Democratic voters need a political party.

[mmonk]

That is how I feel as a Democrat and activist. Discuss.

[SHRED]

1. Green Party

[Skidmore]

11. Pffffffffffffffffft.

Tell it to change its name and apologize for Nader.

[Xicano]

14. Peace & Freedom

http://www.peaceandfreedom.org/home/downloads/P&F_Voter_guide.pdf

[eridani]

39. Tell me when they start taking election campaigns seriously n/t

[LWolf]

2. What is there to say?

You summed it up pretty well already.

[Major Hogwash]

3. Only 56% of the registered voters turned out this year, lowest turn out since 1978.

In Idaho.
When Republicans want to win, they don't even have to turn out!!!

Senator Crapo won his reelection with a record 71% of the vote!!!

[mmonk]

4. How can we change that?

[Bluenorthwest]

25. We had 69% turn out, highest midterm turn out in twenty

years. We elected Democrats, go figure.

[Major Hogwash]

75. Your state is in the minority.

Or didn't you know that this mid-term election was a yawner.

[Hawkowl]

79. His state has universal mail in ballots!

I think if the entire country followed Oregon's example and did mail in ballots only, we would CRUSH rethuglicans and conservadems in all national elections.

As a bonus, we wouldn't have electronic voting machines! A win-win if there ever was one.

[TBF]

5. We need more than a political party - we need a movement. nt

[mmonk]

6. I tend to agree with you.

I still contend we shouldn't have to be put in this position.

[dixiegrrrrl]

26. With all dur respect, I learned a long time ago

that forms of "shoulds" are a distraction.
Coulda, woulda shoulda distracts from what IS.

What IS it we CAN do as Dems when our "official" party seems to have fallen away from us?

Are we willing to spend as much time and effort and planning as the Repubs have?

Will that even work in today's climate?

Do we really have a 2 party system that represents 2 significantly different points of view?

Are we asking the rights questions today?

[TBF]

35. The only question we need to ask is "which side are you on" -

are you supporting the owners (who keep robbing you blind) or are you in solidarity with the workers?

[ChiciB1]

57. YES WE DO! But How, When, Where Or Who Will Be A Strong Enough Leader

so we can mobilize?? It MUST be done, but here we sit! I was so active during Viet Nam and felt we were be listened to, even when THEY hated us. NOW, I see APATHY everywhere!

[TBF]

58. The unions need to be the leaders, even though they are not as strong as they were.

But it has to come from the working class - not the Petit-bourgeois (small business owners & professional class - like Obama for example).

[mmonk]

62. Good question. Do we need to be that person?

[LiberalEsto]

7. Bring back the Citizens Party

My husband and I were members of the Citizens Party for several years. We went back to the Democratic Party because we were sick of the Reagan/Bush evil empire and didn't want them to make any more Supreme Court appointments.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_Party_%28United_States%29

"The Citizens Party was a political party in the United States from 1979 until 1987. It was formed on May 15, 1979 in Washington DC by Barry Commoner, who wanted to gather under one umbrella political organization all the environmentalist and liberal groups which were unsatisfied with President Carter's moderate administration. The Citizens Party registered with the Federal Elections Commission at the end of 1979. Commoner, a professor of environmental science at Washington University in St. Louis, was the head of the Center for the Biology of Natural Systems in St. Louis and editor of Science Illustrated magazine.

The Citizens Party platform was pro-environmental in nature. Some have claimed that it was possibly socialist as well, but this claim arose from a misunderstanding of the economic democracy platform of the party, which appears to be a form of corporatism. Commoner clearly stated repeatedly that socialism for parts of the economy other than essential infrastructure was a disastrous idea. His economic democracy idea stated that the business of business is to do business, but that the business of government is to regulate business to prevent abuses."

[mmonk]

8. Or we could somehow take back our own party.

The power structure under the DLC has been a disaster.

[LiberalEsto]

9. Do you think that's possible at this point?

I would like to think so, but I'm getting worried.,

[JNelson6563]

47. It all depends.

The power of the party really could be in our hands. It all depends on who shows up to the meetings, raises the money and recruits the candidates. Of course we are talking granular organizing, local and state level for a start.

