General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFormer Salt Lake City mayor Rocky Anderson running for President. A progressive alternative to Obama
Rocky Anderson a progressive alternative to Obama
Former Salt Lake mayor says Democrats, Republicans sustain corrupt system
by Steven Higgs
December 14, 2011
Americans who feel betrayed by timid, capitulatory leadership from Democrats like President Barack Obama and Indiana Senate candidate Joe Donnelly now have a candidate to consider at the presidential level. On Dec. 12, 2011, former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson announced his candidacy on the Justice Party ticket and the next day laid out a cogent progressive agenda on Democracy Now!
"There is clearly a convergence of interests regarding the concerns we have and the concerns of Occupy Wall Street," he told The Guardian. "There's little I've heard from the Occupy movement that I would disagree with, and I think there's little we support that they would disagree with."
Obama's Kansas speech on income inequality last week was "total hypocrisy," Anderson said. The president has accepted more Wall Street money than any other candidate in history, and he is surrounded by alumni from Goldman Sachs.
"All any of us have to do is look at our pension plans, our 401(k) accounts, and we can see the direct impacts of this economic disaster, brought to us through, by and large, these criminal acts committed by these Wall Street firms and their employees," he said. "And not one of them has been brought to justice under the Obama administration." "Just follow the money, and youll see why Congress and the White House are pursuing these policies that are so inimical to the interest of the American people."
Read the full article at:
http://www.bloomingtonalternative.com/node/10879
Rocky Anderson speaking at anti-war rally in Salt Lake City in 2006
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex-Salt Lake Mayor Rocky Anderson, Former Democrat, Launches Third Party Presidential Bid Against Obama, GOP
Amy Goodman interview with Rocky Anderson
December 13, 2011
ROCKY ANDERSON: We launched the Justice Party because the entire system is so corrupt. Its so diseased. We know that the public interest is not being served by anyone in the system right now, particularly the two dominant parties who have sustained this corrupt system and who are sustained by it.
AMY GOODMAN: Third party, what does that mean now? How exactly will you run for president?
ROCKY ANDERSON: Well, actually, I consider this a second party. The Republican-Democratic parties havealthough theyre at an impasse, much to the detriment of the American people, on some issues, they really, through their collusion, have brought this country to its knees economically. Without the Democrats colluding with the Republicans, we would not have engaged in an illegal, aggressive war against Iraq. Weve seen Democrats and Republicans together granting retroactive immunity to the telecom companies. Then-Senator Obama promised this nation, before the primary, before he won the Democratic primary for the presidency, that he would join a filibuster against telecom company immunity. And then, as soon as he won the nomination, of course, he not only didnthe didnt back offonly back off on his promise to join a filibuster, he voted for the legislation. Who in this country gets Congress to grant them retroactive immunity for committing clearly felonious acts?
And then, now we see the same thing. He comes into office, and he says, "Lets look forward, not backwards," when it comes to war criminals, people who have engaged in torture, clearly in violation not only of international law, but domestic law. So, we have this two-tiered system of government. Not only a two-tiered system in terms of our economy, with very few privileged people cleaning up while the rest of us are suffering in so many dramatic ways because of the economic upheaval, but we have this special class of people who arent even held accountable under the law. And all three branches of government are part of this. The courts allow the executive branch to come in, and they dismiss cases on the basis of the subversive state secrets doctrine, where the executive branch gets to determine whether these cases go forwardvictims of torture, people who are challenging illegal surveillance programs by the government. Amy, this is unprecedented in this nation and so completely contrary to the notion of an equal justice system.
See the full interview or read the Democracy Now interview transcript at:
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/12/13/ex_salt_lake_mayor_rocky_anderson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rocky Anderson's radical third way
US history is littered with failed third parties, but the progressive populism of Salt Lake City's ex-mayor might just break the mould
by Gary Younge
December 12, 2011
As a progressive former Democrat in Utah, the most reliably conservative state in the country, Rocky Anderson is no stranger to long odds or short shrift. Among other things, Anderson has been a fierce opponent of the Iraq invasion, supports gay marriage and is an ardent environmentalist. (Think former London mayor Ken Livingstone surrounded by conservative Mormons.)
His agenda is a familiar one on the left. Broadly speaking, he wants to break the hold of corrupting corporate influence on the two main parties and give a voice to ordinary working people. It also chimes with the general thrust of the Occupy movement, even though the latter has steered clear of engagement with electoral politics.
