Talk:Green Party of the United States

LOL.
LOL. The Green Party is a joke. 24.189.254.24 (talk) 11:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Lol, so are you! 11:33, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * They're grifters. They poke their heads out like meerkats every five years, beg for money, and leave.  It's appalling that so many leftist heavyweights have fallen for their act.  Plutoniumboss (talk) 20:12, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

No mention of the US Green Party's obsessive love for psuedoscience and woo?
 * We mention some of it in the UK Greens section, but yeah, we should have a section regarding the most common undercurrents of woo found in mainstream parties. They really need to hold off on their anti-nuclear rhetoric if they want AGW mitigation to work, and I remember doing a voting advice application with the Green position on NASA funding being that they'll support it only if "there are no military applicaions."  Osaka Sun (talk) 03:26, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and not just that. They also support publicly funded homeopathy. 166.137.191.38 (talk) 04:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Not shocking. Add it in. Osaka Sun (talk) 04:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Greens do not support publicly funded woo, they just simply encourage it. They are not obsessive over it either, please read their platform http://www.gp.org/what-we-believe/our-platform/17-platform/39-ii-social-justice#HealthCare though it does mention it is a far cry away from publicly funded woo.

Split into at least three articles
This article covers entirely separate parties in different countries with platforms that are not necessarily the same (especially on woo where they can differ drastically from country to country) in one place. I think it'd be better to have a separate article for the US and UK greens. The greens in other countries could either get their own articles or be handle in the articles on the political system of those countries... Laurogeita Hamabost (talk) 17:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
 * eh, only the US and UK have any useful information -- nobody should use RW as a half-assed Wikipedia for Green Party electoral success. I say two articles. 02:17, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Well at the very least Green Parties that have shaped government policy might get a mention... They are the forth or fifth or sixth largest group in the European parliament and have (at least in Europe) greatly influenced Socialist and Social Democratic parties. I think Australia even had a government depend on supply and confidence of one or two Greens once... Laurogeita Hamabost (talk) 14:33, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Should be renamed to Green Party of the United States
The German and New Zealand Greens (not a branch of the topic of this article) have served as junior policy makers at the federal level in both countries for decades, and also lead entire local governments in Germany. 2600:8806:0:C2:C9ED:C10:D273:52C9 (talk) 17:05, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

The lede and thrust of the article was US-based, and the "Global Greens" do not have the US Green Party as a full member. Additionally the 'Global Greens' are not a party, nor do they decide policy. It just looks mostly like a small vanity or diplomatic thing. If people want more on the other Green Parties the writing is preserved at Draft:Global Greens to separate into their own articles in the future as the previous talk page commenter suggested, if they are even considered notable for an Anglo-centric wiki 2600:8806:0:C2:C9ED:C10:D273:52C9 (talk) 17:09, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll be undoing this, as it leaves a lot of red links and broken redirects that are undesirable, and the article isn't just focused on the U.S. Green Party anyway. If someone is willing to work on a Global Greens article and rewrite this page to only cover the U.S. Greens, then the move should be done, but the move was done prematurely in my opinion. Plutocow (talk) 18:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, there does seem to be a draft at Draft:Global Greens, but again I would like to wait until it is finished for the article to be moved. Plutocow (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

One could probably track the historical and philosophical antecedents to the Greens opposition to Nuclear Power
But for now just leaving the prior writers (snarky? and false) assertion it came from modern media. If anyone figures this bit out please add it. 2600:8806:0:C2:F51B:46B7:F49B:3F55 (talk) 23:32, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
 * My guess is they partly oppose it because of the tie btw nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons capabilities 2600:8806:0:C2:C0BA:CE48:5D45:3C89 (talk) 10:58, 24 April 2022 (UTC)