“We're not faced with the lesser of two evils in this election… We're faced with the evil of two lessers.”

—2008 Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin, referring to his Democratic and Republican rivals Barack Obama and John McCain. (Source)

I recently announced on Twitter that I intend on voting for 2024 Green Party presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein in this year's upcoming presidential election, and since many of y'all (especially those who knew me back in 2019-2020) may recall that I once was a vocal supporter of then-President Donald J. Trump, and that I frequently referred to myself as a "pro-Trump Libertarian conspiracy theorist" at the time, I thought that I would take the time writing a blog to explain why exactly it is that I'm planning on voting for Jill Stein this year, instead of former President Trump or the Libertarian Party's candidate.

First of all, it is worth mentioning that my views regarding former President Trump have been gradually changing over time, and while I still like many of the same things that I had liked about him back in 2020, there were always plenty of things that I didn't like about him as well, many of which ultimately played a role in my decision to vote for Dr. Stein this time around instead of him.
(Assuming that I actually get to vote this year, anyway&hellip

That isn't to say that Trump isn't still somewhat better than "Genocide Joe" in certain respects, and there were certainly worse candidates than Trump running in the 2024 Republican primary, but as a pro-life Libertarian I have a number of problems with the idea of voting for former President Trump like I had intended to do in the past, and I'm going to go over the main issues that I had looked at carefully before ultimately making this difficult decision.

[Spoiler=1. Right to Life]

Those who are even vaguely familiar with my political views will likely know that I am extremely pro-life, and so my decision to vote for a candidate whose views on preborn rights are decidedly different than my own was by no means an easy one for me to make.

Unfortunately, like this Federalist article written back in 2016 points out, there is currently no political party in the US that consistently represents the views of the pro-life movement.
(Especially not the views of pro-life progressives like myself.)

“Start with this question: what viewpoint is held by an enormous number of Americans, roughly half the country, but in the context of the 2016 election is opposed or barely tolerated by all of the candidates on a majority of ballots?”

“The answer is obvious. There are effectively no pro-life candidates for the presidency in 2016. Not Hillary Clinton, not [2016 Libertarian candidate] Gary Johnson, not Jill Stein, and no, not Donald Trump.”

Regarding the author's assertion that Trump isn't truly pro-life, they go on to say that while Trump's "judicial nominations may be acceptable to pro-lifers" that he has a "desire to weaken the GOP platform on the issue", a sentiment that is echoed by the author of this op-ed in the Washington Post as well.

“…What unites pro-lifers is more important than what divides them. The objective is to end as many abortions as possible. That desire is driven by a profound belief that the unborn child within a pregnant woman is human and deserves legal protection.”

“Trump does not believe this, as his statements in an interview with NBC News’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday make clear.”

“Pro-lifers should also be wary of where Trump’s sympathies lie. He said the heartbeat bill that his chief rival for the GOP nomination, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, signed was “a terrible thing, a terrible mistake.” But Florida’s law is exactly what pro-lifers have fought for decades to achieve. In fact, many remain unhappy that such bills implicitly permit abortions in the earliest stages of pregnancy. When someone calls the fulfillment of your dreams “a terrible thing,” perhaps he’s just not that into you.”

It is also worth noting that similar criticisms of Trump have been expressed by some of my (much more conservative) pro-life friends as well, and while Trump's position on preborn rights is obviously better than Dr. Stein's is, voting for him based solely on this issue alone just doesn't make sense to me given his weakness on it.
(Especially not when there are other life-and-death issues that mean just as much to me.)

Hopefully there really will be a "Party of Life" someday, but until that day comes I will simply vote for the candidate who I believe will save the most lives, even if they're pro-choice.[/Spoiler]

[Spoiler=2. Foreign Policy]

“I think this chaos has been tremendously increased, and it’s hard to figure out how they can work their way out. But, it’s a hole that’s been dug for a long time, but I think the hole by Trump has gotten much deeper and much faster, and there’s no easy way out. Overall, it represents the stupidity of the interventionist foreign policy.”

—Former Rep. Ron Paul (Source)

At the Republican National Convention in 2020, Sen. Rand Paul gave an impressive anti-war speech, in which he asserted that "President Trump is the first president in a generation to seek to end war rather than start one", and that he's "supporting President Trump because he believes, as I do, that a strong America cannot fight endless wars".

This is most certainly a common sentiment among Trump supporters, and given the insanely militaristic foreign policies of the 2 presidents that preceded him (Obama and Bush) as well as Joe Biden's, it is easy to see Trump as being "anti-war".

