Press "Enter" to skip to content

2020 Green Party primary candidates and speculation

Ever since it’s creation, the Green Party has been known for nominating candidates like consumer advocate Ralph Nader in 1996 & 2000, political activist David Cobb in 2004, former representative Cynthia McKinney in 2008, and physician Jill Stein in 2012 & 2016. It’s also been involved in a heap of controversy due to Nader and Stein being attributed to the loss of the Democratic Candidates in each of their latter races via the debated spoiler effect. Now that the 2020 Presidential Election is on the horizon, and speculation being high for both major parties, I felt it was appropriate to go over the confirmed and highly speculated candidates for the Green Party nomination, minus satirical candidates like Kanye “Deez Nutz” West and two Marvel superheroes secret identities.

The first major Green Party candidate to announce their candidacy was Sedinam Kinamo Christin Moyowasifza-Curry. Sedinam was notable for co-founding the Green Party Black Caucus, organizing for a political party in Ghana called the People’s National Convention, and running for the Green Party nomination for President in 2016. While Sedinam’s candidacy was not officially recognized by the Green Party since she failed to file with the Federal Elections Commission, she was invited to a Green Party Debate on RT. While her candidacy has not had the traditional campaign announcement, only saying that she’s a 2020 candidate in social media bios, much similar to her very grassroots candidacy in 2016, her platform will resonate well with Greens and any disgruntled Democrats that may arise.

The next major candidate is James Ogle. Ogle is known for running in the 1993 California District 17 Special Election as an independent, running for the California Green Party Gubernatorial nomination in 1994, running for the Libertarian Party nomination in 2012, and “running” for president in 2014. But the most memorable thing he has done is starting the fantasy organization US Parliament. His platform appears to be a mix of Libertarian Party and Green Party ideals, such as his website saying “We support the Libertarian Party’s philosophy of the non initiation of force, smaller government, increased liberty.”

Another major Green candidate is Gary Swing. Swing has been a candidate for political office sixteen times, eleven of those times was with the Green Party. The most notable of those runs was when Swing ran for Arizona’s Senate race in 2016 getting 5.48% of the vote. One of those times was him getting 30 votes in the 2012 Primary for President. While Swing is more willing to make fun of himself, with him being a member of the “Boiling Frog Party”, his overall platform is nothing out of the ordinary for the Green Party.

The last major candidate to announce their candidacy so far is Ian Schlakman. Schlakman was an entrepreneur, former co-chair of the Maryland Green Party who ran in the Maryland Gubernatorial Race in 2018 against Republican Larry Hogan, Democrat Ben Jealous, and Libertarian Shawn Quinn. While Schlakman was overshadowed by the Ben Jealous campaign, his jump from a losing a smaller race to running for president is comparable to the dark horse candidacy of Democrat Richard Ojeda, or a potential Beto O’Rourke candidacy.

Much like a possible O’Rourke candidacy, there has also been speculation on potential Green Party Candidates. The most obvious one being two time Presidential Candidate Jill Stein, who has expressed interest in someone else taking up the mantle. Four time presidential candidate Kent Mesplay is expected to run again due to his status as a perennial candidate. Although other speculated candidates like Ralph Nader and Congressman Ro Khanna are a bit more wishful thinking above anything else. But an unexpected speculative candidate has arisen in former Governor of Minnesota, Jesse “the Body” Ventura.

Ventura who has made a career outside of wrestling in the field of politics as a staunch advocate for Third Parties, being the only major elected official representing the Reform Party. While Ventura has been outspoken in regards to his Centrist and Libertarian views, Ventura has has helped progressive candidates from voting for Ralph Nader in 2008, endorsing Dennis Kucinich for Governor in 2018, and even voting for Jill Stein in 2016 over Libertarian Candidate Gary Johnson. He explained his reasoning due to her stances on the War on Drugs, Climate Change, and ending the Middle Eastern Wars. Ventura even stated on the Jimmy Dore Show that he was invited to the 2018 Annual meeting and would be interested in running for the Green Party. He reiterated in a TMZ interview that the Green Party was pressuring him for a presidential run.

Though each of these candidates has potential, they will not be payed much mind outside Third Party circles until their primary is over, and even when they do only the front runner gets attention, much like the 2016 Election when Jill Stein got attention even though her primary had not yet ended. Though they may be featured on another RT Debate. But it is still too early to make accurate predictions as of this moment as there has not been a poll to show any possible Greens chances while Libertarians do. Mostly due to more independent Libertarian News Sources, than ones affiliated with the Green Party. But we’ll see what happens.

About Post Author

E Pluribus Unum

The host of the Socialist YouTube Channel E Pluribus Unum, which has the main focus of educating people on Minor Parties, their history, and their candidates alongside the latest political news of the day.


  1. Gary Swing Gary Swing July 22, 2019

    I was on the ballot seven times as a Green Party candidate between 1996 and 2018. In August 2017, I was elected as a state co-chair of the Green Party of Colorado. I no longer support the Green Party.

    Here is account of what happened to the Green Party of Colorado and how it now extends to Howie Hawkins’ presidential campaign. I strongly urge anyone who remains associated with the Green Party of the United States to oppose Howie Hawkins’ bid for the Green Party’s presidential nomination. His choice of campaign staff demonstrates that he has chosen to embrace authoritarianism and corruption.

    I grant permission to share this commentary.

