Just a quick hit... the People's Party
Jimmy Dore discussed this today:
[video:https://youtu.be/JlXm_fx3NY0]
This is the continuation of the effort that started with Draft Bernie then moved on to the People's Convergence. Now they have come to the conclusion that the Democratic party is a total loss and so they are working to form a coalition. It's early days. Their website offers zero functionality right now. Even so, I'm rooting for them. Yes, we need a place to coalesce.
https://www.forapeoplesparty.org/
With nearly 2:1 people in America thinking we need a new party:
That number includes a whopping 49% of Democrats.
Half of the folks who haven't long since #DemExited think they ought to. I think the time is ripe and so I'm really hoping these folks are able to form the nucleus. Frankly, I don't honestly care who ends up holding the banner so long as there IS a banner and those of us who are actually progressive and populist have somewhere to clump up around.
Comments
....
A truth of the nuclear age/climate change: we can no longer have endless war and survive on this planet. Oh sh*t.
Interesting evolution from
trying to reform the dem party, which many of us were telling them wouldn't work, to this.
Wish them luck, I do think it will get a bit confusing with the democrats calling themselves progressives and this new party calling themselves progressives also. And the overlap as shown with the Sanders wing will be problematic in that many will continue to support dem party politicians in effect sabotaging third party progress.
Particularly from those who want nothing to do with the progressive label because of how it's been tainted by the democrats.
In the end I think unless the political system is dramatically changed, and forced to change by an independent working/lower class people's movement, third parties will continue to struggle for peanuts.
@Big Al The bigger problem, I
The bigger problem, I think, is that Bernie is now severely compromised.
We could have a big argument about when he got compromised--last year, the early nineties, when he first ran for Mayor of Burlington--but that doesn't really matter; what matters is that he's certainly been fully compromised since June of last year.
Having him as the standard-bearer when we have actual emails in which Robbie Mook tells John Podesta that he has "leverage" over Bernie is insane.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Certainly does make you
Wonder who they don't have leverage over, and what exactly they've got on Bernie?
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
@Anja Geitz
Leverage includes threats - and not just to the person involved.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
thanks to Assange & Putin
you are absolutely right on this, imo.
don't forget those pesky missing tax returns Sanders promised to release.
these questions do not go away, not if he wants to be a "leader".
There have been too many signals showing his subservience to dem power for my liking.
not to mention war, etc.
@Big Al
Well, since the actual progs will have an actual progressive platform to proudly promote, we can hope that'll help the real progs to stand out.
And I dunno, but if people voted only for progs and for no corporate candidates, I'm thinking that if the new Party would get in where there no Berniecrat progs and a lot of corporate Dems got weeded out, that would, at least, be an advance.
Problem being, of course, that the corporate Parties cheat anyway...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Sounds good and longggg overdue. But no Sanders. Don’t bother
trying to pry his lips off the DNC’s collective ass.
It’s funny (NOT the haha kind of funny) that he’s been so quiet while all these ‘revelations’ have been pouring out about the Clinton Creature and her cheating and lies. Her buying the DNC in 2015 was/is an outrage and against ALL supposed ‘democratic’ principles. That’s Banana Republic-type governance. There was no ‘Primary’. Only a Clinton/DNC rigged farce. Excuse me, but I resent being cheated of my right to participate in the election just like any knuckle-dragging supporter of the Clinton Creature.
No word on the purging of everyone who supported Ellison. And total silence on the ‘Clinton Dossier’. (These cretins said that ‘report’ was proof of TREASON. That’s about as serious and despicable a lie as can be told.) And not a damn peep about Perez filling the positions on the ‘Rules Committee’ with fakes, frauds, and lobbyists.
He’s basically useless at this point. And he crapped all over his own credibility with his praise of the Clinton Creature, the DNC, and Tom Perez. I don’t know about anyone else but I kind of think it should take a (very) limited number of lies before A rational person catches on. Or proves that since he supports what the has been going on, he AGREES with the current system of rigged politics in this country.
