SPUSA prez nominee Bill Stodden, part 2: Dear Leader, the Salvation Army, sneering

So, two months ago, I did a long piece on Socialist Party USA presidential nominee Bill Stodden and specific reasons why I wouldn't vote for him.

I partially, but not totally, lost one of the two big political ones, when I found out that an error by the Rapid City, South Dakota newspaper about him allegedly being against the Iraq War but supporting Vietnam, during a protest against the Iraq War, was incorrect. I have corrected that post.

But, I didn't totally lose it, as Stodden, who was already an SPUSA activist for years in 2008, voted for Dear Leader Obama for prez, apparently being suckered by his "no more dumb wars" statement, while not asking further about that, and ignoring that he was otherwise just another neoliberal. And, in extensive comments on that first post, Stodden has not only doubled down on his lack of repentance for that vote, but increased the defensiveness, and further undercut himself.

He said:

You did your “duopoly exit” in 2000. Good for you. I presume you never voted for one of the two major parties again after that. That sort of ideological purity is nice. You have certainty. You cup is already full then. Nothing more can be added. It is clear that you missed the point of the declaration that the wise man knows that he knows nothing. If you know everything already, there is nothing to learn. Fine. 

Obama in 2008 was the only vote for a major party candidate I ever cast, in my life. We can go through my voting record some other time, but I never did a “duopoly exit” because I never did a duopoly entrance. I voted for Obama because 1) I believed that he was sincere about being anti War. I was wrong. Sorry about that. I’m not the first person to be lied to by a politician. And 2) I believe that the election of a black dude would give the racists in this country heart palpitations. And about this, I was correct. His election was like lifting the rock on the facade of civility. I don’t give a damn what anyone says about this: dragging the racists and bigots out into the light is always a good thing. If that’s the ONLY positive thing his election did, I say it was worth it. Because while neither you nor I may like it much that one one or the other of the duopoly gets to win, that is still a fact. I’d rather it be the one that was elected. I voted that year for the one of those two that I thought would do the most good. I didn’t vote for him again in 2012. It was a principled vote and I even resigned from the SP to do it, because I also believe that you don’t get to call yourself a socialist if you are voting for Democrats.

Emphasis added.

To which, I responded:

2. Yes, I have never looked back, at the presidential level, from 2000 on, Bill. (That includes conscious undervoting of the presidential race, as I did in 2020.) I didn't trust Dear Leader on things besides the war. And, by your logic on voting for him, you should have voted for Biden in 2020, as all the BlueAnons screamed. Or, to twist deeper, you shouldn't be running yourself on the SPUSA line this year because "democracy is at stake." So, your sneer in the first paragraph of your second comment is indeed taken as a sneer, and a defensive one.

And, his further response, which I won't bother quoting, shows that he doesn't grasp his own illogic. If he accepts that one side or the other of the duopoly is going to win and he wants to be on the winning side, yeah, that's exactly what Blue Anons say today. EXACTLY. 

And, Stodden has a PhD in political science to boot. And still doesn't grasp, or accept, his own illogic. And, per lesser evilism, Trump 2024 is indeed a worse fear than McCain 2008.

The second issue hasn't gone away, but has in fact intensified due to more sneering on his part, that I'm not going to quote.

Yeah, Bill, the charitable division of Salvation Army may be administered differently from its congregational division, but? It's still part of the Salvation Army. Catholic Charities is still part of the Roman Catholic Church. I'm sure there's at least a Goodwill, on clothing and small appliances, or maybe even a non-affiliated thrift store. There's probably a regional food bank. That doesn't go to shelter, but there may be a homeless shelter that's not run by the Salvation Army, too.

I use all of those. 

Also, while I'm here, there's secular alternatives to 12-step sobriety. There's no in-person SMART Recovery in Ames, but there are four meetings in Des Moines, and both SMART and Lifering have online meetings, email groups, etc.

I'm not poor, but I'm not rich and I'm not even that high up the middle class food chain. And, as both an adult and a child, I have experience government-defined poverty before. My career path includes rejecting options that would have left me better-paid than today, too, Bill, just like, even if you weren't a Quaker in the 1990s, you could have opted not to volunteer for the Marines, unless you needed collegiate money that badly.

So, your sneers about using a little discretion in shopping? I am not going to engage further.

As for his family heritage? I was just adding "color" to the original piece. Sorry that that was incorrect, but as noted, I'm not a NYT investigative reporter who does only this for a living, and it meant nothing one way or the other to the core of the piece, and I said words to the effect of "could be," anyway. On the protest and the Rapid City paper? Not my fault, as noted at the time.

To sum up, even if we didn't have the possible (if he's on the ballot here) option of Cornel West instead of likely two-com-three time GP retread Jill Stein, I still wouldn't vote for you if you're on the Tex-ass ballot. Everything associated with your Obama vote and your defensiveness is laughable. Although I'm not a Marxist, if West isn't on the ballot, but PSL is, I'll vote their candidate over either you or Stein.