    Howie Hawkins is one of at least seven recognized candidates seeking the Green Party’s 2020 presidential nomination. Howie Hawkins’ campaign manager is Andrea Merida Cuellar, who transformed the Green Party of Colorado into a totalitarian hate group. Andrea Merida Cuellar orchestrated a series of kangaroo court witch trials (most of them on a closed, heavily censored internet forum) to expel fifteen long-time Green Party organizers, activists, and candidates from the party. Most of these Green Party members were expelled for signing a formal complaint about corrupt, authoritarian leadership of Colorado’s Green Party.

    Merida’s term as a national Green Party Co-Chair ends on July 28 due to term limits. She is also a state co-chair of the Green Party of Colorado and a co-chair of the Denver Green Party.

    Kevin Zeese is Howie Hawkins’ campaign media spokesperson and the husband or partner of Green Party National Co-Chair Margaret Flowers. Zeese is the author of libelous propaganda published by Counterpunch. He falsely accused Colorado Green Party members who filed the “Caucus to Restore Green Values” complaint of being white supremacists.

    The original Caucus to Restore Green Values complaint and some supporting materials may be seen at

    Sixteen months after this complaint was submitted to the Green Party’s national Accreditation Committee, a subcommittee consisting of all members who were on the committee at the time the complaint was filed ruled in favor of the plaintiffs. However, in the meantime, Andrea and her supporters had packed the committee with their allies, increasing the number of committee members from 8 to 49, thereby obstructing action to redress the grievances of Colorado Green Party members. The subcommittee report stated:

    “The GPCO/Respondents dealt with the RGV complaint by revoking the rights of participation of RGV-associated GPCO members, stating that the reason for the revocations was because they filed a grievance. This is a violation of the key value of grassroots democracy. In a democracy, many ideas and stances are entertained and considered. The substance of the complaint is immaterial to this concern. We use 10 key values to guide our work. These values may inform our platform, but they do not completely eliminate differences. The value of respecting diversity refers to respecting a diversity of ethnic and class backgrounds and experiences, as well as the ideas associated with these experiences. The members who were ousted from participation in the GPCO were recognized GP candidates, they had served the party in leadership roles, and one was voted state party co-chair by fellow members. The revocations were clearly personal attacks in retaliation to their raising the points of concern regarding bylaws violations and exclusionary practices.”

    “Escalation of actions by GPCO/Respondents have resulted in alienation of a significant group of experienced and active members, exclusion of members from state meetings, abusive control of access to the state website discussion boards, concentration of state offices in a small group, manipulation of locals allowed to vote, violation of the letter and spirit of state bylaws, silencing and purging of members, and refusal to participate in conflict resolution in good faith. The manner and scale are unprecedented in the history of the GPUS, and will result in further difficulties and embarrassment for the national party.”

    I wrote the following letter to Margaret Flowers after she was elected as a National Co-Chair of the Green Party of the United States. She wrote back to me only to say that she would not read my letter.

    Dear Dr. Flowers,

    I read your statement titled “Unity and Principled Disagreement in the Green Party.” In that statement, you wrote some things that would be excellent and positive if you sincerely meant what you said. However, considering your association with Andrea Merida Cuellar and Kevin Zeese, I do not believe that there was an ounce of sincerity in your statement.

    Words have meaning. I can’t speak with personal knowledge about whatever conflicts have been going on within the national Green Party. However, from the perspective of a Green from Colorado, I see that your commentary states or implies perspectives that are diametrically opposed to the truth.

    You wrote: “While some would degenerate into accusations of factionalism and calling some Greens “the opposition,” these differences in opinion are normal. We can disagree with each other, even publicly. However, what is not healthy is name calling, finger pointing and other immature behaviors. I hope we can strive for principled and constructive discussions rather than tearing each other down. Let’s model the world we are striving to create.”

    However, you have chosen to align yourself with a group of people who have orchestrated a hostile takeover of the Green Party of Colorado’s State Council. These people have operated through bullying, intimidation, character assassination, hate speech, authoritarianism, and corruption to transform the Green Party of Colorado’s organizational structure into a totalitarian hate group that systematically suppresses any dissent through censorship, libel, slander, rigged elections, systematic organizational restructuring, restriction of voting rights, and purges of Green Party members who dare to express differences of opinion.

    Your partner, Kevin Zeese, published a false and defamatory commentary in Counterpunch in which he brazenly committed libel against unidentified members of the Green Party of Colorado, accusing these unidentified people of being “white supremacists” with zero evidence. This story presented a bizarre and totally unfounded false narrative, accusing these unnamed members of the Green Party of Colorado of conspiring with David Cobb and Jill Stein against Andrea Merida Cuellar because they didn’t want to have a woman of color in a position of strong leadership. Kevin Zeese’s libelous commentary asserted that this alleged conspiracy was motivated by a backlash against Andrea Merida Cuellar’s efforts to block the use of the GPUS as a conduit for funding Jill Stein’s proposed presidential election recount.

    It was obvious from reading Kevin Zeese’s article, that he did not bother to speak to any of the unidentified Green Party of Colorado members whom he libelously branded as “white supremacists” to ask for their perspective about the internal conflict within the state Green Party.

    The conflict within the Green Party of Colorado existed long before the presidential recount effort. It had nothing whatsoever to do with the recount, with Jill Stein, or with David Cobb. Nor did the conflict have anything to do with race — at least not on the part of the unidentified people that Kevin Zeese libelously branded as “white supremacists.”

