will be quiet about the greater danger of the rabidly hawkish Clinton than the Putin-friendly Trump.

But the safe states strategy in and of itself tells us that the first priority of such worthies is the election of Hillary Clinton. In fact a friend of mine close to the Stein campaign informs me that Jill has made statements like this previously and has run into criticism for them.

Let this essay not be seen as an endorsement of Jill whom I have known for many years. But this essay is intended as a tribute to her. Years ago in Massachusetts I watched her stand firmly against the attempt of the “DemoGreens” to turn the Green Party into a powerless appendage of the Democratic Party.

In her statement on Trump and Clinton, Stein has gone beyond cliché and said something uncomfortably true for all too many progressives.

John V. Walsh can be reached at [email protected]

39 comments for “Jill Stein: On War, Trump Is Safer Than Clinton

  1. bluto
    October 24, 2016 at 15:49

    Jill Stein needs to hit Hillary where it counts – her Israeli Lobby/Jewish Lobby backing, esp with the Podesta/Hillary Leaks wikileaks emails

    To take down Hillary, the Israel Lobby must be taken down, and that IS HAPPENING with the Collapse of Israeli Apartheid (UN Sec Co meeting on Oct 28th 2016)

    Like this*, for example:


    ‘The Israeli Civil War and 1P1V1S’

    WHEN: OCT 22, Saturday, 4:00 – 5:00 pm
    WHERE: Otay Branch San Diego Public Library, 3003 Coronado Ave, San Diego, Ca 92154
    WHO: Dr Lance Dale

    Topics:‘Israeli Apartheid and the 3rd Israeli Generals Revolt’:
    The Commanders for Israeli Security (CIS)The Israel Civil War:

    ‘Hillary and the CIS vs Bibi, Adelson, and the Settlers’

    The UN Sec Council Resolution against Israel supported by the US (UN Sec Co meeting on Oct 28th 2016)

    1P1V1S = One Person One Vote One State
    Marwan Barghouti and 1P1V1S from Shining River to Shining Sea

    The 3 Existential Events (seen as such by Israel itself) for Israeli Apartheid: The Iran Nuclear Deal, UN Sec Co Resolution against Israel, and the ICC

    ‘The Collapse of Israeli Apartheid and the Tsunami on American Politics’ (*Go get her, Jill Stein!)

    ‘The Successful 2nd American Revolution of 4-2-15 and the Iran Nuclear Deal

    ’How the Israeli/Israeli Lobby ‘Clean Break Dream’ perished in Aleppo’

    … and breaking current eventsQ and A after the talk



  2. Zachary Smith
    October 24, 2016 at 12:31

    I found this story at the Naked Capitalism site this morning.

    Hillary the Hawk closing in on the White House

    A quick summary is that Hillary is going to become President, and Hillary is a very consistent and passionate warmonger.


  3. Bob In Portland
    October 22, 2016 at 14:09

    Since the coup of 1963 both major political parties have been under the sway (control) of our military-industrial complex. RIP, Democratic Party. The rank and file lasted longer than the party apparatchiks, but now we’re all getting onboard the train.

  4. delia ruhe
    October 22, 2016 at 00:32

    Anyone who does their reading in these important pre-election weeks will not be shocked by Stein’s statement, since she’s not the only one making it. And it’s not a new observation. It has been a frequent topic of serious discussion since the return of Secretary “Regime Change” Clinton from Libya. People who think seriously and rationally about US foreign policy are uncomfortable (to say the least) with Hillary’s plans for Putin.

  5. Helge
    October 21, 2016 at 17:46

    It is somehow weird to read that Trump, Stein and the Libertarian candidate advocate to rather work with Putin than against him and only Hillary Clinton is trying to tell us that he is the new Hitler. Here are three candidates who come from very different directions and backgrounds but they agree on that. Who is then right and who is then wrong? When I look at the media bias and those ridiculous claims that the Kremlin hacks into the Democratic Party (what could they possibly gain by that anyway?) in order to avoid attention and to stifle a proper political debate I am wondering who really is the new Hitler here. She must have also “reminded” Angela Merkel to support her campaing as a fellow female so Merkel tried today to push the EU calling for new sanctions for alleged Russian atrocities in Syria, fortunately the Italian PM Renzi put a stop to the EU interfering with the US election campaign on behalf of Hillary Clinton.