Unfortunately, I too foolishly fell for the same trick that Rand Paul did, by rationalizing settling for the lesser of 2 bloodthirsty warmongers rather than (like his dad did) voting for somebody who genuinely believes in non-aggression.

“I just can’t, you know, say I’m really enthusiastic about the ticket. But the Libertarian Party stands for the nonaggression principle, and that means that you and I cannot use aggression to get our way, and you can’t use the government to get your way by using force… And that principle is sound on the Libertarian Party, and the more votes they get, the more votes there will be for the nonaggression principle, and that’s as far as I go because I’m a just little bit frustrated with all the individuals running and the discussion going on.”

—Former Rep. Ron Paul, commenting on his support for the Libertarian Party in the 2016 presidential election. (Source)

Anyway, here are the top 10 issues that I had with Trump's foreign policy:

1. Murdering Iranian General Qassem Soleimani.

2. Supporting Saudi Arabia's indiscriminate mass murder in Yemen.

3. Mislabeling Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) as a "terrorist organization".

4. Failing to pull US troops out of Syria like he said he would.

5. Stealing Syrian oil.

6. Sending hundreds of millions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine.
(Which are now being used there to kill Russians.)

7. Needlessly antagonizing China.

8. Mislabeling Cuba as a "state sponsor of terrorism".

9. Overthrowing the democratically elected president of Bolivia.

10. Attempting to overthrow the democratically elected president of Venezuela.

Additionally, regarding Israel's ongoing bombing campaign in Gaza, Trump recently said that Israel should "finish the problem", and while I understand that many people (including many personal friends of mine) support Israel and their efforts to defeat Hamas militarily, I personally believe in a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

“Turn away from evil and do good; seek peace and pursue it.”

Psalms 34:14

[/Spoiler]

[Spoiler=3. Environmental Policy]

“I said if the independents who don’t know what to do and who should they pick, I say if you tend to lead progressivism and liberalism and you are interested in expressing yourself — you can vote for the Green Party…”

—Former Rep. Ron Paul (Source)

Being more of a Progressive Left-leaning Libertarian myself (see my Political Compass score in the image above), I'm very much inclined to take Dr. Paul's advice here, and one of the main areas where I've always had extremely progressive views is with regards to environmental policy.

Although I had intended to vote for him back in 2016 and 2020, I always knew that Trump's environmental policies would be absolutely appalling, and I was basically just comprising my own morals on a cause that I'm actually quite passionate about, in order to further 2 other causes (the right to life and a non-aggressive foreign policy) that I was equally passionate about, similar to what I'm doing with the right to life this time around by supporting Jill Stein.
(Only unlike last time, I'm at least voting for someone who's sincerely anti-war.)

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Green Party has a good environmental policy compared to that of Donald Trump, and while I'm all for a hands-off approach from the government in most areas, I personally believe that that approach is insufficient to protect Mother Earth from ecocidal corporate interests and the ever-present "humans first" mentality.

On that note, it is worth mentioning here that this issue is one of the primary reasons why I'm voting for the Green Party instead of for the Libertarian Party, and in order to help explain why, check out this excerpt from the Libertarian Party's 2022 platform:

2.2 Environment

---

Competitive free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Governments are unaccountable for damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights and responsibilities regarding resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Where damages can be proven and quantified in a court of law, restitution to the injured parties must be required.

I would agree with them insofar as that governments have a terrible track record when it comes to protecting the environment, but unfortunately "restitution" cannot be paid to animals that have been adversely impacted by human behavior, and while conservation groups could in theory press charges against individuals or corporations that are doing things that are harming wildlife but aren't harming humans (as is oftentimes the case), I personally believe that nonhuman animals and preborn children should be legally protected from being harmed, just like the rest of us are.
(And animals aren't merely a "resource" as far as I'm concerned, either.)

Contrast the Libertarian Party's stance on the environment with this, taken from the Green Party's "ten key values":

3. Ecological Wisdom

Human societies must function with the understanding that we are part of nature, not separate from nature. We must maintain an ecological balance and live within the ecological and resource limits of our communities and our planet. We support a sustainable society that utilizes resources in such a way that future generations will benefit and not suffer from the practices of our generation. To this end we must practice agriculture that replenishes the soil, move to an energy-efficient economy, and live in ways that respect the integrity of natural systems.