    The conflict within the Green Party of Colorado developed due to the failure of certain Green Party members to treat each other with respect, a failure to discuss disagreements in a civil manner, a failure to follow a grassroots democracy process of consensus building. This conflict grew out of a disagreement concerning a proposed state ballot initiative, Amendment 69, which would have instituted a universal health care system for Colorado, based upon a single-payer model.

    Green Party of Colorado State Co-Chair Andrea Merida opposed Amendment 69. I don’t know why she took this position. Other Greens wanted the Green Party of Colorado to endorse this initiative. Advocates for this position included Bill Bartlett (the other GPOC state co-chair who had been Andrea’s running mate), Harry Hempy (the GPOC nominee for Governor in 2014, who had run for state-chair in 2015 in opposition to Andrea and Bill), and Arn Menconi (the GPOC nominee for US Senator in 2016). Rather than debate the merits of Amendment 69, Andrea Merida and her supporters chose to engage in vicious character assassination against Bill, Harry, and Arn. Andrea habitually attacks white people who disagree with her by accusing them of being white supremacists.

    Just over a year ago, several members of the Green Party of Colorado filed a 373-page complaint against Andrea Merida Cuellar and her supporters with the GPUS National Steering Committee and the GPUS National Accreditation Committee. This complaint expressed deep concerns about the conduct of the Green Party of Colorado State Council, including a long-standing pattern of authoritarianism, insults, character assassination, and systematic breakdown of the consensus building process that had previously been used by the state party. See for details, documentation, and some updates.

    Two of the people who were involved in compiling, filing, and representing this complaint were Harry Hempy and Judy Harrington, who was the co-chair of the Larimer County Green Party. Harry Hempy and Judy Harrington’s rights to participate in the activities of the Green Party of Colorado were revoked without due process, in violation of state party bylaws because they filed this complaint. A state party meeting to elect party officers was scheduled by an illegitimate process, in violation of state bylaws. Eight party offices were up for election, but only six of the eight offices up for election were included in announcements for the meeting. Andrea Merida Cuellar ran both for re-election as state co-chair and for one of the unannounced seats for alternate to the GPUS. The “Caucus to Restore Green Values” put up a slate of reform candidates for the six announced offices that were up for election. I agreed to be part of this slate as one of our candidates for state co-chair.

    The GPUS National Accreditation Committee made several recommendations to reform the Green Party of Colorado. Andrea’s faction, which was controlling the organizational structure of the state party, violated every one of their recommendations. They suppressed candidate nominations, withheld information about the election of party officers, refused to allow independent observation or monitoring, and restricted voting rights. Andrea’s husband, Jason Justice, sent out an announcement to friends in an effort to recruit temporary “Greens” and pack the meeting with them, libelously claiming that a group of white supremacist men was trying to oust Andrea because she was a woman of color. There was absolutely no truth to that claim. Andrea was initially welcomed into leadership within the state Green Party with open arms. However, Andrea and Jason chose to make enemies out of people who should have been their friends and allies, through a long-standing pattern of insults and abuse.

    The Caucus to Restore Green Values proposed eleven changes to the bylaws of the Green Party of Colorado to reform the party’s internal process and to restore voting rights that had been revoked from Harry Hempy, Judy Harrington, and the Jefferson and Weld County chapters of the Green Party. I proposed that the GPOC adopt the positively worded anti-oppression statement of the Friends of the Earth rather than the derogatory and insulting language that Andrea’s faction called an “anti-oppression” statement. The controlling faction refused to discuss alternative anti-oppression language or to discuss any of our proposed bylaws changes. They refused to discuss overturning the illegitimate expulsion of Judy Harrington. They viciously crucified Harry Hempy, refusing to overturn his illegitimate expulsion from the state Green Party. The Jefferson County chapter was reinstated. The proposal to reinstate the Weld County chapter was dropped due to lack of participation.

    Two members of our slate were elected as party officers. I was elected as a state co-chair. (I had agreed to run to take a stand against hatred, corruption, and authoritarianism, with the understanding that there was no possibility of winning this rigged election.) Susan Hall was elected as a national delegate. Immediately after the election, Andrea tried to bully and intimidate me into getting the Caucus to Restore Green Values to withdraw its complaint against her. I told her I had no authority to do that. Andrea sent me abusive and insulting emails. She tried to blackmail me into getting the Caucus to Restore Green Values to withdraw its complaint against her. I blocked her on Facebook and on my email accounts. Andrea and I never saw each other again or spoke to each other again after we were elected to serve as state party co-chairs together. I was blocked from posting or commenting on the official Green Party of Colorado state website or Facebook page before, during, and after the time that I was supposedly a state co-chair — an office that I held in name only (if that). It was obvious to me that Andrea’s faction would never allow me to function in the role of state co-chair.

    I resigned three months after I was elected as state party co-chair, concluding that the Green Party of Colorado had become a totalitarian, extremist hate group and a lost cause. Andrea’s faction changed the party’s bylaws to bind Susan Hall’s vote to their will. If Susan didn’t vote the way she was ordered to vote, she would be removed from office and Andrea would automatically assume her office as a national delegate. Susan bravely carried on until she was eventually expelled from the right to participate in the state party by the rogue state council.

