Talk:Jill Stein

Resurrection
Greetings fellow Courageous Conservatives, As suggested per RationalWiki:To_do_list I think it would be worth it to reexamine the creation of a Jill Stein article. There are two angles that I think would be worth exploring. One is the positive angle, such as her longtime support for social justice causes and concern for environmental issues. The other is the not as positive angle, such as her opposition to GMOs and nuclear power, and possible anti-vaxxy stuff. I might try to draft some things here in the talkspace to see what sticks. BossHuade (talk) 02:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * What's up with the desultory posting of a link to Ted Cruz's failed platform? Anyway, as we also have an article on Gary Johnson I believe we should have one for her as well - CNN has a fairly decent write-up of her stance on her moonbat positions which should serve as a good starting point for the creation of an article. 10:03, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Wi-fi
As a matter of fact, yes, France passed a law to RESTRICT and not ban in Kindergartens, but actually ban it from daycare. Whether it's justified or useful, I can't tell, but fact is, yes it is being regulated.

I hope your French is good ;) http://eduscol.education.fr/numerique/tout-le-numerique/veille-education-numerique/archives/2015/juin2015/referentiel-usage-wifi-ecole http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/propositions/pion2065.asp Nicklaus|talk
 * Though, not due to any health concerns:


 * Stein is still wrong and a crank. Reverend Black Percy (talk) 12:56, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh sure I'm not condracting that, I was just fact-checking there. Whether it's for health reasons or not, there is a restriction and even a ban in daycares :

http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/ta/ta0468.asp Again, not trying to defend her, I simply find the snark "huhuh those countries have no wifis in schools" misplaced, since measure are actually taken.Nicklaus|talk

Alt-medicine and science woo is "hard-left"???
"Like her party, however, Stein more often leans toward the hard-left (particularly with regard to alt-medicine and science woo)"

Is alt-medicine and science woo really a sign that you're hard-left?

You can of course be hard-left and believe in alt-medicine and science woo. It's not a contradiction. But I've never heard that this is mostly limited to the hard left. Hippies are known for following a lot of alt-medicine, but does that make them hard-left? What about Alex Jones, is he hard-left?

I know very little about Jill Stein but if one is attempting to show that she's hard-left, one should present something more evidently hard-left like praising Mao or Emma Goldman or something.

--Softcommie (talk) 11:42, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

"complete joke"
Look, I hate her views on science issues, but Obama and Bush are war criminals.50.194.115.156 (talk) 18:05, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

this article is bad
regardless of what one thinks about her as a person or her positions...
 * Fixed. — Oxyaena Harass  14:03, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , you just deleted a shitload of perfectly good material. You should at least discuss a bit before you do. Also, wtf is with you calling Obama an Uncle Tom? Twodots (talk) 15:20, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not good material it's centrist bullshit. — Oxyaena Harass  15:29, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe so, but several paragraphs of grammatically correct, cited, and correctly spelled material do not need to be thrown out the window because you personally don't like them. I'm going to bring ,, and in on this. Twodots (talk) 15:41, 4 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Pinging Cory in a convo with Oxy never ends well, my dude, Get on with RationalWikiWiki. ElectrosPardon? 15:44, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It'll probably be fine. We're just going to have a polite discussion about this article and the centrist bias that Oxy claims it has. Twodots (talk) 15:53, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Whoa there, cowboy! Why am I being dragged into this? I ain't a mod! But also, I'm here now, so I might as well type (yay, wall of text!). Twodots, listen to me. Confrontations on the internet are, fot the most part, fruitless. Mkay? There isn't gonna be more money in your back pocket from arguing over this article with Oxyaena. The sun ain't gonna shine more, global warming won't end itself, like, there is NOTHING that you will gain from this. IF you feel strongly about the material Oxyeana removed and want to put forward a case as to why it should be kept, then do so in a detailed manner. And I mean like, bullet points detailed. Crying from the boredom, polite, logically sound type of detailed. The type of argument that's bulletproof and stands on it's on two legs. There is no need to ping people and drag them into this. First make an attempt to resolve it just between the two of ye. IF that fails, then go to the mod noticeboard and say that there is an edit war (and there isn't an edit war just yet, so you should be trying to convince your opponent before asking for mod hats to step in). Also, that's a weird selection of people to ping. :D Why me, Ace and Cory? - Rairyu75  ( Talk ) 16:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Because they are people that'd be more partial to them than to me. I don't plan on pressing this issue, ive learned my lesson. — Oxyaena Harass  16:08, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * We could just hold a content vote if anyone feels so strongly. 16:17, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry if I've caused unnecessary drama...Twodots (talk) 16:39, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I pinged you, Ace, and Cory because I was hoping that you might agree with me and try to help. I'm terrible at debating, you see, and the last conversation I had with Oxy ended with me telling her to eat glass and a nine hour block. Oh, and she's been an editor for way longer. Twodots (talk) 16:45, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
 * First, you should revert to the original text, then, Oxy should present an argument why it should be changed for each factual change. Goat knows she seems to have the time. The burden is not on the last accepted version to afford defenders.Ariel31459 (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2020 (UTC)