  6. Stop
    October 21, 2016 at 14:17

    She’s saying it now because the polls have Clinton winning decisively. If this were a toss-up I don’t she would be saying it. It also allows her to maintain an oppositional presence. Trump has said many many bone-headed things. He advocates getting in a currency and trade war with China. He wants to break up NATO and dramatically alter geo-political relations. Is Stein even thinking about all that or merely being an opportunist? She may be a third party candidate but she operates just like a mainstream politician. She is trying to come off as a contrarian but she really ends up looking like a fool. Of course, most people on the left are critical of Clinton’s policies. But saying Trump is less scary is not based on anything other than his superficial claim that he can make great deals. Has Stein seen the deals Trump has made?

    • Gregory Herr
      October 23, 2016 at 18:25

      It’s based on the fact that Clinton wants the U.S. military more fully engaged in the destruction of Syria while it is obvious that Russia (and possibly China as well) will not allow that to happen without confrontation. It is far from foolish to underscore this in conjunction with all other aspects of Clinton’s wretched foreign policy. Would you have Stein NOT speak the truth?
      Trump’s ignorance and belligerence in regard to Iran is disturbing as well…but his inarticulate, yet comparably sane positions in the foreign policy sphere do not compare to the actual bloody record and stated intentions of the Queen of Chaos.

  7. Bill Cash
    October 21, 2016 at 11:26

    The only thing wrong with this theory is that you trust Donald Trump. I agree about Hillary and we’d have to really pressure her.

    I believe Trump owes a ot of money in Russia and can’t afford to be nasty to them. We need his tax returns and you should be asking for them.

  8. Joelaferriere
    October 21, 2016 at 08:06

    Oh my god, and I thought we had a republic

  9. Peter Loeb
    October 21, 2016 at 06:59


    The facts regarding Trump and war with Russia are correct and
    have been made by other Consortium writers. What is NOT
    right is Trump’s unreliability in pursuing any policy whatsoever.

    My choice was between voting for Green (Jill Stein et al) or
    no one. In 2012 I voted for no one at all with two candidates
    for Congress excepted.

    This year I shall vote for Green. They support BDS (Boycott
    Divest Sanction), Palestinian Rights, #BLM (Black Lives Matter)
    and the rights of Native Americans.(Plus one of the two cnadidates
    I supported in 2012 who is running for re-election this year.)

    I will oppose the winning candidates as appropriate.

    —Peter Loeb, Boston, MA, USA

  10. Kate McCormick
    October 20, 2016 at 23:49

    Give me a break – Stein is a joke.

    • Bill Bodden
      October 21, 2016 at 00:39

      Give me a break – Stein is a joke

      Besides being an intelligent and knowledgeable person, Jill Stein is a very civilized and humane person standing in stark contrast to Clinton and Trump. Her name on the ballot gives people the opportunity to say they want nothing to do with Clinton and Trump and that they want someone instead of Stein’s character and integrity. The election is not about picking a “winner” but about letting fellow citizens know what your standards for the highest office in the land are. Of course, given current conditions Jill Stein won’t get anywhere near the White House. If she did, the oligarchs from both the Democratic and Republican parties would gang up on her because they place their and their parties’ interests ahead of the nation’s.

      Voting for the lesser or the greater evil lets the party oligarchs know they can put a seriously flawed person on the ballot and have a chance of her or him winning. No incentive there to raise standards.