    Over the past year, the GPUS national steering committee and national accreditation committee have continued to drag their feet in dealing with the complaint against the Green Party of Colorado. In the meantime, the hate group faction that has taken absolute control over the Green Party of Colorado has consolidated its power. They have carried out a series of purges to expel fifteen people and three local chapters from the right to participate in the state party. The people who have been expelled from the state party include candidates who were nominated by the state party for statewide and federal offices in the past three general elections, long time organizers of local chapters, and dedicated Green Party campaign volunteers. The chapter representing Jefferson County — Colorado’s [second] most populous county — has been “deactivated.” The Greater Boulder Green Party — which had established itself as a “sanctuary chapter” open to Greens from all over the state who felt unwelcome in their local chapters — was “deactivated.” So was the Douglas County chapter.

    The 2018 state nominating convention of the Green Party of Colorado was held in Boulder County without the involvement or participation of the Greater Boulder Green Party, and without notifying or inviting the Boulder or Jefferson County chapters. The elected representatives of the Boulder and Jefferson County chapters had already been illegitimately expelled from the right to participate in the Green Party of Colorado without cause and without due process by the rogue “State Council.”

    The Green Party of Colorado has had automatic ballot status since 1998, with the ability to nominate candidates by party assembly for all county, state, and federal offices. The Green Party of Colorado has nominated candidates in every election since 1994. However, 2018 is the first time that the state party has failed to nominate any candidates for statewide or federal offices. The only “Green Party” candidate nominated to the 2018 ballot in Colorado is Cliff Willmeng, who was nominated for Boulder County Commissioner — without seeking the endorsement or support of the Boulder Greens.

    Seven “Green Values Coalition” candidates have filed as write-ins for Congress in 2018, one for each of the state’s Congressional Districts. Six of us have qualified. (One missed the filing deadline.)

    Voting rights have been restricted so that only dues-paying members may vote on Green Party candidate nominations, officers, or bylaws. More than 99 percent of registered Green Party members have been systematically excluded from voting rights, making the Green Party the most blatantly authoritarian and corrupt political party in Colorado.

    This is what you have chosen to embrace, Dr. Flowers. You wrote that “we are all Greens.” No. That is not true. Words have meaning, even if the words you choose express falsehoods. The Green Party was founded upon a set of values. These values include nonviolence, social justice, and respect for diversity. The people who have taken absolute control over the Green Party of Colorado’s organizational structure are diametrically opposed to these values. They are not Greens.

    We have the interest to build a Green Party in Colorado, if we could move beyond the hatred of those who want to set the Green Party on fire and burn it to the ground.


    Gary Swing

    ADDENDUM: This statement from Harry Hempy, the 2014 Green Party of Colorado nominee for Governor explains the conflict within Colorado’s Green Party concerning a citizen initiative for universal health care:


    This is an accurate account of actions taken by Andrea Merida to suppress discussion of ColoradoCare or endorsement of ColoradoCare by the Green Party of Colorado 2015 and 2016, leading up to the recall of Bill Bartlett. -Harry Hempy

    I’ve known Andrea Merida to be corrupt in her dealings with the Green Party since July 2015.

    At that time Andrea was a cochair in the Denver Green Party and editor of the Denver chapter’s monthly newsletter. I was a cochair in the Boulder Green Party and a subscriber to the Denver newsletter.

    The Boulder chapter had been working to get a citizens initiative for universal health care financing on the ballot in Colorado. The Boulder chapter collected more than 1000 petition signatures. ColoradoCare, also known as Amendment 69 and Initiative 20, did make the ballot in the 2016 general election.

    The July 2015 issue of the Denver newsletter reported on a discussion of Initiative 20 (ColoradoCare), held at the Denver Green Party meeting on June 17, 2015. The article concluded with the statement, “Andrea Merida is writing a proposal for a formal vote for both this chapter and the state party, with a recommendation for a NO vote. All voting members will have the chance to discuss and vote.”

    I was shocked by this announcement. How could Greens be against a publicly funded health care payment system for all Colorado residents (citizen or not)? The newsletter article shows that no one in the discussion had read the text of the initiative. The discussion and the newsletter article misrepresented ColoradoCare in several ways, most importantly by stating that workers would pay a larger share of health premium payroll taxes than their employer. This was a huge mistake. In fact, under ColoradoCare the employer would pay 2/3 of the tax and the employee would pay 1/3.

    I responded to the newsletter editor with correct information about the ColoradoCare initiative and asked for a correction to be posted in the next newsletter. The editor turned out to be Andrea Merida and she flatly refused to correct the article or tell her chapter that their discussion of ColoradoCare and their decision to oppose it had been based on misinformation. This was corrupt.

    So I attempted to post accurate information about ColoradoCare on the Denver chapter’s FB page. This is what I posted on July 15, 2015:

    “Initiative 20 would establish a people’s cooperative named ColoradoCare to provide comprehensive, universal health care coverage in Colorado.

    Main features:

    • Comprehensive health care financing for ALL Colorado residents (not just US citizens).
    • Eliminates the need for private health insurance; puts people’s health before corporate profits.
    • Saves Coloradans $5B per year in health care costs.
    • The tax structure is progressive, because unearned income is taxed.
    • A 15-member interim board, appointed by the 2 CO House leaders, 2 CO Senate leaders and the governor, will define a non-partisan election system, not subject to CO election statutes, for an elected ColoradoCare Board of Trustees.”

    Andrea immediately deleted this post and wrote an email letter to me and Denver Green Party Cochair Laura Clark, dated July 16, 2015 1:07 AM.

    The letter threatened to ban me from the Denver chapter’s FB page if I ever attempted to make another pro-Initiative 20 comment. The final paragraph of her email reads, “I am taken aback by your repeated disregard for the collaborative nature in which I have always interacted with you. Please respect my wishes and stay in your lane.”