"The more time has gone on, the more it has become clear that we're not going see change in this country with these two parties," he says. "There are lots of good individuals in the Democratic party, [but] without Democrats voting the way they did in Congress, we wouldn't have invaded Iraq. We wouldn't have suffered as a nation because of these Bush tax cuts.
"Obama received more money from Wall Street than any presidential candidate ever. And they got a great return on their investment."
Read the full article at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/12/rocky-anderson-radical-third-way?newsfeed=true
I don't support Anderson's presidential campaign but I think progressives need to pay attention to what he is saying and doing. Perhaps some Utah DU'ers can shed more light on Anderson's political career in Utah and how someone as liberal or progressive as Anderson can be elected the mayor of Utah's biggest city in the heart of right-wing Republican dominated Utah. I'm looking forward to reading your input. BBI
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)I would not put it past Romney to ask Anderson to run as a third-party challenger to take votes from Obama.
I don't have any evidence, so I don't know if maybe I should take this to the UFO/Bigfoot conspiracy forum.
But hey I'm just sayin, it could be.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Here's an excerpt from the Democracy Now interview:
AMY GOODMAN: I asked you about the Democrat, President Obama. What about the Republicans? For example, youd be squaring off against a former political backer, in Republican hopeful Mitt Romney. You both worked together on the 2002 Winter Olympics. You recorded then a campaign ad backing Romneys gubernatorial run in Massachusetts. He returned the favor the following year when you sought re-election as Salt Lake City mayor.
ROCKY ANDERSON: Well, that was that Mitt Romney. Its a very different Mitt Romney, of course, whos running for the Republican nomination for president of the United States. Hes changed his position on so many issues. You and I have talked about that in the past. I was very fond of Mitt and his wife, and we did great work together through the Olympics. I have a lot of regard for the mans abilities. But you really have to wonder when somebody is willing to change his views on so many things and then pretend as if that didnt happen, because the fact is, he ishes gone far, far to the right on so many of these issues. I mean, Mitt Romney, last time he ran for president, talked about doubling the size of Guantánamo? That is not the Mitt Romney I knew. And then, of course, you get to the issues like choice, stem cell research, rights for gays and lesbians. Its a completely different Mitt Romney running for president now than ran for the governorship of Massachusetts
AMY GOODMAN: Rocky, explain on the issue of abortion.
ROCKY ANDERSON: Well, Mitt Romney, when he was running for governor, said that he thought that Roe v. Wade was basically the right result, and that ought to be the end of the discussion. He told me that privately. And that was howyoure not going to runyoure not going to win a race for governor of Massachusetts unless you take stands like that, and thats how he won that office. And now, of course, hes anti-choice, to please, I think, the Tea Party faction of the Republican Party.
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)'gaming the machines,' and the other tactics the GOP uses 'con brio,' he'd probably get his pick of ambassadorships, and he'd have even MORE 'regard for the man's abilities.' No matter what he says today to Amy Goodman.
totodeinhere
(13,351 posts)He is a very thoughtful caring person who proved that a bona fide progressive can get elected even in a place like Utah. And he ran a good progressive administration in Salt Lake City. Of course, in fairness, Salt Lake City itself is surprisingly liberal. It's the rest of the state that's in the Stone Age.
ooglymoogly
(9,502 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)Ignore the people that tend to... protect the fortunes of the fortunate.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Maraya1969
(23,022 posts)Right now all I hear is Ralph Nader. He has to be a part of the solution and if kicking a republipig in because he pulls votes out of a Democrat's ticket then that's not the solution.
Javaman
(63,189 posts)do you?
MADem
(135,425 posts)presidential candidacy against an incumbent Democrat.
YMMV, but that's my judgment.
ooglymoogly
(9,502 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)totodeinhere
(13,351 posts)They said that someone as progressive as he is could never be elected mayor of Salt Lake City, but he proved them wrong.
And yes, I understand where you are coming from. I share your concern about a third party candidate siphoning off votes from Obama and giving the election to the GOP. I definitely don't want to see that happen. It's just that I know Rocky is a good guy and I don't want to see him disparaged. He has been at the forefront of climate protection and LGBT rights among other issues for a long time.
Javaman
(63,189 posts)brilliant.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Brilliant, indeed.
I put forth my logic why I felt his 3rd party effort wasn't a good idea. You come back at me with nothing of substance.
Heckuvajob.
Javaman
(63,189 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)You can laugh all you want, but it's not terribly funny.
