WHAT THE GREEN PARTY NEEDS TO DO

[littlejoe]

I am very respectful, and do support many of the causes that the Green Party stands for. And although I am 70 percent idealist, I am also 30 percent pragmatist. It can be argued that the Green Party helped to throw the "selection" of 2000 to G.Bush. We certainly must not allow anything or anyone to keep from ousting Bush in 2004. I for one could not abide a repeat of unfortunate, not to mention catastrophic events.

The Democratic party is far from perfect, but I believe a large number of democrats share the same values as Green Party members. What I would like to propose, since this country will never go along with a three or more party system, is that the Green Party becomes an accepted and welcome branch of the Democratic party.

At first, this might be hard for Greens to accept. But rest assured they would not be forgotten. It is well known that politics is the art of compromise. Greens might not get all they hope for, by blending into the Democratic party, but at least they would have more of a chance for their voice to be heard than as things stand right now.

[ewagner]

1. hooray for you!

I think it's time we started talking openly about a:

peace treaty between the Dems and the Greens; or

a coalition between the Dems and the Greens; or

a merger of the Dems and the Greens;

We're going to need all the help we can get in '04 and divisive contests between us won't achieve the goal of outsing this criminal administration from office.

[littlejoe]

2. We are to ready

to fight amongst ourselves, when we clearly have more in common that things that divide us. We need each other now more than ever.

[grannylib]

3. I would hope that could be possible...we do need to pull together to

prevent any more massive evils being perpetrated on this country and its people by the busheviks...

[Loonman]

4. Build a coalition, like in Germany

Running Nader just pisses people off and makes them indifferent to the Green cause.

The Greens started slowly in the 80s in Germany, now they are a powerful political force.

Oh, and stop running Nader.

[Yupster]

8. Agree Loonman

The Greens have to decide if they are party trying to become more relevant, and eventually replace the Democrats like the Republicans replaced the Whigs,or are they a crcle of fringe guys who enjoy being on the fringe.

If they really want to build their party, of course they need to run someone in every election, but it can't be Nader. Third parties associated with one personality never survive once that personality leaves. For example the Bull Moose Party and the Reform Party.

If they like being on the fringe and really don't want to grow, then they should pick and choose when to support the Democratic nominee and when to run someone of their own.

[Rainbowreflect]

5. I agree,

but this would mean the dems moving to the left & embracing some of what is most important to the greens. The "bush is worse" arguement is not enough.

[IrateCitizen]

6. STOP SHOUTING AT ME IN YOUR SUBJECT LINE!

If you don't change it to lower case, this thread will get zapped by the mods (I'm surprised it hasn't already).

In any event, this subject has been discussed ad nauseum already, for the past three years. I hope you're not hoping for a different outcome this time, because I can almost guarantee it won't happen.

[foo_bar]

7. never, ever happen

The Greens are an "international" movement, they don't respond to national interest per se:

http://www.global.greens.org.au/charter.htm
http://www.global.greens.org.au/Charteramendments.pdf

Their constitution is pretty funny though. It's like "America would be perfect, if only there wasn't racism"

[Moderator]

9. Locking

Rules to start discussion threads in the General Discussion forum.

1. The subject line of a discussion thread must accurately reflect the actual content of the message.

2. The subject line of a discussion thread and the entire text of the message which starts the thread may not include profanity, excessive capitalization, or excessive punctuation. Inflammatory rhetoric should also be avoided.

3. If you post an article or other published content which is from a conservative source or which expresses a traditionally conservative viewpoint, you must state your opinion about the piece and/or the issues it raises.

4. If you wish to start a vanity thread (ie: a discussion thread in which the sole purpose is to share your personal opinion) you must state your opinion in a non-inflammatory manner which respects differences in opinion and facilitates actual discussion.

5. You may not start a new discussion thread in order to continue a current or recent flame war from another thread. The moderators have the authority to lock threads in order to contain flaming on a particular topic to only one thread at a time.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation,
DU moderator