MADISON, Wisconsin — Downtown Madison, known for its progressive activism, exudes its liberal spirit on a scorching August day. Pride flags flutter from buildings, while Black Lives Matter signs proudly adorn storefronts. A quaint bookstore showcases revolutionary titles alongside newspaper clippings of past rallies against Donald Trump.
Adding to the display of solidarity, a high-end restaurant features a powerful graphic of a raised Black fist in its window, while chalk markings on the sidewalk proclaim “solidarity forever.”
The Green Party, an independent political party that claims to prioritize the needs of self-identified leftists, is noticeably absent. It lacks physical locations, candidates participating in local elections, and any connection to the politically engaged UW-Madison campus, home to nearly 50,000 students.
Local Democrats are plagued by nightmares, fearing the impact the third party could have in November. Wisconsin, one of the seven battleground states, holds significant importance in Kamala Harris’ bid for the presidency.
This state, known for its narrow victory margins, has become a symbol of division. Every vote counts, with even the smallest percentage making a difference. Against this backdrop, the Green Party emerges as a significant force in the upcoming election.
Jill Stein is back in the spotlight as the Green Party nominee, bringing back painful memories of her impact on the 2016 election. Wisconsin
Democrats still vividly remember the devastating loss that Hillary Clinton suffered, narrowly losing to Donald Trump by less than 23,000 votes. Many believe that Stein’s 31,000 votes as the Green Party nominee played a significant role in Clinton’s defeat.
In the past eight years, the political landscape in the state of Wisconsin has seen some significant changes. One notable shift has been the transformation of Dane County, which includes Madison, from a reliably Democratic stronghold to a powerful force that consistently drives voter turnout. This surge in participation has had a profound impact on the GOP’s traditional stronghold in other parts of the state.
Dane County’s Democratic margins continue to grow larger with each election cycle, and more and more people are showing up to cast their votes. A prime example of this occurred in 2023, during an otherwise uneventful spring election.
Dane County played a pivotal role in propelling Democrats to victory in a closely contested state Supreme Court race. Notably, the county generated even more Democratic votes than the traditionally populous Milwaukee County, which has long served as the state’s population hub.
Madison, the seat of Democratic power, is particularly vulnerable to the influence of the Green Party. Despite having limited infrastructure in the county, Madison has managed to elect two Green candidates to local office within the last decade, a feat that is rare for a city of its size.
The Green Party tends to gain traction in deep blue areas like Madison, where voters are highly progressive, anti-war, and eager to push Democrats to the left. These voters are also more willing to abandon the Democratic Party when they feel it falls short of their expectations.
The Democrats consider the area to be crucial, and it presents an excellent opportunity for Green Party activism.
The Green Party may only make up a small portion of the electorate, but its influence in recent presidential races has earned it a reputation as a threat among Democrats.
The Democratic Party is determined not to repeat their mistake of underestimating the support for the Greens as they did in 2016. This time, they have taken a proactive and assertive approach to counter third-party threats. To achieve this, the national party has established an extensive operation across the country.
They have even hired dedicated communications professionals whose sole responsibility is to attack third-party candidates. In a recent incident, the Democratic National Committee posted a job opening for an “Independent & Third Party Project Manager,” which included attending third-party events, providing updates on their activities, and recruiting volunteers to do the same.
Although the posting was quickly deleted, it reflects the party’s commitment to closely monitor third-party activities. Additionally, Democrats have pursued a legal strategy to remove third parties, such as the Green Party, from the ballots in battleground states that could potentially harm their electoral chances.
This year, the Green presidential ticket is on the ballot in 38 states, which includes every battleground state except for Nevada, despite the numerous efforts made. Unfortunately, these legal battles have only intensified an already strained relationship.
During a phone interview with POLITICO Magazine, Stein expressed her strong disapproval of the Democratic Party’s efforts to remove the Green Party line from ballots, labeling them as political dirty tricks.
While she has traditionally engaged in battles against the major parties, her frustration this year seems to be primarily aimed at the Democrats rather than the “uniparty” (referring to both Democrats and Republicans collectively) as a whole.
In a conversation with me, Stein expressed his belief that the DNC had intentions of having individuals infiltrate and spy on his campaign. He described the situation as suspicious and likened it to the presence of a rat. The DNC, however, chose not to provide a comment regarding the job posting.
The Greens, in general, resist the notion that they should step aside for Democrats. Instead of heeding the calls of progressive Democrats to focus solely on non-swing states, they have taken a different approach. They have concentrated their efforts on closely contested battleground states, where they are certain to receive greater visibility.
The Green Party continues to hold a pivotal role in the race, particularly with the close competition between Kamala Harris and Trump.
