What this Country needs is a Progressive Party
What this Country needs IS ...
BERNIE SANDERS: What you really need in this country is a progressive party standing with the middle class and working class of this country. And yes, a conservative party that is more fiscally conservative. That is where we should be as a country.The Republican Party today now is a joke maintained by a media which really does not force them to discuss their issues.
[...]
Source link: RealClear Politics, March 31, 2016
It is obvious from the last week of the DNC condemnation of Sanders' character -- that the Democratic Party is now "a joke" too.
At least from the perspective of caring about and carrying forward about Progressive Ideals and a substantive Progressive Agenda.
The corporate-infused DNC is really stepping in it Big-Time this time. Equating Bernie with a few of his most vocal supporters anonymous out-bursts.
Maybe they will realize, when tens of millions of former-Dems suddenly become Independents, because of their swift-boat type tactics (according to Snopes.com).
It would be better yet, if us ignored, used, disgruntled Dems, could somehow become members of an actual modern-day Progressive Party -- as Bernie advocates for in that video clip above.
Hope that "Political-affiliation" option becomes available soon. I would check that box in a 21st-century minute!
It’s obvious the neo-liberal, corporate-catering DNC only wants our progressive Votes, and bleeding-heart Money,
— BUT not our Ideas or Principles.
...
This “arranged relationship” for the sake of appearances, (the DNC bi-annual pretense of 'supporting' Progressive ideas)
is just not “working out” for me anymore. If we were an actual "couple", I would have 'broken it off', long long ago.
I suspect I am not alone.
At some indefinable, some inexcusable slanderous point, it should become obvious to compassionate souls everywhere, who only what actual People-first based progress,
-- That Enough is Enough! ... That it is time for Real Change ... lasting Change.
Hopefully that will be the lasting lesson of this lying, smearing, abusive "rough and tumble" election cycle. Hopefully some lasting good, will come from it all. In addition to our Media's pre-arranged ... "More of the Same."
Comments
Yes it does. I'll join, fuck Democrats.
Edit: Maybe I need to take a break, the level of discourse at Hillary land is pissing me off and I don't like it when I have thoughts like that. I feel like I was living with a close family for 10-12 years and then all of a sudden half of them lifted their masks and I realized they were the enemy and had been hiding it all along.
There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties.. This...is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.--John Adams
It is a Choice
that is long overdue.
Thank kharma, love the quote,
What this Country needs is a Progressive Party ... OBVIOUS
What this Country needs is a Progressive Party ... well that is obvious to anyone not on the corporate payroll (which leaves out any corporate media drones, including Maddow.)
In the video Sanders says, the GOP is a joke, and says that's his two cents, then Maddow asks for "three cents" and fleshes out her concerns about if the GOP is blowing up ... while I [a progressive] am thinking, "Doesn't that mean the Dems are currently the de facto conservative party?"
Rachel
Rachel has a foot in both worlds now.
Me thinks the corporate world is winning.
And so it goes ... just ask K.O.
By their Actions
What the Democratic Party has done since Bill Clinton first won election demonstrates that they are in fact the conservative party. Not a single progressive issue which doesn't involve gay rights has gotten past them. If gay votes weren't so vital to Democratic victories, would those have been allowed to pass? I doubt it.
Noam Chomsky's observation that the Democrats are now the moderate Republicans has been brought on here at The Caucus before. Moderate Republicans were much more likely to be conservative than liberal, even if they were willing to allow a liberal issue to see the light of day once in a while. Increasingly, even so-called liberal Democrats oppose such things.
QED
Vowing To Oppose Everything Trump Attempts.
by their ...
by their ... pragmatic compromises and corporate-sellout riders,
we shall know them and their core values, which short-change our best interests whenever they can.
Catfood Commission anyone?
Don't forget those little-watched ear-marked Riders:
Jamie Dimon Lobbies for the Cromnibus Bill -- TWICE
by jamess -- Dec 11, 2014
Why should We have to Pay their Ransom -- just to Keep our Government Open
by jamess -- Dec 13, 2014
About that Rider to cut Pensioners' Benefits -- Guess who's to Blame
by jamess -- Dec 13, 2014
Today Warren took on TBTF Citigroup on the Floor of the Senate
by jamess -- Dec 12, 2014
IOW, the real quid-pro-quo currency of modern-day corporate-dems.
