Why is Gary Johnson polling at 7-16% but Stein is at 1-2%?

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

You'd think the anti-Hillary Democrats who are behind Johnson would be more inclined to vote for Stein over him.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Almost everyone can find something to agree with in Johnson's platform, plus he and his VP pick have experience. Stein and Baraka have never held public office before and only appeal to Berniebros.

[Bismarck]

Gary Johnson is a credible candidate, Jill Stein is a far left kook. Plus Johnson has gotten a lot more exposure and the Green Party has a smaller base and is seen as a one issue party.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Gary Johnson is a credible candidate, Jill Stein is a far left kook. Plus Johnson has gotten a lot more exposure and the Green Party has a smaller base and is seen as a one issue party.

Exactly. Johnson, by running as a John Anderson-esque low tax liberal, has been able to gobble up these votes. Stein stands for everything Bernie does, but she doesn't have the political record to stand on, nor the exposure.

[evergreenarbor]

Johnson is a credible candidate with years of experience as a governor. Stein thinks that wifi is hurting kids' brains. I would vote for Johnson over Stein, and I voted for Bernie in the Washington caucus.

[RI]

Almost everyone can find something to agree with in Johnson's platform

I don't know if I agree with him on a single issue.

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

Johnson is a credible candidate with years of experience as a governor. Stein thinks that wifi is hurting kids' brains. I would vote for Johnson over Stein, and I voted for Bernie in the Washington caucus.

Did she actually say that? I thought she said that there needed to be more research in that area?

[Mr. Morden]

Part of it is of course the fact that there are more people who are aware of Johnson's existence.  How many ordinary voters have any clue who Jill Stein is?

[RI]

Johnson is a credible candidate with years of experience as a governor. Stein thinks that wifi is hurting kids' brains. I would vote for Johnson over Stein, and I voted for Bernie in the Washington caucus.

Did she actually say that? I thought she said that there needed to be more research in that area?

Her quote was "we should not subjecting kid's brains to that [wi-fi], and we don't follow that issue in this country, but in Europe where they do, they have good precautions around wireless. Maybe not good enough, you know, because it's very hard to study this stuff; you know, we make guinea pigs out of whole populations and then we discover how many die, you know. This is like the paradigm for how public health works in this country, and it's outrageous."

[EliteLX]

Here's your answer. Close thread:

Gary Johnson is a credible candidate, Jill Stein is a far left kook. Plus Johnson has gotten a lot more exposure and the Green Party has a smaller base and is seen as a one issue party.

[evergreenarbor]

Johnson is a credible candidate with years of experience as a governor. Stein thinks that wifi is hurting kids' brains. I would vote for Johnson over Stein, and I voted for Bernie in the Washington caucus.

Did she actually say that? I thought she said that there needed to be more research in that area?

Well, she said that "we should not be subjecting kid's brains" to wifi. I was wrong on her exact wording.

She also seems to be courting the anti-vax crowd, which is bizarre given that she's a doctor.

[Mallow]

Johnson is a credible candidate with years of experience as a governor. Stein thinks that wifi is hurting kids' brains. I would vote for Johnson over Stein, and I voted for Bernie in the Washington caucus.

Did she actually say that? I thought she said that there needed to be more research in that area?

Wi-Fi (as with pretty much all radiation we use for wireless communication, including cell phones, TV remotes, etc) operates at non-ionizing frequencies. Like, not even close to the ionizing frequencies (on the "infrared" side of the visible frequencies, as opposed to the "ultraviolet" side). In this context, "we need more research" is code for "technology is scary and I don't understand basic physics."

[Pyro]

The truth of the matter is that the Clinton smear machine is all over Stein. Clinton surrogates repeat these petty gaffes and bring up the Nader misconception instead of focusing on her actual positions (knowing, from the primary, that the lean-left economic stances are rising in popularity). Another major factor is the lack of a genuine party line or any semblance of a media platform for the Green Party. Though, overall, the biggest issue is that most people have no clue who she is, and Stein's weakness as a contendor is partially to blame for this.

Johnson has the most to benefit from the incompetence of Trump. Simple as that.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Johnson is a credible candidate with years of experience as a governor. Stein thinks that wifi is hurting kids' brains. I would vote for Johnson over Stein, and I voted for Bernie in the Washington caucus.