  11. exiled off mainstreet
    October 20, 2016 at 22:11

    Stein is undoubtedly the best candidate. In the latest IBD-TIPP (I hope I have the initials right) poll (they were the most accurate poll in 2012) Stein is up to 5%. I hope she can surpass this figure. Any vote for the harpy is a vote for death. No no-fly zones for el qaeda. Her claim in the debate that she will negotiate is illusory, since the Russians are defending civilization and Christianity in Syria while the harpy favours barbarism and thuggery. My recommendation is that in safe states, vote for Jill. In doubtful states, in my view you should even vote for Trump. If the polls say it is close by election day (and most are saying so now, other than the tweaked ones run by Democratic and sell-out pollsters such as Peter Hart) Trump is likely to do surprisingly well, since the threat of the harpy’s candidacy is slowly becoming apparent to high-information voters who traditionally support the Democratic party like myself. Since the wikileaks documents prove that Sanders was denied the nomination through corruption, and since the corruption and hostile takeover of the Democratic party years ago by the Clintons and their acolytes is a proven fact, she figures to have a lower turnout than would have occurred in prior election years, the modeling methodology commonly used by polling firms.

  12. John
    October 20, 2016 at 20:05

    War is coming…..We are not there yet…….$ market share………..the number one indicator……..

  13. Sally Snyder
    October 20, 2016 at 18:13

    Here is an article that explains why the connection between Hillary Clinton and one of her biggest financial supporters is going to influence her foreign policy agenda:


    Millions of dollars buys a lot of influence in Washington.

    • backwardsevolution
      October 20, 2016 at 20:10

      Sally – good article. So Cheryl Saban is on the board of the Clinton Foundation too (along with Frank Giustra, who also gives a ton of money to the Clinton’s in exchange for favors from foreign governments, which Bill helps to get). Lots of money changing hands!

      I was surprised that Obama came out so strongly to endorse Hillary (because apparently they hate each other), as well as Michelle Obama. But after watching the video I posted above, I think if the Obama’s didn’t come out and endorse her, Hillary would make sure they never got a single paid speech ever again. She would crush them. Actually, it might be justice: when you shake hands with the devil, don’t be surprised when they bite you.

      • Bill Bodden
        October 20, 2016 at 21:32

        I was surprised that Obama came out so strongly to endorse Hillary

        No real surprise there. They and their spouses are part of the cabal running the country and they want to keep it that way. Suck it up and do what you have to – just like those good liberals who do the bidding of the Israel Lobby even to the point of defending Israel when it is bombing the hell out of Gaza and slaughtering thousands of people, including hundreds of children.

  14. Bill Bodden
    October 20, 2016 at 17:48

    It isn’t only Hillary Clinton that is the problem but all the other pro-war entities on her side – Israel, its lobby and all their warmongering cohorts, the neocons and their bought-and-paid-for courtesans in Congress. Over at CounterPunch Ramzy Baroud informs us :- An oddly refreshing, although disturbing ‘truth’ (about Syria) was articulated by Alon Ben-David in the Israeli Jerusalem Post last year. The title of his article speaks volumes: “May it never end: The uncomfortable truth about the war in Syria.” – http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/10/20/the-many-truths-on-syria-how-our-rivalry-has-destroyed-a-country/.

    Add to that bunch the military-industrial complex and our “good,” don’t-want-to-get-involved American citizens (?) – make that somnambulant residents – who, like the “good Germans” of the 1930s did nothing and let the Nazis succeed.

    There are times when it appears we are like bit players in a Greek or Shakespearean play observing helplessly how the main characters are leading the entire cast into an inevitable tragedy. At other times, we appear to share the dilemma of Jews in Nazi Germany trying to determine whether to endure their lot for a little longer with the hope circumstances will change or get the hell out of Germany or Austria while the getting is good. In one way, they were lucky. They had a choice. With the looming prospect of a nuclear Armageddon there is no where to escape to.

    • RR
      October 20, 2016 at 19:22

      Good post.

      In many ways we are much worse than the Good Germans of the 1930s. Many more have died from US aggression since WWII than Hitler ever killed.

    • backwardsevolution
      October 20, 2016 at 19:55

      Bill and RR – watch the video I posted above re Hillary’s temperament. Utterly scary.