    I call BS. When Andrea refused to correct the Denver newsletter article about Initiative 20, she wasn’t being collaborative. When she used her FB admin authority to shut down honest discussion of a universal health care initiative on Green Party social media, she wasn’t being collaborative.
    She was being corrupt.

    Andrea Merida was elected state cochair in August 2015, together with Bill Bartlett. Andrea used her state party positions to quash discussion of ColoradoCare (amendment 69 in the 2016 general election). Andrea coerced me not to submit a proposal to endorse ColoradoCare at the 2015 annual meeting. And she coerced Bob Kinsey not to submit a proposal to endorse ColoradoCare at the 2016 annual meeting. Andrea fought Arn Menconi tooth and nail over endorsing ColoradoCare when Arn was the GP candidate for U.S. Senator from Colorado. Bill Bartlett and Susan Hall did, finally, submit a proposal on Aug. 31, 2016 to state Council to endorse ColoradoCare, without consulting Andrea.

    Andrea retaliated with a proposal on Sep. 22, 2016 to recall Bill Bartlett as state cochair.

    The most heinous thing about the proposal to recall Bill was the deception as to its motivation. Andrea could have simply said she wanted Bill out because he disrespected her wishes and got out of line by submitting a proposal he knew she did not support. That would have been honest.

    Instead, the proposal to recall Bill cited insensitive social media activity by Bill and a story told by Andrea’s husband, Jason Justice, in which he claims Bill had an intent to physically assault Andrea. To the best of my knowledge Andrea has never confirmed Jason’s story, but she did stand by and let her husband, her state secretary Sean Friend, and her future state cochair Dave Bell drag Bill’s reputation through the mud in discussion of the proposal on the state party Forum. Disgusting and corrupt.

    A toxic atmosphere quickly developed in the Green Party of Colorado, leading to the complaint filed with the national party by the Restore Green Values group on June 14, 2017 and the subsequent purge by state Council of at least 15 Colorado greens from the party who have publicly expressed support of the complaint. Assigning guilt by association is corrupt.



    Six other candidates seeking the Green Party’s 2020 presidential nomination have complained about preferential treatment granted to the Hawkins campaign. No association or endorsement is implied by sharing this information. See their joint statement here:

    A previous statement was signed by five Green Party presidential candidates, calling for equal access to the nomination process:—————————

    This commentary by Green Party presidential candidate Ian Schlakman addresses the role of Andrea Merida Cuellar and Kevin Zeese in Howie Hawkins’ presidential campaign: “Hawkins Team Sends Letter Demanding I Let Hawkins Have An Unfair Advantage:”

    Andrea Merida now concurrently occupies seats as Co-Chair of the Denver Green Party; Co-Chair of the Green Party of Colorado; Co-Chair of the Green Party of the United States; and as an alternate to the Green Party of the United States. Once she purges Susan Hall as a state Green Party delegate to the national party, Andrea will automatically assume the seat that Susan currently holds, as well.

    Andrea Merida was elected to a single term as a Denver school board member, which was rather newsworthy.

    Andrea Merida’s Classroon Behavior Has Earned Her a Seat Apart On the Denver School Board:

    Andrea Merida’s Political Posturing:

    DPS School Board Member Andrea Merida on Romanoff Payroll: needed-who-else#sthash.SqA2UsCH.dpbs

    Andrea Merida Recall:,_Denver_Public_Schools,_Colorado_(2010)

    Is the DPS School Board’s Andrea Merida an Embarrassment or a Hero?:

    Teacher union supporter Merida pulls out of Denver school board race:

    Controversial DPS board member Merida blogs her secret swearing-in:

    DPS board member Merida on Romanoff campaign’s payroll:

    What Andrea Merida was misspending-our-tax-money:

    Attempt to Recall Andrea Merida Fails:

    Andrea Merida’s expenses show fuzzy DPS policies:

    I wrote this account of my history with the Green Party after I ended my affiliation with the Greens. “It’s Not Easy Being Green” — Gary Swing, November 20, 2018:

  2. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | June 17, 2019

    Gonna probably make an update article.

  3. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | June 17, 2019

    Probably gonna do an update with more some of the newer candidates.

  4. paulie paulie April 8, 2019

    Libertarians don’t have viable solutions to the problems of imperialism and climate change

    Yes, we do. In fact, no one else does.

    (Reagan era) ideology

    False. Our ideology has been around for millenia (Lao Tzu, for example) and Reagan was worse from a libertarian peace, civil liberties and economic freedom perspective than most presidents, including most recent Democrats. See Ivan Eland’s Recarving Mt. Rushmore for a comparison of US presidents from a libertarian perspective.

    predominately North American whites

    So are most Greens based on what I saw at GP conventions and meetings. However, surveys of issue stances show that libertarian views are no less prevalent among African-Americans and Latinos than among whites – if anything, more so.

    How can Libertarians condemn empire yet idealize an economic system and economic conditions founded upon imperial exploitation and domination?

    Your premise is false. We idealize no such thing.

    To paraphrase Orwell, socialism is the logical conclusion for those of us who desire liberty and justice to win out over ignorance and barbarism.

    It depends on what you mean by socialism, but if you mean government ownership or control or any monopoly through force Orwell was wrong about this.

    Howie Hawkins would be a fine Green Party candidate and would carry on the tradition of respectable articulate people campaigning under that banner.

    Agreed, as I stated elsewhere.

