Why you say that? She did what she was supposed to besides getting 5%. Now, Greens have more ballot access.
Only getting 1% in a perfect storm race while co-opting the Bernie Sanders movement seems like failure to me. She had substantial advantages over Ralph Nader in 2000, whereas people largely meh between Bush and Gore, unlike 2016 Clinton and Trump were passionately hated. Where were anyone to get information on Ralph Nader in 2000? In 2000, I was 14 and watched the news heavily and literally nothing was ever said about his policy or his campaign other than that he was spoiling Gore's chances. In 2016, a large amount of electorate was exposed to Jill Stein, and got easy access to her platform whenever they wanted, whether youre 14, 30 or 60. She still did substantially worse than Nader. Theres a long long list of progressives to be groomed for 2016