Javaman
(63,189 posts)I know you are but what am I?
here's a shovel, it might help. LOL
MADem
(135,425 posts)Don't expect me to know everything about a minor politician running for President from a fringe party.
Don't expect me to care enough to run around "Googling" this guy no one I know has even heard of.
If you want to impart information, do so.
If you want to be a jerk, keep doing what you're doing--hang on to that shovel, you may need it yourself.
Javaman
(63,189 posts)This is the subthread to make yourself all crazy? I minor nothing subthread that matters to maybe a total of a dozen people total.
Wow.
in all the time you have taken to reply to me, you could have used it more productively and just googled Rocky Anderson's platform.
But instead you chose to take this whole really bizarre and useless back forth to try and get a dig in. That's called a complete and utter waste of time and energy.
It appears as if it's more important to you to be right (regardless of the weight of the argument) than it is to educate yourself on a topic you knew nothing about.
You, are truly one remarkable individual.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I really don't care that you don't agree with me. I don't care about your PeeWee Herman, your dramatic "WOW" comments, and all the fake outrage you're trying to generate over a guy I don't even know, who will not win the Presidential election, and if he even rises to notice by the MSM, will do so on the back of a Rove PAC frantically attempting to divide the progressive vote.
Yes indeed--I am a remarkable individual--most of us in this world are, in one way, or another.
You keep your shovels, and you keep you digs, and perhaps try to be happy for a change, rather than trying to piss people off with manufactured arguments and drama--it just won't work with me. See, I have to care about an issue, and just I don't care about this guy and his silly little Not-On-Most-Ballots Justice Party, and you--by yelling, snarking and pouting at me instead of offering any substantive information--have made damn sure I never will.
Don't tell me that I have to do the work, when YOU are the one trying to make the point--it simply doesn't work that way.
Not in school, not in life, and not on these here "internets."
Javaman
(63,189 posts)Wow. (I know you enjoy that so much)
just walk away.
if you don't want to do the footwork, but choose instead make uninformed claims about a candidate you know nothing about, well, then, I can't help you.
I told you knew nothing about Rocky Anderson and you responded with a very bizarre string of replies about how it was my job to educate you.
That is really sad.
Since we no longer have the block function, I will just trash this thread, because this whole exchange between you and I is nothing a more than a sad comedic disaster. Much like a clown car getting hit by a train carrying fake dog doo.
ta.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I walked...and you're still not happy!
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)Vote Rocky, settle for Mitt.
brooklynite
(96,882 posts)Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)There's going to be a lot of money available to get an Independent Party to run on a platform to Obama's left.
leftyohiolib
(5,917 posts)why announce now? let him shoot for 2016. is he the new ralph nader?
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)will make a lot of money available to 3rd Party campaigns. They can attack Obama from the Left and from the Right. Isn't Republican Free Speech grand?
whistler162
(11,155 posts)again.
karynnj
(59,999 posts)It was common knowledge that much of the money Nader had - at least in 2004 - was from the Republicans. http://articles.sfgate.com/2004-07-10/news/17433544_1_ralph-nader-howard-dean-mcauliffe
ooglymoogly
(9,502 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)Why don't you support him? Will you be posting information on the person you do support?
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Now do you have any information on Anderson's career in Utah or do you prefer drive-by personal attacks on DU'ers you disagree with?
I believe I had to put you on my ignore list for several such personal attacks on the old DU2.
I'll be putting you on my ignore list again if you're incapable of civil debate as soon as that feature becomes available.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"I opposed anyone running a primary campaign against Obama. Did you conveniently forget that?"
...could I forget something only you know? I don't see that statement in your OP comment:
Still, good to know. FYI: Laughing at something that seems humorous doesn't equal "drive-by personal attacks on DU'ers you disagree with"
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Response to Reply #12
I actually don't favor a primary campaign. I think it would be a distraction from building independent mass movements with an active base among millions of ordinary working class folks.
I agree with "The Progressive" magazine view on this.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2263074&mesg_id=2265640
Why a Primary Challenge to Obama Is a Bad Idea
By Matthew Rothschild
Editor of The Progressive
December 9, 2010
Im as unhappy with Obama as the next progressive, but I dont think itd be a good idea to mount a primary challenge to him, and heres why.
First of all, it would be extremely divisive within the Democratic Party, and it would drive a wedge between the largely white left and the overwhelming majority of African Americans at the grassroots, who constitute the partys most loyal constituency. The last thing we need is to incite racial animosity on the left.