      • Rikhard Ravindra Tanskanen
        October 22, 2016 at 17:11

        I checked it out on Snopes, and it’s been debunked.

        • JP
          October 24, 2016 at 11:22

          Snopes is disinfo.

    • Brad Owen
      October 21, 2016 at 04:56

      You are probably right. This is a Greek tragedy, and the Erinyes (the Furies of Revenge) are coming at us, screaming blood-curdling screams. I actually believe this. The simple-minded monotheisms were constructed by the Roman AND the Muslim Empires to maintain control over their captured populations, thus negating the REALITY of tens of thousands of years of uninterrupted polytheistic shamanism…that’s just how evil these Empires are, trying to create a false REALITY to hold their “sheep” in their “pens”. Voting D or R endorses this filthy evil. I believe Coyote Trickster is afoot, with a trick up His sleeve for this election, but Coyote is unpredictable.

  15. Jim Hannan
    October 20, 2016 at 17:32

    The Green Party hardly exists. It receives 1% of the vote in national elections, hardly runs candidates for most offices, has a few dedicated party members, but no clout lobbying at state or federal level. It has a high minded platform that no one has read. It does not join with the Democratic party to push liberal issues, because it doesn’t have money or people. So, it exists as a way for leftists to “vote their conscience”, which is a ridiculous idea. The Nader voters must be very happy with their conscience vote and the death and destruction it brought us for 8 years.
    It’s now been around in the US for over 25 years, does not grow, does really nothing of value. Years ago some wealthy Republican donors tried to pump it up in certain states to split votes, but even that seems to have died down.
    Trump likes Russia and Putin because his business dealings are intertwined with certain Russian business interests. Let’s look at the facts. Russia and Iran are strong allies. Trump has promised to tear up the Iranian nuclear deal on day one of his presidency, pushing the entire Middle East back to a war footing. Russia has no interest in tearing up the nuclear deal.
    Trump represents the absolute worst in American politics and for Jill Stein to weigh in on his side just shows how little she knows about anything.

    • Zachary Smith
      October 20, 2016 at 18:10

      You put a lot of words on my computer monitor, but totally avoided what Jill Stein said. All you did was dump on the woman.

      I’m sticking in two links where you’ve previously written here.


      Jim Hannan
      September 19, 2016 at 10:26 pm

      I think Obama is the best American president since FDR.

      I don’t personally think much of this opinion because Obama has been the most lawless of any president in my lifetime. Yes, that includes Nixon.

      Jim Hannan
      April 8, 2016 at 7:15 pm

      The jury is probably still out on Clinton’s term at State, and it will take awhile for historians to sort out.


      May I suggest you go to the link in the essay above and actually read what Jill Stein said. Then you might write an actual review instead of all the weasel-words attacking her.

      • backwardsevolution
        October 20, 2016 at 19:51

        Jim Hannan – take a look at Hillary’s temperament displayed in the following video, especially from 3:39 onwards:


        Matt Lauer asked Hillary: “What is the most important characteristic that a Commander-In-Chief can possess?”

        Hillary said: “Steadiness, an absolute rock steadiness, mixed with strength to be able to make the hard decisions…”

        Matt Lauer: “So judgment is the key?”

        Hillary said: “Temperament and judgment, yes.”

        Wow! So Matt Lauer DARED to ask her ONE question that she wasn’t prepared for (about her server) and she went ballistic after she got off the set, screaming, calling for her staff to get Comcast on the phone (parent of NBC) because she wanted Matt Lauer fired over this. She threw a glass full of water in an assistant’s face, then had a full meltdown. She said that if Trump wins, “we all hang from nooses”. One of her staffers said that they all feared Clinton’s wrath and uncontrollable outbursts, and one described Hillary as an “egotistical psychopath”. She screamed at Donna Brazile, interim DNC Chair, calling her a “brain dead buffalo”.

        An employee from NBC who witnessed the meltdown said: “That woman should never see the inside of the Oval Office, I can tell you that. She was unhinged and just continued to verbally abuse everyone – she was out of control.”