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
Many Now Starting
Remember a few weeks ago, reports out of union leadership (reported by Jimmy Dore among others) had the Unions looking to start a new "Labor Party"? I think this new "People's Party" should align with that effort--start aiming all your ammunition in one direction, so to speak. Hell, try to get the Greens on board as well, since all by themselves they've been about as effective as, well, nothing.
I think this is all good stuff. Whether it is called Progressive, or Populist, or Labor, or Left--any of those work. I know that the Democrats call themselves all of those, but it doesn't matter. The Democrats aren't even Liberal--they are Neoliberal.
Now, get some decent politicians on board--Nina Turner, Tulsi Gabbard, maybe Bernie Sanders (maybe not). Or better yet, find new, dynamic candidates.
A Coalition Party.
Made up of Green, Labor, Peoples, Progressive Parties. Hell, even Tea Partiers are anti war, anti Globists, anti NWO.
If most of Trumps base voted for him because of his anti interventionalist campaign promises, how many independent voters feel the same?
An Anti-War Party could bridge the gap.
IMHO.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
@earthling1
Yes, indeed, there was talk of a coalition Party, made in a video when I'd just thought 'coalition' and then that that'd never be considered in the US - when it immediately was!
People just need to see through the propaganda and realize that obviously any party that gets the most votes can win - and that any not-evil party is better than the Devil you already know is out to get you.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Thanks SnappleBC
for the Dore video.
As a life long union supporter and member I have often yearned for a "Labor Party " even in the early days when unions were still strong (60s).
I would join and support any coalition that included advocating for workers and unions.
Did I say lifelong? Well almost.
Here I am, on my first picket line (On left) at 5 years old.
Huntington, W. Virginia c. 1954
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
Here Is the Union Jimmy Dore Notice
Hi earthling1--don't know if you saw it, but here is the Jimmy Dore from 1 week ago about unions thinking of starting a labor party.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaLZS6YoWZo
It seems disconnected (currently) from the effort shown in this post (no relation to Bernie Sanders or anything), but it's also something to track.
Thanks
It was discussed in the above video also.
Neither Russia nor China is our enemy.
Neither Iran nor Venezuela are threatening America.
Cuba is a dead horse, stop beating it.
IMHO, BigAl is right
Yeah, Big Al, I said it!
The entire system of government in the US has to be changed before anything else of substance can happen. We are not running the show. Just a few very wealthy people (and foreign governments) are calling all the shots. We might see some improvement in representation of the people's wishes if we had a parliamentary form of government. But money is still running the show.
Further our system of elections is completely compromised and skewed toward the duopoly even though non-affiliated voters out number either party and are rapidly approaching the majority. The debates, which are possibly the only way a third party can get any traction, are limited to the duopoly. They control everything in the Presidential debates. The media is owned by the corporations and the oligarchs and they will do everything they can to shut out anyone not affiliated by the duopoly. And what controls everything is big money.
Because of the duopoly, we have gerrymandered districts at all levels of government due to the party in power at the time of redistricting being able to draw the new district lines. We also have one party, the Democrats openly assert in a court of law that they have every right to select candidates in the back room against the will of the voters. That same party openly cheated during the primary elections in several states, most notably, California and New York, and there appears to be no federal law against doing so.
We have political parties (yes both) who claim they want to protect the sanctity of the vote when what they really want to do is to protect their right to control the results of the vote.
I never thought I would write this, but it is very possible that I may have voted in my last election and this is by choice.
Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy
Welcome to the club
I was amazed that many of the people o worked with said that they weren't voting during the Hillary/Obama election. I thought, "how could they pass up the chance to vote for Obama after hearing what he was saying".
They told me that voting doesn't change anything, so why bother? Now I wish I had paid attention to the people who said that Obama was full of shit. I should have looked at his voting records in both t Illinois and when he was a senator. He voted the same way he governed. No wonder he was called No Drama Obama.