Secondly, theres no obvious, credible challenger to Obama, and even if there were, any candidate would be likely to lose, so whats the point?
Thirdly, the divisiveness would only serve to help the Republicans and their rightist forces gain even more power, as the Ted Kennedy challenge to Jimmy Carter illustrated back in 1980.
But most importantly of all, the boomlet for challenging Obama reiterates the fallacy that Presidential politics is the crucial arena for political activism. We, on the progressive side, have been investing way too much time and energy here.
Please read the full article at:
http://www.progressive.org/wx120910.html
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)I'll alert the press.
ooglymoogly
(9,502 posts)of simpletons and sycophants are irrelevant.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)go to the individual's profile and the option to put on ignore is there. Cheers!
snooper2
(30,151 posts)LOL
Oh, and-
I oppose anyone buying a subway sandwich while putting buy 1 6" get 1 free coupons on all the cars in my work parking lot.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)This guy won't get my vote no matter what.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Yes, he's raising issues that need to be raised, but OWS is doing much better at that than any "alternative" presidential candidate could. I think that progressives are better served by putting more progressive people into the pipeline at lower levels of government. Which we should have been doing since the 70s, but didn't.
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)So Rocky gets elected. What changes? Nothing. Why? He'll still have to deal with Congress. I don't think Republicans will be any more willing to move his progressive legislation. And what's the Democrat's motivation to want the Rocky Party to succeed? Actually, he'll be totally sidelined and completely ineffectual. He'll have zippo influence on the Hill.
Not that he has a snowball's chance in getting elected. But his 5-10% will be enough to throw the Presidency to the Republican. Great.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)change? I can imagine brown bricks in the pants of most representatives and senators if that were to happen. You think congress would still be as conservative as they are now? In the first place if Anderson were to win I think a lot of new faces would also appear in the Capitol building. There would be no Republican majority to do anything. The old faces would be doing a lot of reassessing their positions. I can think of no larger wake up call for congress.
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)You can imagine whatever you like, of course, but the reality is, a messiah type 3rd party President comes into town with his own agenda - built on trashing the evil Republican and Republican-Lite Parties. The Inauguration comes and goes...then what? Assuming this Party-less President has some grand legislative agenda to fix all of the political and social problems of our society - it's going to be an impressive body of legislation (who writes that?) - who's going to stage manage it through Congress? If Republicans are in control of the House...game over. He gets to wait 2 years to see if the electorate decides to put the RLs in charge while he spends his time vetoing that agenda.. But what if the RLs have control of the House? Are they going to move this guy's legislation? Nope. They could give a rat's ass about rubber stamping his legislation They'll write their own, reflecting their vision and priorities. If it passes, he can sign it or veto it. But in no case is it going to be in any way his legislation. Talk about compromising principles, he'll be horsetrading everything to get anything.
Now you're including "new faces" magically appearing in Congress with the magic 3rs Party President? Lots of wonderful conjecture and hypotheticals...but they won't fare any better in reality than your 3rd Party President.
No, you want a 3rd way? You're gonna have to build a foundation for it to sit on. That means creating a Party and organizing at the precinct level. Running slates of candidates locally...building accomplishments that can translate into state offices...then run candidates for national office. And you're going to have to do it in all 50 states, concurrently. If you start now, you should be realizing your goal of national significance in about 20 years. Look at the Green Party for inspiration. They've been at if for 40 years....look what they've accomplished. And along the way, to succeed, you'll have to be willing to compromise on just about every facet of your agenda.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)that there would be a sea change in Congress. An electorate that rejected both major presidential candidates would not stop at the Presidency. Those that survived the slaughter would have much fear in their hearts.
Of course it will not happen unless the both major candidates get caught at the same time in bed with dead hooker and a live boy.
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)I explained to you why it wouldn't work. I see nothing in this post that explains why I'm wrong.
I have no idea why you'd think there would be a sea change, simply because we have elected someone with no political infrastructure in place to accomplish anything. The lesson we should have learned in 2008 is you can't elect a president and assume the hard work is over. The Republicans didn't roll over and sign on to Obama's vision of change. They certainly won't with a 3rd Party President. So we need to elect a bullet-proof progressive Congress that will deliver the legislation that will bring the change that Obama represented in 2008. The message was "Yes, we[ can", not "Yes I can"
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)I still maintain that voters that would reject an incumbent President and the candidate from the other major party would not reelect incumbent representatives and senators that have favorable ratings hovering near 10%. There would be a lot of new faces in congress.
eridani
(51,907 posts)--a voter contact plan is just plain silly. An actual political party is by definition one that runs candidates at all levels and has a large, constantly maintained, voter database.