        Can you just imagine what would happen if Putin didn’t agree with her? That IS the way I see her, an egotistical psychopath. Very dangerous.

        Watch it. It’s illuminating!

        • Bill Bodden
          October 20, 2016 at 22:24

          The You Tube clip needs to be regarded with skepticism. Who is this Still who does the Still Report? Couldn’t he find someone to specify instead of referring to vague people? There has been lots of talk and evidence lately of Hillary’s public persona and her opposite in a private setting. If anything, she is a model of decorum in public in part because she knows there are cameras and smartphones all around shooting pictures of every movement she makes so it is highly unlikely she behaved in public they way the Still Report claims. I wouldn’t put it past her to behave the way the Still Report described in a private setting, but I don’t buy this story. The follow-on You Tube “documentary” was from Project Veritas that has been accused of unethical practices.

          • backwardsevolution
            October 21, 2016 at 00:37

            Bill Bodden – Bill Still puts out videos and is a former newspaper editor and publisher. You can see his site here:


            Bill, you must not have listened to the whole tape because at 6:09 he says that “Hillary does not allow any staff to have cellphones when she is in their presence, so no footage is available.” This particular video has 770,000 clicks. As I understand it, this was a private setting. It was after she had left the stage.

            And you actually think that the two videos by Project Veritas are what, bogus? That the two employees that were fired were fired for nothing?

            Bill Still says at 5:46: “According to the email, calls were made to the New York Times, the Washington Post, Huffington Post and Twitter executives with orders to crush Matt Lauer.” The email he is referring to is an email from an NBC staff member who was there and witnessed this.


            Bill and Hillary’s former secret service man has a new book. He said in an interview that this is exactly the behavior he witnessed in the White House: a dictator.


          • tjoe
            October 22, 2016 at 20:14

            backwardsevolution, Yes an important article’


            Knowing her temper and hate for Bills sexual wanderlust, explained by a former agent and Bill’s continuing escapades, like having women in their home and Jeff Epstein sex junkets, how can this woman think rationally and make decisions in the US best interest? She can’t. She will be obsessed with her power, have Bill followed and attack the women and even Bill at some point. She hates him in her personal self for making her feel second to his lust. Watch the video and imagine four years of hate spewing from her. Indeed she will start WW3…with her Jekyll and Hyde, personal and public self.

        • Paul G.
          October 21, 2016 at 13:26

          Sloppy lazy journalism, such an explosive issue-no pun intended- deserved more specific interviews with the witnesses not just an email reference and some other vague references. This event, if it went down as noted, was too important and profound not to do a more direct job investigating. What I am saying is that I am disappointed this wasn’t reported better in a more convincing manner. The extremely sexist biblical quote at the end about contentious women and the stupid cartoon make it look like Trump propaganda.

          That all said, it does mesh with the reports of Secret Service agent Gary Byrne in his “Crisis of Character; which is a much more valid expose’ of “Attila the Hen”. Her lack of impulse control and degrading potty mouth behavior has been noted by others over the years. She is a piece of work.

          As Julian Assange said, “… a choice between cholera and gonorrhea… ”

          By the way I saw no evidence of her boiling during the video itself; she is a good actress. The ability to hide emotions in public is the hallmark of an successful sociopath.

          The State of the Nation article is better presented.

    • RR
      October 20, 2016 at 19:17

      Thanks to people like you we may have WWIII

    • Bill Bodden
      October 20, 2016 at 20:01

      The Nader voters must be very happy with their conscience vote and the death and destruction it brought us for 8 years.

      Apparently, it will take natural attrition to bring an end to this meretricious canard, and there is no point in repeating the evidence proving its complete nonsense. However, I’ll make a couple of points. (1)The problem wasn’t that so many people voted for Nader instead of Gore but that so many people voted for Gore instead of Nader. (2) I smelled a rat watching Bush and Cheney and was prepared to vote for Gore as the lesser evil, but he ran such a deplorable and inept campaign I couldn’t vote for him either. Nader was someone I could, and still do, believe in.

