We need a strategy, and unfortunately we need it now
I could start this essay trying to analyze Bernie's strategy - it looks to me like he's accepting that the nomination has been stolen, that Hillary has gotten away with it, so he is moving on to plan B - to transform his movement into a power, and we have to assume something like that, because that is (or could be) the circumstance that we will be adjusting to, but that is not - cannot be - the point. Bernie's plan is Bernie's plan. The movement is ours. He cannot tell us what his plan really is, and we cannot sit back and wait for it to come to pass, because then it won't.
I could also begin by reading tea leaves - Trump's choice of that monster from Indiana proves that we cannot hope that Trump might not be as evil as he has presented himself in the primaries, but Hillary has been threatening to nominate Liz Warren or Sherrod Brown - eviscerating what little left there is in the senate. Why? She would either provide herself with impeachment insurance ("go ahead Tea Partiers, see what you'll get?" the only problem is that it won't work) if she wins, while her masters can point left and blame us for her losing if she loses. We can assume that Hillary will be our mortal enemy, but there is nothing we can do about it, so why bother talking about it - just plan for how to deal with it.
This gets me to where I think we should go. We cannot support Hillary, even in return for promises - Bernie can pretend that that is what he is offering, but if we continue what is indisputably an abusive relationship she will only get worse. And Trump is no option. Hillary will steal the election or not, Trump will ride a racist wave or not, there's nothing we can do about it.
Therefore I recommend that we come up with a plan that works whoever wins. First we vote Green or at least exclusively for progressives in at least safe (either way) states. Since we cannot have an effect on the outcome (now, in reality) anyway we must establish ourselves as a power, and we can only do that by reducing Hillary's vote total. This will also strengthen Bernie's position as a power, win or lose, by demonstrating the size of our block. And we must also back it up downballot. If Alan Greyson gets more votes in Florida than Hillary progressive Dems might get the message, that kowtowing to the corporatists is a losing strategy, not a necessity.
But that is not enough. It is shortsighted - the corporatists will simply outlast us if the 2016 election is all we think of. Our plan must take an ultimate goal - and that goal must be the destruction of the corporate wing of the Democratic Party, the party itself if necessary. (and it probably is) We have proven that we cannot defeat the fascists by supporting corporatists, therefore we must defeat the corporatists first, regardless of the short term cost.
Where does that put Bernie? Contrary to his rhetoric, we need him, but we must lead him. He has the skills to guarantee that whatever direction we go will come out positive, but we must give him a direction to direct and not undermine him. We must be coherent. We must give him something reliable to work with.
But like Bernie, it's not about me and/or my ideas, it has to be organic. We must go where we believe we should go. It's just that we have to make our decisions now.
Comments
i think plan B is...
...to get Jill Stein on the national debate stage. gotta bump up her numbers somehow but i don't know how fair pollsters will be in that regard. they'll easily take a bribe of some sort to keep her numbers down.
I think we have a lot of options, blue drop
And I think it makes sense to back ALL of them, and see which ones have staying power. I think Brand New Congress is a really good idea, if they can stick with it. I think raising the profile of the Greens as a viable party is important even IF BNC is successful.
And supposedly Bernie is starting something to support Progressive candidates, too.
Although it's not targeted, which might be what you're asking for, I think consistently supporting any and all progressive initiatives at this point is a good idea, until we can clearly see which ones take off.
i think we're all searching...
...for something to coalesce behind as soon as possible to make the most impact in the upcoming election, whether that's money or volunteering. the big stuff may not happen for several more elections but i think we would all like to see some indication of the wind being taken out of the Democratic party sails this November, some evidence that progressives are making strides. we did get 45% of the vote in the primary but we've already seen that makes no difference to the Democratic party.
what you're saying is exactly what I'm saying.