Did she actually say that? I thought she said that there needed to be more research in that area?

Well, she said that "we should not be subjecting kid's brains" to wifi. I was wrong on her exact wording.

She also seems to be courting the anti-vax crowd, which is bizarre given that she's a doctor.

Stein hasn't practiced medicine for about 10 years, though she did graduate from Harvard Medical School and practice for 25 years, which are pretty good credentials.  But the wifi and anti-vax statements make her come across as a fruitcake.

[andrew_c]

Johnson actually stands for something, while Stein is a bigger fraud than Trump.

[Ebowed]

Hillary Clinton is winning the votes of leftists.  Far right kooks who feel bad about voting for a racist are backing fringe lunatic Gary Johnson.

Jill Stein is not a qualified, serious candidate.  She would do a better job than Donald Trump, though.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Here are three probable causes.

1) Stein is a far-left kook crazy conspiracy theorist

2) Around 80% of people who voted for Bernie is opting for Clinton in the general election. The Bernie or bust crowd is just a small but vocal minority.

3) There are Democratic-leaning swing-voters who don't like Clinton but who wouldn't vote for a crazy guy like Trump either but would be going for Kasich if he was the GOP nominee. Those people are hardly gonna vote for the Trump of the left, but is quite attracted to two moderate sane former Republican governors. 

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

1. Johnson has some credibility as a former two-terms Governor. Stein is, well, an activist at best.
2. Johnson has some appeal to anti-Trump Republicans. Steins has no outside appeal other than a small, and even sinking, number of Bernie or Busters.
3. Aside of 2000, Libertarians were always stronger than Greenies.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Because Stein is an anti-science Putin apologist?

[EliteLX]

Hillary Clinton is winning the votes of leftists.  Far right kooks who feel bad about voting for a racist are backing fringe lunatic Gary Johnson.

Jill Stein is not a qualified, serious candidate.  She would do a better job than Donald Trump, though.

Jill Stein would tank the United States economy unlike we've ever seen with hyper-leftist fiscal policy (even worse than Trump's tax policy consequences), exaggerate and inflame racial tension with blatant pandering & flagrant reverse-racism, be three times a bigger disaster than Jimmy Carter in foreign policy,  trash every ounce of tradition/moral guidance for the country, and create division in the country like we've never seen, from both a partisan and demographic standpoint.

There is a zero percent chance she is outperforming Donald Trump, at least Donald would have Mike Pence on his ass helping execute the majority of policy and it could be a somewhat status-quo conservative administration.

[IceSpear]

1) Johnson has far more name recognition.
2) Johnson is a far more credible candidate.
3) Johnson has been furiously pandering to every section of the political spectrum, Stein is pandering solely to the Reddit-esque Bernie or Bust sore loser contingent of voters, which was already small to begin with and only grows smaller and smaller by the day.

[OwlRhetoric]

Johnson has some government experience, appears more credible, and is playing moderate libertarian while making a play for the left votes more than he is for the right.

[Anna Komnene]

It probably helps that I think Gary Johnson gets mentioned (if not endorsed) by a few high profile people like Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney, and Susan Collins.  That increases his exposure and his credibility among the large group of people considering voting for him - #NeverTrump Republicans.  I'm still not convinced that a significant number will actually vote for him in November.  It's possible his poll numbers are just an expression of disapproval for Trump, but people will vote for Trump or Hillary in the end - or stay home.  I guess people might also remember when he ran for the republican nomination, but I can't see how that would be a good thing.

I don't think there's a single Democratic politician that's mentioned Jill Stein, and she doesn't have the recognition like people have been saying.  It probably doesn't help her case that people that might otherwise sympathize with the green party (like me) have been turned off by some of her delusional statements.

I think there's also a much bigger stigma of third parties on the left because of Ralph Nader's candidacy.  The right doesn't seem to care much if people vote for a third party or not.  "Democrats," on the otherhand, cheer every time a Green fails to make the ballot.

[dspNY]

Johnson has held a legitimate executive post (governor of a blue state which used to be a swing state) and Stein hasn't gotten above a local school board

[Nyvin]

The two problems for the Green Party:

1.   Most people don't know who Stein is

2.  Once they know who Stein is...it becomes apparent she's kind of an idiot.