Whoever packs the room wins the vote. That's how it works on every level.

Progressives can start by getting into the local parties. Get active, show up to the meetings, organize events and get in the trenches at election time. By building a network of like minded people within the party you develop a majority. If you are unable to achieve this in your local Dem party that perhaps refuses to change, grow or work for true progressive change, start a Dem club. Appeal to all the disaffected Dems in the region. Get organized and get powerful You can do this by amassing resources, establishing an HQ, growing membership and fielding candidates. Get the membership out in the field for that candidate; hit the doors, phones and public events. Believe me, whether you're able to do this movement within the party or through a self-organized Dem organization, all will notice the improvements and most will want to join the effort.

I've seen all of this done within my Congressional district so I know it is possible. It is hard work, takes dedication and organization but is well worth the effort.

Julie

[bluetrain]

27. Just as individual identity is not static, the identity of a social group like a political party

also exists in constant flux. At this point, the leaders of the Democratic Party do no share values with the majority of their followers. The time is long overdue for the voters to get behind representatives who share their voices and convictions. Party loyalty is a suicide mission at best.

[Le Taz Hot]

40. That's impossible at this point.

We need campaign finance reform and those who benefit from that system aren't about to turn off the spigot.

[mmonk]

44. That was destroyed by the Supreme Court.

Citizens United was our death knell for politics as usual. It will now take a real grass roots education and organizing effort to overcome this governance by a corporatist court.

[pangaia]

49. Hell no its not impossible,

Look at those nitwit TEABAGGERS.. Of course they don't know they are being fronted, but nevertheless..If they can do it with frontal lobotomies couldn't we do it with brains intact? :>))

[GOTV]

67. We won't get the corporate sponsorship that tea baggers get.

[Skidmore]

12. I want the DFL in Minnesota to go national.

[mmonk]

13. A big problem in many states is ballot access.

The system is some states is gamed by the political powers to make ballot access all but impossible.

[Pholus]

16. Hehehehe. I always identify myself as DFL, though I left Minnesota 20 years ago.

I'd be with you on that one in a heartbeat!

[pangaia]

46. Good name

Citizens Party. I remember Commoner but don't remember the Citizens Party... bad on me...
Howard Dean and Alan Grayson for starters,

[leveymg]

10. They have their Tea Party. We should organize to get rid of the Blue Dogs, and replace them with

solid Progressives. The difference is, the Teapots are insane.

Organize within the Democratic Party, as far as is possible.

[mmonk]

15. We have the Bold Progressives, DFA, PDA, Move On, etc.

but still have no sway. We have to have some sort of strategy whereby we do not vote for Democrats that do not share our views. The only way to create a movement is to remove the obstacles.

[leveymg]

17. We should insist that more leadership posts, committee chairs go to the Progressive Caucus

And, that disloyal Blue Dogs get pulled. Hold the leadership's feet to the fire on this, and keep the flame turned up.

[mmonk]

18. Since when have they listened to us?

[leveymg]

20. Well, I guess it's some kind of victory that Steny isn't Minority Leader, and

that the Blue Dog Caucus will be a lot smaller. Rarely does the Progressive wing openly push for or against specific assignments, as happened in the last couple months, and we should keep the pressure on.

[mmonk]

28. I agree that the Progressive Caucus is our only hope.

To be effective, they have to stop yielding to the leadership in order to gain power and do it consistently and without fear of the arm twisting threats from the party apparatus anymore.

[leeroysphitz]

42. but how?

[leveymg]

73. The Teapots did it when the Koch Bros. gave them a pile of money, and hired some talented

political operatives to organize things. Seeing that they were giving away free beer with a free lunch, everyone and his sister just jumped on the bandwagon. Sure enough, the GOP moved further Right, and so have some of the Dems, including Obama.

Mr. Soros, did you notice that?

[Skidmore]

19. We have an amorphous bunch

of provacateurs who refuse to work with anyone who doesn't think exactly like them on every issue. And I am a member of a couple of those groups.

[Pholus]

21. Hopefully your couple of groups don't disagree....

:)

[mmonk]

22. I too am a member of some of these groups.

They end up being just sounding boards because no matter how many signatures they get to try and sway politicians, the politicians continue to ignore these petitions.