On to Biden since 1973
Not sure if I am understanding you correctly
But this really bothers me:
Are you saying that in a battleground state we should vote lesser of two evils? If so I find that both undemocratic and in contradiction with the latter part of your statement, i.e. establishing ourselves as a power. How do we establish ourselves as a power if we only vote our conscience in those states where the outcome is a foregone conclusion? To take down the Democrat machine we have to effect the outcome or they will never learn to respect us.
There's some indication that my state may be in play, but I'm voting for Jill, the candidate that best represents my interests. Let the chips fall where they may and a pox on both their houses. The elites will only start to listen to us when we cause them to lose, because maintaining power is all that interests them.
I'd rather learn from one bird how to sing than teach ten thousand stars how not to dance. - e.e.cummings
I took it as doh saying at a minimum in the safe states
I didn't see anything that said we should vote for Hillary in a battleground state, but some do feel that way, as is their right. I read it as, if nothing else, vote in numbers for Jill in safe states to get her on the map. But I could be wrong!
I do agree with you though, that the state doesn't matter. If we're serious about progressive change, then we vote for the progressive, full stop.
Ride the Tide
The tide is turning Green.
The same momentum that propelled Bernie will propel Jill.
I agree with you
but I accept that the lesser evil option may be legitimate to some people because/if Trump is so bad. I also think that the difference between Hillary and Trump is in how they will do irreparable damage to America, but for any person the difference might be important. (I am a relatively wealthy white retiree in poor health - I do not personally fear racism or war, but I fear economic depression and the elimination of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) I also live in CA, so it is an easy position for me. If someone believes differently I do not condemn him. Ultimately what is important is to depress Hillary's vote total, not whether she wins or loses. Either way we can say "You lost because you weren't worthy and we were finally fed up!" or "You won, but only because we allowed it. See? we cost you 20 points in CA, if we'd done that in Ohio you would be waiting for a knock on your door from Trump's FBI. Now toe our line or else!" She won't, but if we make it stick downballot Dems might decide that selling out is not only immoral, but fatal.
I have voted Green or nothing for over twenty years - unless (the Republican) is truly dangerous and has a legitimate chance to win. I honestly cannot think of an election where I had to vote for a Dem since 1992. (oops, there was an attorney general election in the 90s where the fascist ran on a platform of drug testing taxi drivers)
On to Biden since 1973
For me the lesser evil is
For me the lesser evil is Trump. I don't really want him to win, but given our choices, it is very, very important to me that we break Hillary and the Democrats, and I will run right to do it if necessary. If state polls indicate a close fight, I will most likely vote Trump.
One thing I've been puzzling over is what to do if it's not a close fight. I'm not entirely fond of Jill Stein or the Green Party, but if that's where people's support starts to go, I will join in. One thing I remember from earlier in the primary was downballot Dems whining about Bernie's "money hose" - all he had to do was endorse a candidate and suddenly they were flooded with highly competitive amounts of grassroots cash, without even having to spend time on the phone or kissing rich ass. Turning that hose on Stein might send an even stronger message than voting or polling for her does. Of course there's only so much money to spread around, and every dollar you give to Stein doesn't get to a progressive downballot, and we already know Stein isn't going to win. Then again, after seeing Lucy Flores support the establishment narrative after Nevada, and Merkley endorse a TPP supporter (Ron Wyden) and then Hillary, and Liz Warren's lack of support for Bernie, et cetera, "progressive" doesn't mean much to me where politicians are concerned these days.
Lessor of two evils is insane
Lessor of two evils is insane. The politics of fear is a Clinton strategy, and needs to be debunked. Hillary is the biggest threat to what is left of our safety net, only a Republican in Democratic clothing can reduce or change Social Security, approve TPP and continue fracking and fossil fuels.
We have to support Greens in all states including the battleground states. A third party has to grow to the point that it will pull swing voters from each party until it replaces one of the top two parties. With the high levels of mistrust of the two major parties, the time for a third party to succeed is reaching a critical point. When we come in first or second place we will gain the political power to start getting progressive policies implemented.
Spread the word in social and MSM to rally Green everywhere