This club is growing
My feelings are much the same
If we have no way of ensuring our vote is counted; If we have have no recourse to contest fraudulent elections; And if we have no voice in the media, what mechanism do we have left to take back our constitutional rights?
Taxation without representation is alive and well.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
Whatever this movement's new party will be called
(corrected garbled grammar)
don't call it progressive, nor call it populist, please. Both terms have been used by people, who have not supported the majority of people's labor and social interests for equality and justice.
I can't stand the word 'progressive' and never thought it was a good label. Just because you progress to somewhere, doesn't mean you progress towards the goals the majority of 99 percent of the working population needs and wants. And even if you think all your goals are popular, never forget the little man with the mustache was very popular. Popularity is not a political or social goal.
Find the real term. The words social, working, poverty, labor and equality should be in it somehow.
Just saying, Meteor Blades called me silly for that, but I still think I am not. I progress right now into my best performance of a white privileged feminist elitist, how about that? /I guess I need to make this a snarky comment. Too bad. I kinda mean it.
https://www.euronews.com/live
Working Families Party
is my favorite name at this point. I agree with you completely mimi. Poor Meteor Blades has been absorbed by the DK Borg.
"They'll say we're disturbing the peace, but there is no peace. What really bothers them is that we are disturbing the war." Howard Zinn
I don't like to think about Meteor Blades this way ,
no need to bash someone because he believed the label was a good one and should be kept. Probably he was right. Most people don't like changes in labels. They get confused and lose their orientation. I simply like terms better, if you can recognize when they are betrayed in their meaning.
It's not that easy to understand when a progressive is not "progressive" any more. That's all I meant.
https://www.euronews.com/live
Charlie Chaplin?
I kid, I kid.
I expected someone saying this...
but that Chaplin man was a BIG man in my books.
https://www.euronews.com/live
I am surprised the concept of a 3rd party is not embraced here
From it'll never work to keep Bernie out of it the comments in this thread are pretty remarkable. I don't see any other option. The two parties will never, ever cede power from big money to the people.
I get that everyone has different ideas about the ideals a new party will represent but we have to get serious or we will wind up with Trump or Biden as our next President.
Some of us here would support the Nobody Party,
so we could tell people to vote for nobody.
that's too fancy, Big Al,
because we want "Something" and "Someone".
So, let's support that "Something" and "Someone" in the "Something Party"...
https://www.euronews.com/live
@Blueslide I don't want someone that
I don't want someone that Robbie Mook has "leverage" over to be the face of the new party, whatever it is.
That seems fairly straightforward and logical to me.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal
That leverage was likely allowing/disallowing him corporate media time to talk ideas, within limits, on the corporate media, to make it appear that the Dems had a human face,. And that'll go the instant he steps over that line - they hate permitting him that much, as it makes the people restless (that being what's required for change and Bernie) but they know he'll walk - I expect to a new party - if there's nothing he's allowed to do toward the common good.
And he needs to keep that up until it's closer to a general election in order to keep the idea alive in the corporate-media-restricted public mind that government working in the public interest really is possible and actually works, where corporate/billionaire self-interest management doesn't, because nobody else dares to do this but Bernie.
And the smears are picking up now because they know this, but fear the results if they just shut him down/railroad/dispose of him.
Just my thoughts, going by Bernie's life-long character and characteristics of changing strategies but keeping on it until some public good is achieved, one way or another and the symptoms of pathology he's trying to work around in order to do it.
Edit: and we know that they think he has a damn good chance, or Hillary wouldn't be spouting nonsense already that if Bernie wins in 2020, it'll be because of the no-longer-existing Soviet Union.