Lefty policy wonks need to give up the notion that the general public consists of policy wonks just like them who vote on issues.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)Hy-po-the-ti-cal that's all this was, a what if scenario. I doubt if anyone actually believes he could win.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Although some other well-defined and measurable goal would be acceptable. What would that be for Anderson?
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)If he does indeed have a goal other than to win, it would probably be to move President Obama to the left. Anderson is probably the first person to know what his chances of winning are. My discussion with Old and In the Way was just a what if scenario.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)I'm thinking a large percentage of OWS would.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)get on the ballot?
Bjorn Against
(12,041 posts)I expect they will probably be on the ballot in several states by the time of the election, but they are probably not on any of them yet as they just formed a week ago.
joshcryer
(62,506 posts)There are some other states who also have extremely high bar to get on the ballot.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)I believe they have automatic ballot status. They used that in 2008 to put two non-PFP candidates on the presidential ballot in 2008, Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo.
ChadwickHenryWard
(862 posts)Since elected officials form the two major parties write the rules for placement on the ballot on the state level, it is often very difficult for third parties to get any representation.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)opihimoimoi
(52,426 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Seriesly.
great white snark
(2,646 posts)No chance.
T S Justly
(884 posts)When I go vote next year. Hope things have changed by then.
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)An excerpt from the Guardian article on Anderson's campaign. Read the full article which explores this question in more detail. BBI:
Anderson: "As long as the fear of being a spoiler prevents people from moving in a direction that will change the corrupt system that's in place, then we'll never see change in this country," he says. "At least, we'll never see changes move in a positive direction. The choice people have now is to either support a very different way that would signal a revolution and vast correction of the systemic problems in our government or they can carry on going in the same direction they have been going all these years that's resulted in so much tragedy for people in this country and the world."
There are a couple of reasons why it would be a mistake to expect a re-run of 2000.
First, Anderson is nothing like Nader. He has held elected office and won re-election by a seven-point margin during a particularly reactionary period. Also, he is a charismatic figure. I have seen passengers cheer after a pilot announced that he was travelling on a plane from Salt Lake to DC (and he was in coach!). I've seen people ask to have their picture taken with him while he's out for a drink in Salt Lake.
Second, 2012 is nothing like 2000. Approval of the work of Congress is at an all time low and Americans are deeply disaffected with both parties. A recent Gallup poll showed that only 13% of Americans approve of how Congress is handling its work. And even though a narrow majority would keep not vote out their own representatives, 76% say most representatives do not deserve to be re-elected. Many Democrats feel disappointed by Obama; many Republicans despair of their primary choice.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/12/rocky-anderson-radical-third-way?newsfeed=true
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)You never, ever see polling that attempt to analyze and track by Party. It's like they want the voter to conclude, they're all bad. If I'm asked my opinion, what do you think of Congress's performance...how do I answer? IT SUCKS! But there's never a follow-up question - Who do you blame? No, they get the answer they want. Congress sucks...then leave it up to the uniformed voter to conclude, "there's not a dimes worth of difference between republicans and Democrats".
aquart
(69,014 posts)Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)Maybe MSNBC will get into polling crosstabs and there are sites like DKos, 538, and DU that have the breakout results but broadcast media seems to always run with the "People think Congress sucks and we have the polls to prove it!". It's a negative feedback loop that helps to carry the CW that both are equally bad. Clearly, both Parties aren't voting the same way in Congress...the votes couldn't be more clearly contrasted. Polling the Congress questions tells us nothing, at best, and, at worst, helps to mislead uninformed voters to conclude both parties must suck equally since both are in Congress.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)First, Anderson is nothing like Nader. He has held elected office and won re-election by a seven-point margin during a particularly reactionary period. Also, he is a charismatic figure. I have seen passengers cheer after a pilot announced that he was travelling on a plane from Salt Lake to DC (and he was in coach!). I've seen people ask to have their picture taken with him while he's out for a drink in Salt Lake.
