“The Green Party stands for an immediate 50% reduction in the military budget, withdrawal from the Middle East, and abolition of nuclear weapons.” said Isaacs.

With an overwhelming amount of people now growing weary of the foreign policy tactics of both Democratic and Republican leaders, Stein and The Green Party’s approach is one that is refreshing to us all.

Many of the more environmentally conscious citizens have been pushing for real reform in the way we do business, to combat the adverse effects of man-made climate change. However, as these believes increase do to scientific endorsement, and natural disasters that are occurring at a much quicker rate and increasing in intensity, both major party’s continue to tip-toe around the issue of climate change as to not rock the “financial-backing” boat of major corporations profiting off of the rape and exploitation committed to our planet.

“We would invest instead,” said Isaacs, “in renewable energy; our plan to make the US fossil-fuel-free by 2030 would make a REAL contribution to reducing global emissions and stabilizing climate change for the planet.”

Many of the ideas that gained traction among Sanders voters during the primary (many of which feel ostracized once again from the American political process) are part of Stein’s platform and have been pushed for quite consistently by The Greens for years.

Amid the most prominent: Campaign finance and affordable education. These issues lay at the heart of the Sanders campaign, and have only increased in popularity among today’s youth.

“Our emphasis on people over profit gives rise to the commitment to resolve the student debt crisis by forgiving all current student loans completely, and creating a system of free public higher education going forward — as well as a commitment to democratic reforms that would restore the voice of the people and eliminate the influence of Big Money on politics.” Isaacs said.

Some may be asking themselves, if there are candidates in America who are running on a platform which the majority of people can say resonates with them and their beliefs, why isn’t anyone talking about them? Why do third party’s constantly get the underhand?

“Third parties have always been relevant, but they have not been covered by mainstream media.” Said Dr. Stuart Chen-Hayes, program Coordinator and Associate Professor of Counselor Education/School Counseling in the Counseling, Leadership, Literacy, and Special Education Department at Lehman College of the City University of New York. “We now know from Wikileaks that mainstream media has been in collusion with the Democratic National Committee (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC) on a host of issues and Fox news for years has been close to Republican National Committee positions. Since mainstream media are funded by corporate advertising (especially the two major parties), it’s easy to see why they are so threatened by us and our progressivism. It upends their business model.

This overt mainstream bias towards the two-party system and the policy position proposed by it has been taking a toll on the American people. Many of which feel their respective party’s no longer represent their ideas.

“Most folks on the left are thoroughly disgusted with both major parties at this point. A vote for Jill Stein and Ajamu Baraka for President/Vice President is a vote to get rid of the two party duopoly and end corporate money in politics. Only the Green Party refuses corporate contributions.” said Chen-Hayes.

It is not an irrational fear, however, that casting a vote for a third party will ultimately contribute to the victory of your least liked candidate. Many older Americans may point to Ralph Nader’s 2000 election bid as a Green Party candidate as pulling votes away from Al Gore, thus electing George Bush. Despite this belief, most Greens push that this wasn’t the case at all.

“It is important to realize that the assertion that Nader voters in 2000 helped elect George Bush is completely unfounded. Ten times more Democrats in Florida crossed party lines to vote for Bush than voted Green Party! Nationally, Nader got less than 3% of the vote that year and that remains our record high!” said Isaacs.

Chen-Hayes also spoke on the issue of Nader’s effect on the 2000 election.

“Ralph Nader was never a spoiler. That’s DNC talk blaming him for the lousy campaign Al Gore ran when tons of Florida democrats crossed over and voted republican. Voting Green helps bring a voice back to the people, peace, and the planet over profit. So vote for who you want, not for your fears. With the two most disliked corporate candidates in the history of US politics, Voting Green is helping move the country toward true democracy.”

Voting for the Green Party may feel like casting your vote for a losing candidate, but not only is voting Green a vote for today- it is also an investment in the future of American progressivism.

“What is deeply threatening to the Democratic party in 2016 is the possibility that the Stein/Baraka campaign will earn more than 5% of the national vote and qualify the Green Party for federal matching funds in 2020. That would be a game-changer; it would mean millions of dollars (already donated, $3 at a time, by taxpayers who support public financing of elections) and a truly legitimate chance for a progressive campaign. A vote for Jill Stein this year is a vote for multi-party democracy in the future.” Isaacs said, pushing voters to see the long-term effects of a Green Party vote in 2016.

Many progressives who were forced to jump ship on Bernie’s ideals have since faded into the Hillary campaign, some still unwilling to show their faces. It is no doubt that Sanders’ primary run pushed Hillary Clinton further to the left on many issues, even adopting many of the issues she previously didn’t represent. But can we be trusting her stances on these newly held positions or should we be weary of deceit in the wake of a Clinton inauguration.

“The Democratic administration over the last 8 years has paid lip service to many admirable liberal goals like the ones you name above, while actively pursuing policies that run counter to them. Democrats are supposed to be for immigration reform and against climate change; Obama promised voters in 2008 that he would end wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, US use of torture, and illegal domestic spying on ordinary Americans.” Isaacs said.

The progressive candidate has also been a critic of President Barack Obama’s Stimulus Package, expressing her disappointment in its lack of immensity and efficiency. “Obama’s stimulus was ok, but only made slight dent in our current crisis,” said Stein.

Stein’s solution to the financial disparity is modeled after the infamous policy of her favorite president, Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal. She suggests reinvestment in America’s infrastructure, and calls for a focus on creating new jobs.

Stein has been reinforcing the Green New Deal, from her 2012 candidacy. The basic premise of the GND is to enforce policy that charges companies for exploitation of the environment, such as corporations that capitalize off carbon emissions, and to kick start to the economy by creating a large number of green initiative driven jobs.

“The sad facts are that over the last 8 years,” Isaacs proclaimed, “the US has deported more undocumented immigrants than ever before; drilled more public lands and fast-tracked more pipelines; bombed more Muslim countries; secretly continued to support rendition of suspects to countries that do use torture; and vigorously prosecuted whistleblowers who tried to draw attention to mass government surveillance programs. The Obama White House has also consistently failed to enforce anti-trust regulations, resulting in increased monopolies in communications, airlines, and Big Pharma. As Obama prepares to leave office, he is actively backing the TPP, a global trade pact that would give multi-national corporations unprecedented legal powers at the expense of governments and their citizens.”

With much to be skeptical about in this election, it is easy to be skeptical about the chances of a Stein/Baraka presidency in 2017. However, The Green Party has committed to its grass-roots approach to success. And they plan on taking it to every level of government.

“Over the next four years we anticipate running hundreds of candidates for local and state offices, so it will be important for your readers who want to support this seismic shift away from our 2 party system to stay involved post-presidential election! A Young Greens group is forming on campus precisely to keep the momentum going after November and explore how the Green Party can visibly engage in our Bucks County towns & communities.”