[leveymg]

24. Me too. But, I'm also on the local Democratic Committee and was an Obama state delegate.

Worked hard to get him and the rest of the slate elected. Had paid staff jobs with the D-Trip and the DSCC. Knocked 4000 doors in '08. Not sure I'm still really motivated, but gonna hang in there and see what happens.

[mmonk]

45. Interesting. So was I. Maybe that is why I feel such a high level

of betrayal from the leadership. Working within doesn't seem to work.

[leveymg]

51. Yup. When they start losing the base - and, we're it - they're in really serious trouble.

None of this gives me much pleasure to say. But, I have been warning this was going to happen if they listened to the same tired party hacks and pollsters and triangulated, again.

Some of them, I swear, would rather be in charge of the minority party than to be consigned to the back-benches in a truly Progressive regime. Looks like some of the bastards got their way, again.

[TBF]

36. Many of the blue dogs were voted out. They're gone. Now what? nt

[mmonk]

48. It is imperative that the DLC be next.

That is where the K street operatives wield their power.

[TBF]

55. Agreed on that. nt

[L0oniX]

68. +1000

[Spider Jerusalem]

23. You have one.

If you ARE indeed a "Democratic voter", you have the Democratic Party. Of course the problem with the Democratic Party is that it's less a party than a loose coalition of what would probably be several parties which span the spectrum from right-of centre neoliberal foreign policy hawks to what anywhere else would be called "social democrats" and are in America denoted "left-liberals". This is only PART of the problem; the REST of the problem lies in the fact that entirely too many so-called "Democrats" are driven more by ideology than pragmatism, and lose sight too often of the fact that yes, the alternative is in fact a lot worse. Which is why you get fucking idiots saying stupid things like "Obama needs a primary challenge in 2012", because they're personally affronted that he's done more or less what he actually SAID he'd do when he campaigned rather than been the Liberal Jesus of their fevered masturbatory fantasies. (Never mind that a primary challenge to a sitting president from within his own party usually results in an election defeat by exacerbating tensions and splits within the party at a time when unity is far more the preferable path.)

My advice? Learn to be a pragmatist, learn that you don't always get exactly what you might want from your politicians. If you want to keep calling yourself a Democrat? Work for the kind of candidates you want. Otherwise, don't call yourself a Democrat. If you're looking for another party? You've no right to the label.

[mmonk]

30. Simplistic. What good is a coalition when not everyone has a real

voice in that coalition? Why should my vote advance Republican ideas such as expansion of charters and privatization while cutting down the social safety net and dismantling the New Deal if I do not believe in those things?

[Spider Jerusalem]

31. Not everyone does get an equal voice in a coalition, that's the nature of the beast.

The faction with the most votes/money/power is always in the driving seat. But in a two party system you have a real limitation of options (and any political system set up on the basis of winner-take-all elections rather than proportional representation always tends to be a two-party system). So would you rather piss your vote away? Because that's your other realistic option (or voting for actual Republicans, along with their charming ideas about female reproductive rights and civil equality for gays and lesbians and enforcing Christianity in schools and elsewhere and so forth and so on).

[mmonk]

41. I question if this really is a two party system anymore.

When you have Democrats ready to dismantel the New Deal and living wages for corporate power, it does not appear such a situation exists. The culture wars are just the far right's way of destroying it all from within for total victory. They keep advancing and we keep slip sliding away.

[Spider Jerusalem]

43. Well, no, political party positions are not fixed for eternity and shift with social change.

Look at Britain, for instance. The Labour Party was upon a time a genuinely Socialist political party. It no longer is so and hasn't been for some time. A lot of Old Labour voters are very unhappy about this, understandably, especially after Tony Blair's neo-Thatcherite policies (which were very similar to Bill Clinton's neo-Reaganite policies in the US, come to that). You can work to change the party from within by working for the nomination and election of candidates who will support your political ideals...or you can stop calling yourself a Democrat and find another party to vote for (or find enough disaffected former Democrats to start your own). Again, those are the only real options.