<...>
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)Be careful, you may just end up with
newspeak
(4,847 posts)I remember him protesting against little boot's iraq war plans. He fully supported the protesters. I admire the guy, he's a workaholic; however, the timing is not right. I think if you're going to promote a new party from the ground, it will take some time.
approximately one hundred years ago, both parties were in bed together and people became disgusted with the corruption. California and wisconsin, both, led in the progressive movement, especially in labor and education. What a strong third party can do is change the direction of one of the established parties.
I admire Rocky-like I said he is a workaholic and he has chutzpah. why doesn't he run as a democrat? Well, if you're a progressive, you may not get that DNC support, especially from the third way democrats. However, it would be nice if he did challenge as a democrat and help change the direction of the party.
alittlelark
(18,921 posts)Are we sure we are not reading 'The Onion'?
FreeState
(10,701 posts)If only all Mormons were like him:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocky_Anderson
Anderson was raised as a Mormon, and was a practicing member of that predominant religion in Logan,[20] but he has described his disagreement with certain doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ, particularly the denial, before 1978, of the priesthood and temple ceremonies for African-Americans, whose dark skin, according to the Mormon Church, was "the mark of Cain,"[21] and the teachings of Brigham Young that "a white person who 'mixed his seed' with a 'Negro' should be killed."[22] Anderson has described his belief, from a young age, that the L.D.S. teaching of personal moral abdication through obedience to people in positions of authority was dangerous and counter to the principle of personal moral responsibility,[23] in which Anderson deeply believes.[24]
Anderson studied ethics, political philosophy, and religious philosophy[25] in college. He also explored theological issues in depth[26], including the unique doctrine of the Mormon Church that worthy men and women can become gods and goddesses[27], and determined that the best course for him was to intensely consider ethical choices, then set certain moral guideposts for his life, and focus on trying to live accordingly, without regard to the doctrines of any organized religion.[28]
While expressing the importance of some fundamental moral lessons he learned as a young member of the Mormon Church, and while describing the value he places on his Mormon heritage,[29] Anderson has spoken out about the L.D.S. Church's discrimination against gays and lesbians,[30] comparing its public campaigns against equality for members of the GLBT community with its history of racial discrimination. Anderson has written about his views on this issue[31] and appeared in the documentary film, "8: A Mormon Proposition."[32]
During high school, Rocky played lead guitar in a rock and roll band, The Viscounts, and worked at a cabinet and roof truss plant. He also shingled roofs during his high school years.
Snip...
Anderson received a bachelor's degree in Philosophy, graduating magna cum laude.[35] After reading existentialist literature and several works on ethics, religious philosophy, and political philosophy, he had a "powerful epiphany. We can't escape responsibility, there's no sitting out moral decisions, and whenever we refuse to stand up against wrongdoing we're actually supporting the status quo."[36]
CanSocDem
(3,286 posts)...how he reconciled his progressive views with a job at the head of the nations only functioning 'theocracy'. Thanks to your post, I am comfortable with the knowledge that he came to them, naturally.
.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)How about "progressive alternatives" work hard to build a base and national recogition/identification ... starting the 1st Wednesday in November, 2012? That gives them 4 years to build legitimacy as a viable alternative for Democrats without jeopardizing our (Democrats and America's) immediate future.
Any other efforts taunting "a progressive alternative" will be seen as suspect to me and will earn my vocal disappoval.
Not that it matters.
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)And they would be bitterly disappointed to realize that this person would be completely ineffectual in getting anything done without selecting sides. Assuming he'd want to work with Democrats (he's a progressive after all)....he'd be a weaker version of Obama.
If they want real change now, they ought to be working to elect more progressive independents like Bernie Sanders to Congress instead of helping to get Republicans elected to the Presidency.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)mmmmmmm ..... not sure if that's even possible.
You're joking .... right?
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)Just like Ralph.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)Just like Ralph!
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,443 posts)Ineeda
(3,626 posts)Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)for President in 2012.
I think that NONE of them are worth even talking about.
Here's a link to EVERYONE that has announced they are running: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012
Here's a direct link to the section that names the 14 folks that no one has ever heard of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2012#Third_party_and_independent
p.s. Except Rosanne Barr, we've all heard of her
Obama 2012 - all the way!!!
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)Anyone can run and, with a creative accountant, you can probably earn a comfortable living. Anyone can run for national office, just look at Christine O'Donnell.
joshcryer
(62,506 posts)...as the trolls keep referencing him over and over closer to election time.
klook
(12,906 posts)Vermin Supreme. A vote for V. S. is a vote for whatever supreme varmint the Republicans put up.
