Asklemmy

Yeah I feel you, the green party has some good positions. But then they go ahead and nominate people like Jill Stein, who has some good but many horrible foreign policy ideas like ending NATO and allowing Russia to do whatever it wants to eastern European countries. In climate areas has relatively good positions, but then despite claiming to follow science she will constantly reject it when it comes to her own bizarre theories about vaccines, banning wifi from areas with children, or trying to ban gmos that have extensive evidence for safety until they meet some arbitrary threshold in her own head and scientists prove a negative, which is impossible. Not to mention what that would do to food prices and create widespread shortages and hunger and cause actual harm around the world if she got her way.

I'd love viable third parties, but they've been picking terrible candidates lately, so I don't really see the appeal atm. I think the path forward there is being active in primaries and pushing candidates forward in the main parties forward who support alternative voting systems like rank choice. Otherwise while we still have first past the post voting, any but the main two parties is never really going to be viable and will probably just end up being counterproductive to their own stated goals.