  5. anon anon April 8, 2019

    Libertarians don’t have viable solutions to the problems of imperialism and climate change, in part because their (Reagan era) ideology idealizes the broader system driving those problems, and in part because they are predominately North American whites who economically benefit from imperialism and the totalitarian abuses necessary to carry it out. How can Libertarians condemn empire yet idealize an economic system and economic conditions founded upon imperial exploitation and domination?

    If we want liberty and justice, then it’s necessary to associate and organize to achieve and defend it. Vigilance is the price of sustainable justice and liberty. To paraphrase Orwell, socialism is the logical conclusion for those of us who desire liberty and justice to win out over ignorance and barbarism.

    Young people today have too many resources at their fingertips to fall for the boomer propaganda on the MSM. More and more they chat with Europeans on social media and learn about alternative political systems. This makes them less susceptible to constitution fetishism and other ruling class tricks.

    Howie Hawkins would be a fine Green Party candidate and would carry on the tradition of respectable articulate people campaigning under that banner.

    I’m curious what the dirt on Gary Swing is—I heard some negative rumors about him but am unsure if there’s anything to them.

  6. paulie paulie March 6, 2019

    Hawkins seems like he would be a pretty good candidate for them.

  7. paulie paulie January 16, 2019

    Well, I didn’t know that. Now two of my articles are out of date.

    Happens often. A lot of times I find out things I did not know by posting articles here.

  8. Eugene Patilio Eugene Patilio January 15, 2019

    Jennifer Walters was the first candidate to file for the Green Party’s presidential nomination for 2020. She is the only presidential candidate who lifts cars to help turtles cross the road!

    I feel deeply honored that Ms. Walters agreed to accept me as her vice presidential running mate for the 2020 election, after her top eighty choices turned her down. I look forward to a Marvel-us campaign!

    Jennifer Walters is a high-powered attorney at the prestigious New York City law firm of Goodman, Lieber, Kurtzberg & Holliway. She has saved the world on numerous occasions, negotiated interplanetary treaties, and secured political asylum for a high profile political refugee from the repressive dictatorship of Latveria. She has been an outspoken advocate for the civil rights of aliens, mutants, and androids.

    Jennifer Walters and I oppose realist discrimination against imaginary people. Did you know that in the history of this dimension on Earth, every person who has held office as either President or Vice President has been a real person? As difficult it may be to believe that American political leaders are for real, none of them have been imaginary people!

    Check out our campaign pages…

    Jennifer Walters for President:

    Eugene Patilio for Vice President:


    Eugene Patilio
    Walters/Patilio 2020

  9. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | January 14, 2019

    Well, I didn’t know that. Now two of my articles are out of date.

  10. Gary Swing Gary Swing January 14, 2019

    Thanks for the mention in your article. However, I withdrew my filing for the Green Party’s presidential nomination. I am no longer a member of the Green Party.

  11. paulie paulie January 3, 2019

    Sounds like a very modest proposal.

  12. Peter White Peter White January 3, 2019

    I have a plan that I hope libertarians and greens can unite around. First of all we need to respect biodiversity, including human biodiversity. We need radical decentralization, eliminating most of the bureaucracy of the state. Neofeudalism and neotribalism would bring things back to a more human scale. We should voluntarily forego the technology developed in the last 2000 years, thus guaranteeing full employment and vastly reducing pollution and carbon use.

    Before we get rid of modern transportation technology we should repatriate everyone to their ancestral homelands of 2000 years ago: whites to Europe, blacks to Africa, east Asians to the far east, middle easterners to the middle east, and so on. Australia and the Americas should be given to their natives.

    Abrahamic religions should be thrown on the dustbin of history, with those following Christianity and Islam chucking those to embrace their ancestral pagan faiths. Without antibiotics and other technology to prop them up, 90% or so of humans would die, reducing human population to sustainable levels. Only the strongest would survive, allowing natural selection to pick the best of the best to carry on the species.

    Family, extended family, and community would be strengthened. People would have a much more direct, immediate and persistent connection with nature. We would stop killing off so many other species, and they would be allowed to replenish and thrive. Giant government bureaucracies, soulless cubicle employment for megacorporations, faceplanting into little screens, global wars with weapons of mass destruction, reserve armies of the unemployed and homeless…many evils would be banished and all but forgotten. Usurious banksters, rapacious and debased media moguls, and many other such parasites would no longer run our lives. We would breathe fresh air, eat organic natural foods…what could be better?

    Instead of hundreds of millions of lemmings picking leaders financed by global capital to expertly sell lies and keep viewers tuned in to commercials for useless junk to clutter their unnatural dwellings so they can spend many hours a day away from their families to afford this garbage, leadership would be natural and from among people you know, families would work and play together, entertainment would be live and in person by people you know personally, homes would be built by their dwellers and their friends and neighbors of natural and functional locally sourced organic materials.

    Sure some sacrifices would have to be made, literally as well as metaphorically, but it would be well worth it. Who can honestly not agree? Search your soul and you will know this is true in your heart. Vow to your ancestors to help make it reality.

  13. Gina Gina January 2, 2019

    Rothbard isn’t a good indicator of anything, he took his unique brand of venomous hate-filled cultism from supporting Strom Thurmond early on in life and David Duke and Pat Buchanan at the end, to a brief alliance with Marxists during the Vietnam war era, to his contentious stint in the LP which along with his falling out with the Cato/Koch crowd created lasting division and contention in the larger libertarian movement, to his attempts to create a libertarian movement in the Republican Party.