Don’t forget the Obama administration’s mortgage crisis failure.
This is Digby or Heather Parton, whom I count as among the best of the Democratic bloggers. But even she can be—I don’t know, disingenuous?—during election season. Why do I say that? Here’s her interview of David Dayen regarding his book on the mortgage crisis.
http://www.salon.com/2016/05/19/it_is_happening_again_david_dayen_on_the...
What do both Dayen and Digby avoid mentioning about the refusal to prosecute banks and the failure to clean up the fraudulent mortgage paper transfers? That it’s 100% on the Obama administration. She asks “Are we safe from it happening again?” and the answer is “It is [already] happening again,” because of decisions made by President Obama and his AG. But the name “Obama” appears nowhere in the article. Instead Digby ends the interview by abruptly pivoting to a question about Trump.
In contrast, Atrios of the Eschaton blog (Duncan Black in Philly) — another Democratic blogger I consider one of the absolute best — isn’t afraid to name this failure of a Democratic administration and confront it head-on.
http://www.eschatonblog.com/2016/05/the-obummer-years.html
Addendum: here’s David Dayen alone. Same thing: no Obama mention
No mention of President Obama, or his attorney general, or guys like Lanny Breuer by name — just anonymous, abstract references to “the Justice Department.”
Foreclosure fraud is supposed to be a thing of the past, but it happens every day
The book, Chain of Title, is a tour de force, and Dayen’s work is outstanding. Yet the cognitive dissonance remains: presenting oneself as a courageous reporter, but when it comes to calling out the decision-makers responsible, refusing to name names?
Writers, don’t make self-censorship a habit. It’s pernicious.
Holder is a real piece of work.
He went from a cushy job defending white-color criminals to being Obama's attorney general, where he didn't prosecute any white-collar criminals, back to his cushy job defending white-collar criminals.
Now Hillary promises to continue this legacy of Democratic appointees . . .
Only connect. - E.M. Forster
Just tweeted this out
Absolutely effing right on.
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
Thanks Steven D
appreciate the support.
We Progressives had better wise-up,
and quit relying on corporate-interests,
to care about our issues and goals.
And so it begins ...
Sounds like he's saying the Democratic party needs to be
the "progressive" party just like the GOP should be a fiscally conservative party. I don't think he's advocating for a third party here. And again, his primary concern is defeating the republicans and he's said in the past that third parties have no chance at that. I think this is just more of his rhetoric regarding "revitalizing" the Democratic party.
could be
good luck with THAT dream.
Millennials have got the sense now,
of what their combined voice really means.
I hope they carry that Voice forward,
in ways that by-pass the DNC
-- and not get consumed and silenced by them.
Like the Progressive Congressional Caucus has pathetically experienced,
time and time again.
Well, the DLC Dem party won't entertain a real progressive
Stance , so we may as well do it.
Indeed.
Question: What do Progressives have to lose?
Answer: "More of the Same"™
I'm in, jamess!
Good job, as always!
thanks geebeebee
every once in the while,
the fates conspire to give me some clarity.
Unitedprogressiveparty.org
What about unitedprogressiveparty.org? Just saw it today. It seems promising from what little I saw. Any comments?
Hell no, we won't go along.
That does look interesting
Here's a hot link
http://www.unitedprogressiveparty.org/
Thanks for the info!
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
WOW, thanks for thanks for that Link, Lookout
Their opening statement, definitely has some Umph.
The Future is Now.
-- signed The United Progressive Party.
It is truly interest what their Issue Page, consists of.
Simply amazing ... and very good to see.
I hope they get some serious Traction. And a substantial membership.
Glad to contribute
...and wouldn't have been able to without your essay.
And don't forget that next week streaming on therealnews.com is Nader's meeting in DC.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
UPP has a good site, it's got some catchy tunes
time will tell if it'll be another one-hit wonder.
Off to a good start for sure. Let's keep on truckin'!
Great to see this!
Thanks for the link.
inactive account
What a pyrrhic victory for Hillary in Nevada
She and the rest of the DNC crooks may have gotten 4 delegates but they sure lost a heck of a lot more than that in the long run.