It seems that the party has become a refuge for disenchanted Democrats and leftists who have not found their place within the Democratic Party.
While the party’s focus on different issues may change with each election cycle, this year, the conflict in Gaza has become the defining divide between Democrats and the Greens.
Stein has been criticizing Democrats for their handling of Biden’s response to the conflict. Although Harris has somewhat alleviated concerns on the matter, there are still many former Democrats who are reluctant to vote for her due to their apprehensions about the Biden administration’s continued provision of aid and arms to Israel. This has led to a sense of unease among Democrats in Dane County regarding Stein’s potential success.
According to Alexia Sabor, the chair of the Dane County Democrats, the nomination of Harris as the Democratic candidate has sparked a surge in enthusiasm among left-wing, pro-Palestinian Democrats.
However, Sabor also mentioned that there are still individuals, like a friend of hers in Madison with Palestinian heritage, who are hesitant to vote for Biden and are seeking tangible steps to address the ongoing violence.
According to Sabor, Harris did express her support for a cease-fire in Gaza. However, it seems that the cease-fire has not been implemented yet. Nonetheless, many people perceive Harris as having a potentially different stance on this issue compared to Joe Biden.
“I’ve had conversations with individuals who are hesitant to vote or are considering the Green Party,” shared Evelyn Comer, a delegate from Wisconsin attending the convention. “The main topic that arises during these discussions is the ongoing conflict in Gaza.”
The Greens argue that left-wing Democrats are betraying their principles by backing an administration that doesn’t always match their policy goals. In response, Democrats accuse the Greens of running a scheme, only appearing every four years to gather funds and votes without putting in the effort to establish a sustainable political party.
The disagreement between progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Stein has become public in recent weeks, as they engage in heated exchanges on social media.
According to Ocasio-Cortez, Jill Stein hasn’t won anything in the last decade. Ocasio-Cortez believes that if one truly cares about making a difference, they should focus on organizing, building power and infrastructure, and ultimately winning.
Stein responded with a strong retort, asserting that she did not anticipate your support for genocide. She pointed out the Democrats’ tendency to transform individuals who claim they will “change the party from the inside.”
Both critiques offer insights into the underlying beliefs and motivations behind the two parties’ perspectives on the acquisition, manifestation, and significance of political power.
Four years ago, the Green Party faced significant challenges from the Democratic Party in their efforts to impede their progress. This was especially evident in Wisconsin, where the Democratic National Committee (DNC) triumphed in their lawsuit against the Green Party’s candidate, Howie Hawkins.
The DNC capitalized on a minor mistake in the paperwork, specifically a change in Hawkins’ running mate’s residence, to keep him off the presidential ballot in Wisconsin. The implications of this oversight were immense, as Biden emerged as the victor in the state by a narrow margin of just 21,000 votes.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the lawsuit, guaranteeing Stein’s spot on the November ballot.
The state Democratic Party in Nevada achieved success by successfully removing Stein from the ballot. This was possible because the secretary of state had initially provided an incorrect form to the Green Party.
The lawsuits have only worsened the already strained relationship between the two parties.
In Wisconsin, the Green Party leaders are enraged by the Democratic attempts to undermine Stein. Pete Karas, the chair of the elections committee for the Wisconsin Greens, expressed their frustration. Following the lawsuit, their strategy for 2026 is to shift their focus towards running more local campaigns in competitive districts.
The reason for running in swing districts instead of deep blue ones, where they have a higher chance of getting more votes, is payback. Although there is a risk of electing Republican candidates who may be even more hostile to their ideas, the motivation behind running in swing districts is to seek retribution.
“We must educate Democrats a valuable lesson,” Karas emphasized. “They are attempting to meddle with both us and the democratic process, and they are confronted with a few options.
They can persist in their actions and face the inevitable repercussions, or they can opt to enact ranked choice voting, thereby ensuring the presence of fair elections.”
Stein dismisses the attacks on her by progressives in Wisconsin, suggesting that their actions are driven by fear. In her words, “The [Democrats] appear to be quite afraid of facing the music here … they want to wipe out their competition so they don’t have to face a challenge.”
Both sides acknowledge the fear that Democrats have regarding a potential scenario where a few thousand votes in a closely contested election could once again grant Trump victory in the state.
Stein’s current polling numbers hover around 1 percent across all the Blue Wall states this year. However, due to the limited sample sizes and margin of error, any polling figures at or below 1 percent are mostly speculative.
Some Wisconsin state party operatives are cautiously optimistic about the momentum shifting in their direction since Harris became the Democratic nominee. While polling numbers are slowly moving in Harris’ favor, there are still lingering concerns rooted in the memories of the 2016 election. These operatives’ nerves remain on edge.
Bechen expresses a sense of caution when it comes to being optimistic.