I've always believed that we humans need to live in harmony with nature, instead of always just trying to profit off of it or benefit from it in some way, and the Green Party seems to actually understand this, and while there are obviously a lot of things that I like about the Libertarian Party, their stance on the environment certainly isn't one of them.[/Spoiler]

[Spoiler=4. LGBTQIA+ Rights]

TBH, this issue wasn't even on my radar back in 2016 when I had first planned on voting for Donald Trump, and although I was just beginning to become aware of it around the time of the 2020 presidential election, it wasn't really a factor in my decision to support Trump then, either.
(I was more focused on the issues that I addressed in the previous 3 segments.)

Both the Green Party and the Libertarian Party have excellent stances on LGBTQIA+ rights, and this is also one of the few areas where I'd say that President Biden and the Democrats have done an excellent job as well (I've gotta give credit where credit is due), but unfortunately the Republican Party is terrible when it comes to LGBTQIA+ rights issues, and they only seem to be getting worse.

“In state legislatures across the country, bills have been proposed (and unfortunately in some cases, passed) that would regulate and criminalize the personal medical and life decisions of transgender individuals. Those who long have declared themselves champions of limited government and personal freedom are seeking to insert their own opinions into decisions that should be left to individuals and families.”

“In Arkansas where some bills have already become law after legislators overrode a veto, Governor Hutchinson expressed the same confusion so many share. “The Republican Party that I grew up with believed in a restrained government that did not jump in the middle of every issue.” Of course, anyone paying attention has recognized that neither old party is interested in a restrained response to any concern.”

Source

Regarding former President Trump specifically, he once said that he would "do everything in [his] power to protect our LGBTQ citizens", and he's even been criticized in the not-so distant past by "Ron DeSanctimonious" over this, but unfortunately Donald Trump has betrayed the LGBTQIA+ community, and he is now promoting genocide against trans people.

“Some [transgender and non-binary people] are even discussing fleeing the United States if Trump wins in 2024.”

“Here are the proposals outlined in Trump’s genocidal three and a half minute rant:

• Pass a bill that falsely claims there are only two genders, male and female

• Reverse legislation for life-saving gender affirming healthcare

• Ban all education of transgender and non-binary issues in schools nationwide

• Ban transitioning for youth nationwide

• Sign an executive order to end programs for gender transitioning for all ages nationwide

• Criminalize and hunt doctors and educators who try to save transgender and non-binary lives”

It may be hard for some people (especially Trump supporters who have LGBTQIA+ friends, like myself) to accept that Trump would ever actually do something like this, but Trump's trans rights record is far from perfect, and with genocidal nutjobs egging him on, it is entirely possible that something like this could actually happen.

I've already written about the importance of gender-affirming care for minors, and these transphobic measures proposed by Trump go well beyond just banning that. As a Christian, a pro-lifer, and a friend of countless LGBTQIA+ people here on Paint, I cannot condone this genocide, and it is this issue that ultimately made me unwilling to continue to support former President Trump like I have in the past.[/Spoiler]

[Spoiler=5. Conclusion]To say that people should vote for the "lesser of 2 evils" is essentially saying that it is OK to vote for evil, which it's not.

I understand that the next President of the United States is most likely going to be Joe Biden or Donald Trump, and that Jill Stein's chances of winning this upcoming election are incredibly low, but that is neither her fault nor mine, and to all those who would like to see somebody like Jill Stein in the White House but then don't actually vote for her, know that you only have yourselves to blame.
(Unless Donald Trump is actually right about the elections being rigged, lol!)

I may disagree with Jill Stein's stance on abortion, and I would even go as far as to say that abortion is evil, but Jill Stein (like many pro-choice people) is a genuinely good person, and she most certainly isn't "evil".

I wonder if the Republican candidate was Adolph Hitler and the Democratic candidate was Josef Stalin (which it sometimes seems like is the case) if people would still be saying to vote for the "lesser evil". How evil does a person have to be before we are unwilling to vote for them? Do they have to openly support genocide? Because if so, we're already there.

It's worth noting that there are other good 3rd party candidates running this year besides the Greens and the Libertarians (like Cornel West), and I strongly encourage y'all to check them out for yourselves before you decide who to vote for, but never vote for somebody that you don't think deserves to be president. If you do, you'll just wind up feeling guilty when they start some war or something and people are dying because of your decision to support evil instead of supporting good.

—Draconid Joashu, future Party of Life presidential candidate.

[/Spoiler]