[mmonk]

50. I do not view top down leadership as social change I suppose.

[Spider Jerusalem]

52. The disaffection and disinterest of the majority of Americans in the political process...

is as much a sign of social change as anything else; rising standards of living and the distractions of things like cable television and the Internet along with an endless supply of cheap Chinese-made goods from Wal-Mart mean that most of the causes of political activism in the past (grinding poverty and hunger and so on) have been rendered largely moot; couple that with fractures of social cohesion and the decline of working class activism (made largely possible by decades of politicians lying to people and telling them they were middle class, and people being prepared to believe it) and you have a largely politically unconscious population which means that increasingly elections are decided by that portion of the public that still gives a shit (which works out to around 40-50% of those eligible in most elections, most of whom vote the way they do because it's how their family always has, or how their spouse is, or for reasons that are largely unexamined and not at all thought out)...is it any wonder that the state of American politics generally is what it is, when the right wing are the only ones who can muster any real activism and engagement by leveraging the resentment of (mostly white) evangelical Christians?

[mmonk]

69. Agreed and a lot of it has to do with current media trends,

big money purchasing politicians, and a lack of leadership from the Democratic Party to offer a real or genuine alternative party or argument.

[Lisa D]

29. You could call it the "Fair Weather Democrats"

Of course, most of the activists I know don't give up that easily when the going gets a little rough. We'll stay in the current party and fight for what we want.

[mmonk]

32. One is never fair weather if they are the one that holds to the

traditional Democratic Party values. I'm tired of advancing the agenda of the American right. Either we take the party back or bid it fare well and reestablish it under another banner of sorts.

[Lisa D]

53. We take back the party by getting liberals elected in all 50 states

That's where the real grunt work is. We can elect the most liberal president. We can have the most Liberal speaker of the House. If they don't have a MAJORITY of liberals in Congress to actually make and pass laws, nothing else matters. People don't seem to get this. Everyone cheers when blue dogs are ousted, but their replacements are actually more conservative. How does this help us? Give the people in those conservative states reasons to vote for the more liberal candidate and everything we want will happen. Until then, we're tilting at windmills.

[kctim]

33. We have a party

and you are crazy if you actually believe kicking millions of moderates out of the party would do the Party any good.

[TBF]

37. Right because this DLC administration is doing so much for the workers. nt

[mmonk]

63. We're the ones kept out. We're trying to open the door.

[kctim]

72. The main door IS open

You are not dreaming of another party because you are 'kept out,' you are dreaming of another party because not all of us Dems are blindly rushing through the door YOU want us to.

[mmonk]

74. The party I signed onto is not the party of today.

This party is a corporatist party. It is a party that debates itself into accepting traditional republican stances or issue frames. I'm close to saying good bye because I precisely do not blindly follow.

[kctim]

76. And I did not sign on

to be part of a liberal party forcing liberal policy onto everybody, and I too have been close to saying goodbye because I also will not blindly follow.

So, do we shake hands, go our separate ways and be ineffective? Ensuring 2012 and beyond to be repeats of 2010.
OR
Do we roll up our sleeves and work together to help prevent 2010 from being just the beginning of something neither of us want?

[NorthCarolina]

34. The Democratic Party was co-opted by DLC New Dems and Blue Dogs

a clever plan by the corporate masters to create a win-win situation for their causes regardless of which party was in power. The election of 2010 was a good start in reclaiming the Democratic Party in that over 50% of the Blue Dog caucus was given the boot, whereas over 90% of the Liberal caucus was retained. Now we must continue that trend. The conservatives will fight back by running GOP style conservatives with a "D" label in any race they can, but as voters we must resist such candidates. It is time we start picking our candidates, instead of letting the MSM and corporate America tell us who we can vote for. If the MSM takes to ridiculing a candidate as 'fringe left' or 'looney left', then that will signal to me that candidate likely represents the biggest threat to the status quo, and will garner my attention, and quite possibly my vote.

[kctim]

59. The trend you mention means nothing

Liberals won where they were expected to win. Whippie!
Moderates lost where liberals can not win and you are sadly mistaken if you think those voters voted to the right because they really wanted someone to the far-left.

[NorthCarolina]

60. Keep telling yourself that. nt

[kctim]

64. Until a progressive can win and keep the job

in a moderate area such as where I live, I have no other choice but to 'keep telling myself that.'