      … for Jill Stein to weigh in on his side just shows how little she knows about anything.

      Jill Stein has probably forgotten more than you will ever know.

      • Perseus Zeus
        October 20, 2016 at 22:31

        “he ran such a deplorable and inept campaign I couldn’t vote for him either.”
        That is exactly the problem with our voters, why do you depend on a campaign? Gore’s campaign was not bad, but the Republican negative campaign against Gore and Kerry was better.

        You forget about the campaign and do your homework, you learn from their past actions and figure out if they worked on the nation’s behalf, or in their party’s or self-interest.

        Did you get to drink a beer with G. W.?

        • Bill Bodden
          October 21, 2016 at 00:27

          I don’t recall all the reasons I rejected Gore, but I recall two. One was his decision to sell little Elian Gonzales – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli%C3%A1n_Gonz%C3%A1lez – down the Miami River to get the Florida Cuban vote. (In case you have forgotten or didn’t know, Elian’s mother died trying to reach Florida from Cuba. Elian survived and his father, his closest relative, remained in Cuba.) Gore wanted to turn Elian over to other relatives in Miami instead of returning him to his father. I interpreted that politically-motivated move as a sign of serious moral deficiency on Gore’s part. The other was that long kiss Gore and Tipper shared on some stage during the campaign that struck me as phony as was possible. As for my being influenced by the Bush campaign, perhaps you should have paid more attention to my comment above – I smelled a rat watching Bush and Cheney and was prepared to vote for Gore. If I smelled a rat watching Bush and Cheney the chances of my being persuaded by them would consequently have been very slim.

    • Stephen Sivonda
      October 20, 2016 at 23:46

      Mr. Hannan, I’ll not say all I could…but your opinion of the Nader voters needs an amending. This amazing informative site has archives , which I would suggest you should use. Here’s one of several articles on that aborted democratic 2000 election win. https://consortiumnews.com/2001/071201a.html Stop blaming it on Nader.

    • Brad Owen
      October 21, 2016 at 03:50

      The big picture is that both the Dems and Repubs are so filthy with the crimes they’ve aided & abetted and committed over the CENTURIES of their existence that they both should be destroyed and swept off the World stage. The Greens are the needed replacement, and they’ll most likely be on your ballot. They get 1% because people like you stupidly don’t place your mark on their open circle, and instead choose one of the two Establishment criminal organizations. THAT is sheer stupidity. Our power is ONLY in our numbers, and to act like stupid sheep is unforgivable. The life of the World hangs on WHERE you place your mark.

    • Larry Gates
      October 21, 2016 at 08:31

      1. The Clintons have more business dealings with Russia than Donald Trump (Check out Uranium One.)

      2. Gore did not lose because of Nader voters in Florida.

      3. By all traditional standards both Clintons are Republicans, not Democrats.

      4. Trump tearing up the Iranian nuclear deal is indeed a very bad thing, but Clinton’s belligerence towards Russia (and Iran, too) scare me even more. I agree with Stein when she says – for all his other faults (and there are many), Trump is less likely to get us into a nuclear war than Clinton. Trump is essentially an isolationist. Hillary Clinton is a neocon interventionist. Trump wants mutually beneficial relationships with Russia. Clinton calls Putin the new Hitler, and her proposed no-fly-zone in northern Syria would be an act of war against Russia that would entail shooting down Russian planes.

      5. I still call myself a Democrat but I am voting for Jill Stein. BOTH Trump and Clinton represent “the absolute worst in American Politics.”

    • October 22, 2016 at 00:43

      If you knew anything about history, you would know that time and again there is a very small minority of people (sometimes as high as 1%) that actually grasp the “what the fact is going on” at all the major points of conflict, serious change or complete default at the time it is happening. Judging by your comments, you are in the other 99+%.
      dog bless

    • Boris Badenov
      October 26, 2016 at 01:03

      Jill wrote:Trump likes Russia and Putin because his business dealings are intertwined with certain Russian business interests. Let’s look at the facts.

      Which facts are you referring to here Jill?

Comments are closed.