    You might say he was all over the place politically but one thing remained constant with him, he spewed poison and discord everywhere he went and all his alliances ended badly for all involved. The only one that has lived on in an unhealthy undead existence has been his paleo strategy of extreme right wing populism, frozen to perpetually haunt the living because crazy old Uncle Murray expired, twisting over time more deeply in its stew of hatred to morph into the alt right and Libertarians for Trump and tainting libertarianism along the way with a bunch of bigoted newsletters.

    His aggressive and failed incursion into a socialist antiwar movement half a century ago shouldn’t permanently dynamite all attempts to build bridges between libertarianism and the left, IMO. I think it had more to do with him and his style, as well as the dogmatism of tiny Marxist cult mini-sects, than the larger substance Long alludes to.

  14. Jared Jared January 2, 2019

    I would love to see more dialogue between Greens and Libertarians with respect to environmental concerns and how best to address them. Years ago I stumbled upon this 1992 essay by geolibertarian activist Dan Sullivan, former chair of the Pittsburgh LP. I believe it still has relevance today.

    Greens and Libertarians: The Yin and Yang of Our Political Future

  15. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | January 2, 2019

    Libertarians already tried to take over a Left-Wing Party. Was when Murray Rothbard tried to take over the Peace and Freedom Party in 1968.

    And it didn’t work that well

  16. Michael Chastain Michael Chastain January 2, 2019

    I’m more interested in local elected officials such as Gayle McLaughlin and Scott Donahue than in the top of the ticket.

  17. paulie paulie January 1, 2019

    You are probably correct. I don’t expect to take over the Green Party. But I hope to see more Greens consider this approach so I’ll keep sharing and discussing the article when and where I can.

  18. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton January 1, 2019


    I read the Long article. I agree with him that the 10 green key values are compatible with libertarianism because those noble ends may be achieved by libertarian means.

    However, most greens won’t like the libertarian means and will seek socialist / totalitarian means — even though those means are in fact unworkable and / or counter-productive, and thus will not actually achieve their stated ends. Further, I get the impression that many (perhaps most) greens don’t actually subscribe to the 10 green key values and prefer socialism / totalitarianism even if they knew for a fact it would not lead in the direction of the 10 green key values ends.

    Still, it provides good discussion points for reaching out to the few greens who may be willing to reject socialism / totalitarianism.

  19. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 31, 2018

    I don’t know much about Ruwart aside from her multiple runs for office, and the fact she’s a doctor/writer

  20. Gina Gina December 31, 2018

    Mary Ruwart was referenced above. She has some good ideas on how libertarians address climate change. Free market environmentalism is a lot more likely to achieve its goals than a green new deal. Big governments have been a disaster for the environment, both directly and by distorting the market to benefit and shield polluters.

  21. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 31, 2018

    I have read it, maybe I missed what you’re trying to say. I understand some libertarian mentalities in regards to this, but some things the article failed to address, for example how would Libertarians address Climate Change, I assume Free Market Environmentalism which may not go well with The Green New Deal. Especially since the writer is a self described Agnostic on Climate Change.

  22. paulie paulie December 31, 2018

    The article isn’t about polls. It’s about what would actually be a better way to achieve the goals Greens seek to achieve. Unfortunately, the means most Greens choose have unintended consequences which actually are counterproductive to achieving those goals. But you’d have to actually read the whole article to see what I mean, as well as possibly some things such as Mary Ruwart’s “Healing Our World.”

  23. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 31, 2018

    Well they maybe not the only way, but polling wise it’s a popular way to do it. I’m not as well versed as others to talk about the particulars of any economic theory, except for the positives of Social Democracy.

  24. paulie paulie December 31, 2018

    The whole point was that based on the core principles/goals of Greens, progressive economics/social democratic mixed economy/eco-socialism is not the only way to achieve those, indeed that libertarian means can be entirely compatible with green goals. I’d be interested in a detailed critique of the particulars if you or anyone has one.

  25. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 31, 2018

    Well, its not explicitly something that Roderick says, it’s more based on Libertarians, especially American adhering to Austrian Economics, which do not bode well with Greens economic views ranging from a Social Democratic mixed economy to Eco-Socialism. And even Left-Libertarian ideas like Libertarian Socialism are seen as radical, even though they want a lot of the same goals as American Libertarians.

  26. paulie paulie December 31, 2018

    In what ways don’t they mesh? I don’t see where Roderick specifically makes any errors logically or posits anything that couldn’t work.

  27. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 31, 2018

    While I agree with the idea of a Libertarian/Progressive alliance, the person who wrote this may be grasping at straws for some of his points.

    He tries to mesh Green Party Progressive Economics with Libertarian Free Market Economics, when they don’t mesh at all.

    I say that Progressives and Libertarians work together on the 60% of issues they agree with (Civil Liberties, Ending the Wars, Marijuana, and other Social Policies) because when it comes to the more important 40% of issues (Economy, Healthcare, Guns, and Climate Change) there is no budging from either. Even though polls show stuff like Medicare For All is immensely popular and free market healthcare is not

  28. paulie paulie December 30, 2018

    I’d be interested in your thoughts once you finish reading it.

  29. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 30, 2018

    No, I skimmed a bit of it just now.

    I’ve yet to read it in depth, but I’m on board with a Progressive/Libertarian Alliance

  30. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 30, 2018

    Well, my perspective is different. I like the two time Green Presidntial Candiates a lot, I hypothetically would’ve voted Nader over Cobb and McKinney in 04 and 08

  31. Gina Gina December 30, 2018

    Well, begging is certainly attractive, but I only meant from my perspective.