[Individualist]

78. Absolutely, and that's exactly what's wrong with the party.

The "lesser of two evils" is still evil.

[leeroysphitz]

38. Yep.We liberals deserve somebody to vote for too...

[Proud Liberal Dem]

54. Well, we still have the Democratic Party (and political reality to deal with)

Until other parties are built up to the levels that the modern-day Republican and Democratic Parties have been, all third parties (currently) do is split the Democratic vote. Do we really want to go the "teabagger" route and get behind a bunch of principled (but unelectable) "spoiler" candidates- just to make a point (which ultimately means nothing if they don't get elected and can't actually vote on anything)? Do we want to stay and work within the Democratic Party- the party that's still (mostly) on our side to and already has a robust political infrastructure in place- in order to make it better?
Or do we simply abandon the Democratic Party to the despised Blue Dogs, DLC-ers, and Third Way-ers while the rest of us basically resign ourselves to wandering in the political wilderness for awhile until we're able to build up the Green Party, Socialist Party, or whatever third party emerges as the strongest (in terms of support) and it finally gains the widespread ability to outright elect candidates throughout the country instead of just playing the spoiler- in most races (that is, of course, assuming there's even a country left by the time THAT happens)?
Also, please bear in mind too that even on that glorious day when we all finally quit the Democratic Party for good and have our new party, there are still going to be some choices made by the leadership for *pragmatic* reasons that not everybody is going to agree with and are going to be viewed by some as "caving" or "compromising" with our political opponents and, unfortunately, as much as we might like to believe otherwise, there will always be some "opposition" that has their own agenda and will actively work against ours.
The truth of the matter, at least to me, is that the Democratic Party is the most representative party in existence at the moment and because it's so representative, there are always going to be ideological differences but that's going to be true of any party trying to establish itself as the majority party. We don't have a European-style "coalition" government system in our country nor have we ever had one and, unless this changes sometime in the future, we better serve ourselves and our agenda better by working within what we already have established in order to make it better instead of splintering ourselves into smaller and smaller units that simply can't stand on their own.
My feeling is that if you don't like your Democratic representatives, primary them when election time comes around but when the primaries are over, hold your nose (if you have to) and support the Democratic candidate over the Republican- who will ALWAYS be worse- in the general election and try again later (start laying the groundwork for the next campaign IMMEDIATELY). If the Party is too lazy to run a candidate where you live and the Republican is running unopposed, run yourself or find somebody you support and urge them to run. If you don't like what your State Legislature, Governor, Congress, President, etc. is doing, call them, write them, etc. Why does Congress pay so much attention to the damned wingnuts? It's because a lot them call and write and e-mail so much, they jam phone lines and crash internet servers. We could be doing the same exact thing. The people screaming the loudest are the ones whom will be getting most of the attention and if our leaders don't hear (as much) from us, then I suspect that many of them will assume that we either don't really care about what's going on or are o.k. with whatever it is they are doing.
:rant:

[TBF]

56. We have all been doing this a long time, and it doesn't work.

The gap between rich and poor is vaster than it's been since the 1920's. Now what?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

61. Keep fighting the good fight

The alternative would be..........? :shrug: Until this country ceases to exist, there's always the possibility of making things better. Won't be short, won't be easy but that's reality. The forces of darkness can't completely stop change, just make it harder to achieve but it won't happen if we don't keep fighting, right?

[TBF]

66. I don't think the fight at the ballot box is working - we need to move on to protests. nt

[Proud Liberal Dem]

71. Well, (non-violent) protests are still legal

Why not? :shrug: They're certainly a legitimate tool for public discourse.

[bvar22]

65. The "Democratic Party" I joned 44 years ago no longer exists:

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

Americas own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.

For unless there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world."--FDR

As a member of the Working Class, I don't have much use for today's "New Democrat" Party.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

[kentuck]

70. Democrats choose to disarm against Republicans...

...by compromising on lower taxes for the wealthy. This is the strongest weapon that Democrats and the working class have to fight the low-wage, corporatist Republicans. The tax laws are our biggest ally to help the people of this country. If we surrender those, we may as well strip naked.

[Jack Sprat]

77. Yeah we do. n/t

[amborin]

80. K&R