Beware the bullshit factories.
Good post, jamess.
Thanks TomP
for the inspiration.
And picking up on a Theme:
People send Bernie $27 so he can make a stand in CA.
As I just did, thanks to Tom.
He received another $27
from me today!
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.”
George W. Bush
I thought we already had one.....
the Green Party. If it isn't, why isn't it? If it is, why does it lose so bad? I think we're missing some key notes.
"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon
I think
the big reason is
that they appear to be a 1-Issue Party.
Though the Environment is always among my top 3 issues,
I don't think the general public sees it the same way.
Although maybe with the rapid on-set of Climate Change,
maybe the general consensus is rife for a wholesale change?
That said, I will either Vote Green in November, or write-in Sanders.
And am proud to say my recent Sanders Vote, helped to give him a solid win in my state.
Being Green
To be honest, I do not fully understand what the Green Party of the US would do. In the abstract, it look good. But when I look at the ten pillars it lists, I see the word Decentralization. 8m not sure what that means or how it squares with the party's desire for large definitive changes in how the US behaves globally. I see Non-Violence, but I'm not aware of a party that actually encourages violence directly. I see Diversity and Feminism, which are pleasant things, but I don't see basic pillars devoted to homelessness, the working poor, the protection and expansion of health care and social security, and other forms of financial and economic justice issues.
I'm all for social and cultural issues, but the country slowly but surely advances in these areas, with the inbreds on the right using the government to defend their ignorance. Take the gummint out, and things will progress. But the Greens don't present themselves as possessing Bernie's passion or understanding of economics. The environment, the social justice issues, the global and community issues, etc. can all be folded into Bernie's economic focus and become much easier to communicate and digest Until then, I think most of the country will view them as well-intentioned do-gooders who aren't tough enough to run the country.
And of course, the big issue: how can a party that is barely able to put up viable candidates for city council positions field someone for the biggest job in the world. 15 years into the Green Party and sadly they remain at square one.
So different from the German Green Party.
Of course, there is a price for succeeding and not remaining on square one. One ends up becoming mainstream, supporting U.S. imperialism just as much as any other party. Of the parties with meaningful representation in German legislatures, there are only two that don’t support U.S. imperialism: the Left (ex-communist) Party and the right-wing populist AfD.
Marketing... I hate to keep harping on this
But its true. The Green party to most people is a one-issue party that puts the environment before all things - economic issues, social issues. While this is not true, people don't know it. Honestly, I didn't even know it before this election cycle, and I'm a life-long progressive.
They chose a bad name.
Americans are largely surface people - we need a new party with a name that's either generic enough to mean nothing (i.e. Democratic Party, Republican Party) or inclusive enough to pull people from the left, right, and independents. There are plenty of people who vote R for "economic reasons" alone - because they think they'll pay lower taxes or their business will do better. We could bring those people into a new party if it didn't scare them away.
Any party that addresses economic inequality and tax code unfairness would appeal to those economic issue voters.
I agree with jamess & Haikukitty
In the words of Elaine (of Seinfeld): "You have to wonder if 'War & Peace' would have been as successful with the original title, 'War, what is it good for?'"
Good one!
You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again you did not know. ~ William Wiberforce
If you can donate, please! POP Money is available for bank-to-bank transfers. Email JtC to make a monthly donation.
I've long argued that a sane opposition party
is necessary -- two clearly defined, sane parties that aren't in the pocket of Big Donor or the Religious Reich would be awesome. Actually, it would be getting back to the way things were before the rise of the MIC and other lobbying groups, and before the "Moral" "Majority" and all the "family" groups that have a very limited definition of family.
A Conservative Party could stand with working and middle class just as well as a Progressive Party -- just with different ideas. I've never believed that the Democrats have all the answers -- then again, I grew up with reasonable Republicans in the House and Senate. And the two parties would be able to compromise (just as Sanders has over the years) rather than one acting as a roadblock just because the President is the "wrong" shade of hue or in the "wrong" party.