  32. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 30, 2018

    Ralph Nader and Jill Stein beg to differ

  33. Gina Gina December 30, 2018

    Better than the other candidates they have had IMO.

  34. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 28, 2018

    Yeah in 2008,though he only got 27 delegates. On the plus side he also got the endorsement of Mike Gravel

  35. Gina Gina December 28, 2018

    Didn’t he also seek the presidential nomination at least once? Seemed pretty good from what I remember.

  36. Gina Gina December 28, 2018

    There was a West Virginia candidate they ran a few years ago, something like Jesse Johnson…I may not have that name exactly right. Is he still active with their party?

  37. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 27, 2018

    Well except for the obligatory “Independent Senator Bernie Sanders is running as a Democrat” Article

  38. paulie paulie December 27, 2018

    Nothing wrong with that. It’s what we are here for. I was just replying to the predictable gnashing of teeth about the level of candidates declared at this stage as if more and/or bigger names can’t step forward later.

  39. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 27, 2018

    Yeah it’s like the Major Parties, The big names will announce before the first primary, whenever it is.

    And since I can’t cover Dems, I’ll be there when Kent Mesplay announces another run.

  40. paulie paulie December 26, 2018

    As with the LP, I suspect many of the eventual leading candidates are not announced this far out.

  41. A.J. A.J. December 26, 2018

    Largely flakes and gadflies. No wonder no one takes the Green Party seriously anymore.

  42. paulie paulie December 23, 2018

    Maybe “off his meds” ….dunno.

    Could be.

  43. dL dL December 23, 2018

    Nice non-sequitur, dL.

    Not a non-sequitur…

  44. paulie paulie December 23, 2018

    He does look like a bum. But he also sounds and thinks like one.

    Sad but true.

  45. William T. Forrest William T. Forrest December 23, 2018

    Maybe “off his meds” ….dunno.

  46. William T. Forrest William T. Forrest December 23, 2018

    He does look like a bum. But he also sounds and thinks like one.

    It’s been a few years since the last time I saw him in person so I don’t know whether he smells like one as well.

  47. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 23, 2018

    Ok, I thought you were comparing his looks to a bum.

  48. paulie paulie December 23, 2018

    I don’t care how a candidate looks, I just care for their policies.

    It’s not just a matter of looks. His ranting and everything about him says “bumfights.”

  49. Joe Wendt Joe Wendt December 23, 2018

    I think if Kent Mesplay runs, he’ll get the nomination.

  50. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 23, 2018

    I don’t care how a candidate looks, I just care for their policies.

  51. William T. Forrest William T. Forrest December 23, 2018

    LOL. Definitely Bumfights material.

    “Trump won’t stand a chance” ROFLMAO

  52. paulie paulie December 23, 2018

    That was my fault, I’m new to WordPress

    No worries, and welcome on board! Thanks for helping revive IPR.

  53. paulie paulie December 23, 2018

    Ventura should not be trusted by either Ls or Gs, he is a conspiracy nut and Trump-style egomaniac with delusions of prosecution and grandeur. Plus I saw a video of him recently and I swear he looked like one of the brawlers on bumfights.

    As for the green new deal I think this is a better way to achieve green ideals than watermelon green socialism:

  54. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 23, 2018

    That was my fault, I’m new to WordPress

  55. paulie paulie December 23, 2018

    Hopefully that fixed it. For some odd reason it had image rather than standard selected as article format.

  56. paulie paulie December 23, 2018

    Not sure what’s going on with the title. It shows up in dashboard. Probably something to do with how the image was attached. Let me see if I can figure it out.

  57. Tony From Long Island Tony From Long Island December 23, 2018

    Jesse Ventura is one of the biggest political disappointments of my lifetime. He turned into a conspiracy nutbag.

  58. SocraticGadfly SocraticGadfly December 23, 2018

    Nice non-sequitur, dL. Fernando, thanks for the additional info.

    Ventura’s flip (he would, though not fully at home in either party, be better with Libertarians, IMO) is further reason not to trust him, beyond the fact he’s made noises about running for prez every cycle this century.

  59. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 23, 2018

    I gave it a title, but it’s not showing now.

  60. Chuck Moulton Chuck Moulton December 23, 2018

    Is it just some browser error on my part, or does this article lack a title?

  61. dL dL December 23, 2018

    On a true Green New Deal that needs to be socialist, nope, we need a stronger govt.

    Yes, Donald Trump owns all the means of production…

  62. Fernando Mercado Fernando Mercado Post author | December 23, 2018

    The InfoWars segment was after the election was over.

  63. SocraticGadfly SocraticGadfly December 23, 2018

    Couple other notes.
    1. Dunno the date on Jesse’s Infowars appearance, but in July 2016, he said he was voting Johnson:
    2. He appeared on Infowars. He’s got at least one foot in 9/11 “truther”-dom. That’s the biggest “issue” of his I can’t accept — he’s a conspiracy theorist.
    3. He tilts libertarian on thinking smaller govt is better. On a true Green New Deal that needs to be socialist, nope, we need a stronger govt.
    4. Related to 3, he opposes single-payer.

  64. SocraticGadfly SocraticGadfly December 23, 2018

    Just no on Jesse. He’s got a lot of positions that I wouldn’t support.

    If he did get the nomination, I’d vote SPUSA by write-in. (I had that option in 2016 here in Texas.)

Comments are closed.