You argue that third-party candidates like Jill Stein are ineffective and potentially harmful

It was more a statement of fact that an argument.

but this overlooks a fundamental issue: the duopoly stifles genuine political discourse and limits choices for voters.

The system does it. Has done it for over 200 years. The parties themselves are interchangeable and a symptom, not the problem. Neither are the parties monolithic either. The Democratic party in fact gives voice successfully to many disparate groups. Not all of which I agree with, or think is adequate. But I can point to real accomplishments. But I'd like to see you argue otherwise. What have presidents from 3rd parties. Who don't exist because they've never won. Given us policy wise.

Stein’s candidacy isn’t about personal gain; it’s about giving a voice to those who feel unrepresented by the Democrats and Republicans.

You are free to shout into the void. But what does shouting into the void accomplish. Trump gives voice to bigots and racists. And has accomplished mathematically infinitely more for them. Having a voice means nothing when it is ignored.

Comparing someone who fights for workers' rights and social justice to MAGA supporters is a lazy and flawed argument.

How is it flawed. They say they're doing the same thing. But have actually accomplished some of it. So you can say you are different at least in that metric. But is accomplishing nothing really that moral or virtuous?

Standing up for third-party candidates and challenging the political status quo doesn’t make me "self-radicalized"; it shows a commitment to real change, not just settling for the lesser evil.

Whether or not you settle for it you will get the worst or second worst when it comes to presidential elections. As an anarchist I don't care if you vote, or who you vote for. it's your vote. I'm just pointing out mathematical reality. And that people rightfully disliked false or undeserved self righteousness. Outside of the limited state and local offices groups like the green party hold. (Which I think are good) People like Stein if even inadvertently, stand to do more harm than good at a national presidential level. Again, mathematically and statistically provable. You're still welcome to vote for them. But you're not any more virtuous or riteous than the people or groups you're criticizing. And realistically they aren't giving anyone a meaningful voice. Judging based on actual accomplishments.

Serious question. Why did Sanders, an independent, run for the Democratic presidential nomination.