Bernie's right that the Republican Party is a joke: pro-fundamentalism in religion, anti-science, pro-corporate, anti-environment. What Bernie doesn't say is that the Democrats are also a joke, or are fast approaching one.
the fact that Americans
would so willingly limit ourselves to 2 corporately constrained, mainstream do-nothing Parties,
just goes to show how limited we are, and how self-defeating,
when it comes to pro-actively trying to "build that better world"
-- that's supposedly most want to leave, to "those who will follow" our ambivalent, unimaginative, do-nothing malaise.
Progressive Party
Yes, 100%! We need a Progressive party.
On another note, your images are so big they're bleeding across the page and hiding new essays on the right from view. Could you resize? Thanks.
OK
It's a Video embed, not a image.
And it looks fine on my previews and screens.
I will try to resize it, hope it doesn't distort or truncate the video clip.
Question: Are there recommended Maximum Width for images on this site ... what is that, in pixels?
Same question for Video Clips, what are the recommended Maximum Width and Heights for them?
Could some knowledgeable person, enlighten me please.
Thx.
that person might be viewing on an iPhone for all we know
Looks fine to me (on a Mac w Safari).
Just a question...
Exactly how realistic is this option, really? The Green Party has been toiling away for over 30 years in this country (founded in 1984), and has yet only managed to gain ballot access in 21 states. You would have to assume the rules for gaining access in the other 29 states represent a steep hill indeed. Can disgruntled Bernie supporters succeed where the Greens have thus far failed?
In my opinion, the very best approach might well be an inside/outside strategy. A genuine progressive party with a strong focus on systemic reform would undoubtedly be a good thing. But Sanders' candidacy has also shown the value of working within the established two-party system, in order to gain media exposure, ballot access, and the ability to directly confront corporate candidates like Hillary Clinton.
Therefore, I think it would also be extremely useful to form a group explicitly dedicated to advocating for progressive causes and candidates within the Democratic Party. What this group should have is some kind of non-negotiable core agenda, and no Democratic candidate would be eligible for its endorsement or support unless that candidate were willing to embrace all tenets of the core agenda unconditionally.
Really, it makes perfect sense when you think about it. Why in hell would I want to get out and work for a candidate who supports my priorities, my values, and my policy agenda, only to turn around and fall into line behind a candidate who is openly hostile to all those things should my candidate fall short? My first loyalty is to my beliefs, not to some misguided concept of party loyalty that expects me to be an enabler for politicians advocating and supporting things I consider vile, immoral, and totally at odds with my core values.
If Bernie Sanders falls short this time around, perhaps in 2020 there will be another progressive Democrat willing to step forward and challenge the regressive, neoliberal faction of the party represented by Hillary Clinton. It would be good if there was some kind of party infrastructure in place to support that effort. And it would also be good if there was another ballot option progressive voters could embrace in case the powers that be in the Dem Party were successful in putting the blocks to that candidate once again.
I think what a lot of voters are now saying is basically, "I'm an FDR Democrat, but that doesn't necessarily also mean that I'm a DLC Democrat." What we should be focusing on is creating a new reality in which such people have options both within and outside the Democratic Party. There really is no effective way to pressure the DP to reform other than withholding your vote, and this of course has always been the fatal drawback of the LOTE voting strategy.
inactive account
nice comment (n/t)
Yeah-But
The DNC has no intention of playing fairly with Progressives Dems.
Look at the repeated coercing of the Congressional Progressive Caucus
for evidence of that taken-for-granted fact.
The beauty of an independent Progressive Party in my mind,
is that it gives the 39% of actual Independents in this country,
(and the 15-20% of actual Progressives)
SOMEWHERE to Go -- besides the tried and failed "Standard" status-quo choices.
You know what they say about repeating the same thing over and over again,
and somehow magically expecting a different result.
It's enough to make a person "Mad as Hell" ...
Would love to see...
the Democratic Party fall by the wayside, but I don't see that attempting to "subvert" the Democratic Party from within and building a new party to be mutually exclusive goals. Even though Sanders will almost surely be denied the presidential nomination, it would be hard to argue that he hasn't accomplished anything worthwhile during his campaign. He's brought a lot of attention, enthusiasm, energy and support to the issues at the core of his candidacy. I doubt he would have had anywhere close to the same impact running as an independent or 3rd-party candidate. So instead of worrying about the Democratic Party establishment honchos exploiting progressives, perhaps it would be more useful to figure out ways in which we can exploit them.
inactive account
lack of ballot access is not the GP's fault
when there is an organized bureaucracy in government to target a popular political party from being listed in federal elections.
