>>405646This is the sort of retarded rationalization that puts Democrats in power. It's defeatism because you want us to lose elections to the libs.
>Ventura a) jumped in the race in the middle of the primary when a number of Greens had already voted and his followers just expected people to drop everything and anoint himYes they should because the other candidates were shit. Greens primaries were rigged anyway, look up what they did to Dario Hunter.
>b) isn't a socialistYes he is, you don't call yourself a "socialist" in America because it's career suicide. He wants to do the Green New Deal, he's a fan of Che and he was a personal friend of Castro ffs.
>he was never going to win an election even if he got nominated and to think that would have magically made the Greens betterAs opposed to choosing a candidate that isn't a household name in America and has no personality. You seriously think that was a good idea? It lowered our chances at winning majorly.
>What was better for the Greens was getting a candidate actively campaigning to reform and restructure them to make them more socialistic and democratic (Hawkins),Hawkins has been in the party since the beginning and he has reformed fuck all. He rigged the primaries and you expect him to fix the party.
>They did that in 2000 with the Nader electionAnd the Greens since then have never had a higher polling candidate. Nader wasn't a socialist, unlike Ventura.
>unaccountable leadership and perpetual funding crises.Because they keep choosing shit candidates, infighting and have shit organizational skills. You're putting the cart before the horse. First, come up with a good idea, a good organization, a good plan and then try getting funding.