Bernie's still running as an Indie in Vermont, despite all efforts to force him into the Dems. Think about it. And what he's dealing with in terms of a lawless group of psychopaths. He's walking a literal minefield.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
@Ellen North I don't enjoy saying
I don't enjoy saying this, because I like both him and Jane, but I suspect the leverage has to do with her and her time as a university administrator. But who knows? It could be any skeleton in any closet of any person Bernie cares about. Remember that leverage works just as well, perhaps better, when it's aimed, not at you, but at someone you love. I think Bernie's smart enough to keep his own nose pretty clean, especially since he's been a politician for so many decades (someone entering that field does everything they can to keep their nose clean for as long as possible, if they're smart--and he is. The cleaner your nose, the greater your potential independence). Also, I don't think they would have been trying stupid shit like digging up 40-year-old articles he wrote in which he discussed women having rape fantasies, and using that to try to discredit him, if they had something seriously bad he had done which would have dealt a real hammer blow. Remember that Clinton and the people she represents were irritated by the persistence and power of his campaign. If they could have presented something bad Bernie had done to the public, they likely would have. But presenting some kind of shady half-obscure problem with his wife, for instance, about financial issues at some university years ago--that wouldn't do the trick on the campaign trail. It might take out a weak campaign, but not a strong one. However, if they could make some kind of legal threat to Jane, even a nasty civil suit, that might not derail Bernie's supporters, but it definitely could derail Bernie, because he would want to protect his wife.
Just speculation, but my best guess is that what they had on him is actually something they have on someone he cares about.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
this is really getting on my nerves
Hillary wouldn't be spouting nonsense already that if Bernie wins in 2020, it'll be because of the no-longer-existing Soviet Union.
To the point that I've declared a personal moratorium on talking about her, her colleagues, or her political machine. See my Open Thread.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Blueslide As far as people not
As far as people not supporting a third party, the only reason for that--that I've seen given here--is that we have rampant election fraud and voter suppression which anybody powerful can apparently engage in without consequences. In other words, we really couldn't count on our votes being counted, at least not accurately. That's unlikely to get better now that the Department of Homeland Security runs the elections.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I suspect that my participation
In the next general election will be limited to the role of spectator and Putin shill, as I am most certain I will be called by other "Progressives". Assuming of course there will still be a place one can comment on our "democracy" in action as a Putin shill.
There is always Music amongst the trees in the Garden, but our hearts must be very quiet to hear it. ~ Minnie Aumonier
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal If we don't support a
If we don't support a third party, and we don't want to try and force Democrats into creating the party we want, we are de facto disenfranchised. I don't plan on settling for that option. I am not naive enough to think I can make a difference in deconstructing this corrupt kleptocracy, but I will try.
As for Jane Sanders doing dirty tricks at Burlington College - who really cares ? We have a President who among other things is a sexual predator. HRC has been bought and paid for so many times she'd make a streetwalker blush. So the litmus test for a potential 3rd party candidate is the spouse of the candidate must be pure as the driven snow ? I don't buy it.
I'm not convinced Bernie should be the Presidential candidate for a 3rd party. I am convinced creating a Democratic Socialist 3rd party that is on the ballot in every state and institutes a fair nominating process would draw a lot of votes in a national election.
@Blueslide I don't care what
I don't care what Jane did at Burlington College, particularly; I care about the fact that somebody has a leash on Bernie Sanders. While that leash is there, while they have "leverage," whatever it is, he shouldn't be our leader. That's all I was saying.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal Ok...well no one
Ok...well no one has a leash on Bernie Sanders. That's just conspiracy theory nonsense. He supported HRC for the sole reason that he felt she is far less damaging as President than Trump. An opinion that, like it or not, is quite plausible one year in.
@Blueslide I guess it
I guess it depends on whether you believe in Wikileaks and the data they release. Or whether you believe Robbie Mook was lying when he told John Podesta they had "leverage" on Bernie Sanders.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
@Cant Stop the Macedonian Signal It's really
It's really hard to know what/who to believe sometimes. But I think Robby Mook is likely full of shit. As for wikileaks, Barrett Brown seems to think Assange is full of it too and that he's a tool.
@#9.1 Don't need a party for that. n/t