Greens polled 5% or more in the four recent governor races of the following election years:
2002 (California)
2006 (Illinois)
2006 (Maine)
2002 (New Mexico)
Since 1999, these are the following "one-hit wonder" parties which accomplished the same in governor races: Constitution, Libertarian , Conservative, Reform (remember Gov. Jesse Ventura of Minnesota).
Also not to forget Independence, Progressive, and Moderate which cut the 5% mustard here, too.
In other words, the only party that consistently polled 5% or more in recent (1999 or later) governor's races has been Green. Absolutely. No contest.
If your metric for 3rd party access in all 50 states, then Green Party is clearly the most qualified of all the dozens of lesser-known parties. Based on governors' races, which is a reasonably big deal.
We also discussed it eariler this week. It's real good to see
Bernie edging right up to the edge. Go Bernie Go! :=)
Resilience: practical action to improve things we can control.
3D+: developing language for postmodern spirituality.
Ralston Sounds Like Bob Cesca. nt
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Why are we looking away from what Bernie has started?
One of the problems, traditionally, with starting new parties is that they tend to be small, tend to be or appear to be narrow in focus.
Right now, I wish I were a wonk instead of an anecdotist, because I could give you a link to a comment over at reddit to the effect that over 10 million people have voted for Bernie in these primaries - and that does not include the people who were turned away at primaries/caucuses or the people whose provisional ballots were not counted.
When has a third party ever, in short period of time, drawn to itself from - not just a state or a region - but from across the entire country 10 million dedicated, impassioned, empowered people? Is it not already happening with Brand New Congress - an impressive, practical movement of Bernie supporters planning a 50 state strategy to change the face of congress in the year 2018.
The infrastructure is here already.
This.
All the more reason for Bernie to take it all the way to Philly.
Building out his state organizations one primary at time, he's creating a viable 50-state infrastructure complete with competitive fundraising and dominating online marketing capabilities.
And he's offering it to the Dems on a silver platter if they want it.
BUT, if the decrepit, sclerotic Dem establishment decides to stick with the girl that brung 'em, it's an easy switch from D to P.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
Hold that thought jamess. Joe has a first draft of a new
party platform. The folks at reddit/kossacks_for_sanders are asking the same question. what is it? 43% of voters are unaffiliated or Independents or identify as independent?
While each of the two traditional parties can't muster 25% for either one.
The name must be right, what ever that is. And there needs to be a strategy to be on as many state ballots as possible. Or maybe that's a tactic. Anyways, if the Progressive Party mentioned above, has the right platform, and some smart foundations, maybe it's something to build on.
Or we start a new one.
You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again you did not know. ~ William Wiberforce
If you can donate, please! POP Money is available for bank-to-bank transfers. Email JtC to make a monthly donation.
correct me if I'm wrong, but Progressive
Party has done no better than any of its closest contenders. Again that includes Constitution, Libertarian , Conservative, Reform, Independence, Progressive, and Moderate. All for the governors' races since 1999.
Note that I left out Green. It been a consistent winner compared to all of above. I must gravitate in that direction, although everything hinges on what happens after the primaries.
You can form your own party, I'll support it and encourage it as much as possible. But I vote for the person(Bernie) not the party in every case. Jill Stein is socially progressive in every sense of the word.
Righteous rant, jamess. Bernie's "Progressive Party" is exactly
what we need. This should be the year both parties burn to ashes, just as the Repugs are experiencing now. I think with Hillary stealing the nomination it will just have that delayed result, or slow-motion, inevitable burn.
As you say,
I don't really care if we call it that, though that would be preferable because it's the most direct in its explanation. I'd settle for Bernie on the Green Party ticket this year for expediency in an emergency situation. It's all semantics anyway.
What it will come down to is where one stands, from A to Z, on issues. There's no doubt it would be the runaway party of the 99%, with the majority of Independents and disaffected Dems and Repubs.
"If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED
FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD
WAS MUSIC"
- Kurt Vonnegut