Hugabear
(10,340 posts)Fair or not, if you don't have a (D) or (R) after your name on the ballot, you're not getting elected. Plain and simple. It just will not happen. Ross Perot, who spent billions of his own money in a highly publicized third-party run in 1992, couldn't even get a single electoral vote. Neither did Ralph Nader in 2000. If neither of those guys could even make a tiny dent in the electoral college, why should anyone think this guy would have a chance?
RFKHumphreyObama
(15,164 posts)Who will this one get us?
Irishonly
(3,344 posts)People I knew thought Carter would win anyway and voted for Anderson as a protest vote. I remember walking into work the day after the election and seeing everyone dressed in black. I wore black that day and it was a quiet, mournful day.
UnrepentantLiberal
(11,700 posts)You do know they'll ban you from DU for this.
I guess you're so angry about the "More 'jury' nonsense. A 'jury' voted 4 to 2 against Manning" thread you don't care.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/124013092
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Anderson divorced twice and is single.
Tell us why you think divorce is immoral or perhaps should not be permitted in a civil society if that's your position.
This sounds more like a low level personal attack from someone who can't present an effective rebuttal against Anderson's campaign.
newspeak
(4,847 posts)because he is a workaholic. As mayor in salt lake, he was very committed to his position.
Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)He got to where he is in his career thanks to the Democratic party. As soon as it is becomes convenient, he abandons the party.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)hope alive!
CNN poll: Renominate Obama 81%
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100242021
That leaves between zero and 19 percent who maybe open to supporting third party. Actually, that range is closer to zero to 11 percent, since roughly 8 percent of Democrats sometimes vote for the Republican.
My guess is that among the 11 percent, there are about 2 percent to 3 percent who will consider it.
Keep hope alive!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,443 posts)spanone
(137,655 posts)agentS
(1,325 posts)God knows we more people like him in Congress.
I can't stand Coburn or Vitter or McConnell.
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)just like 2000.
SidDithers
(44,273 posts)Sid
bigtree
(90,276 posts)How fricking desperate can you get? How the fuck is this a progressive alternative? So, he's to the left of Romney. Sad.
newspeak
(4,847 posts)he was mayor of SLC and romney was head of the olympic planning. He had to work with romney to coordinate the olympics.
I'm not going to shite on rocky, he stood up to little boots.
dems_rightnow
(1,956 posts)"Sorry. I've changed my mind. You can't have your Olympics here."????
CanonRay
(14,919 posts)He talks a good game, but I think he's phony as a $3 bill. Similar to Mitt. Just MHO.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)Amy loves to promote Democratic vote splitters.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,816 posts)Get a liberal to run as a third-party candidate. This will siphon votes from the Democratic ticket. Shades of Ralph Nader.
I wonder who would fund Anderson.
emulatorloo
(45,591 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Unfortunately, in our 2 party system controlled by money, it dilutes the choices enough to make democracy impossible.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)EC
(12,287 posts)fake candidates being brought in by the repubs like they did here in WI. during the first round of recalls. Put in Dems that they con into running to divide the Dem vote.
ecoalex2
(12 posts)Justice is at the core of why America is what it is today.sadly Obama has kept the bush justice dept. and continues to torture,spy on all of us,and now accepts the unlimited detention of Americans in America by the US military,which is clearly illegal.
Until justice is restored we cannot have the guarantees of the Constitution.
A Republic of,by,for the corporations not the people is our reality now.
This is why as far as I know if Rocky Anderson is on the ballot I will vote for him,and the party of Justice.
greenman3610
(3,954 posts)uponit7771
(91,964 posts)MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Response to Better Believe It (Original post)
Post removed
patrice
(47,992 posts)those who will double-cross us to do it, just so everyone can put shit on their PROFESSIONAL "Leftist" resumes and brag about being part of a "revolution" that ONLY screws those who are already screwed.
patrice
(47,992 posts)ooglymoogly
(9,502 posts)He has solid democratic principals and has stood proud for those principals in a very red state.
ecstatic
(34,500 posts)What happened?
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)the 'rules'.
Awesome.
Door is wide open now.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)I see you were on my ignore list on DU2 for engaging in personal attacks against DU'ers you disagreed with.
You haven't changed.
Bye.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Nope.
I haven't changed, you are correct on that score.
I am a Democrat.
Proud to be on your fingers in the ears list.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Careful Ikonoklast or you'll be on double secret ignore. LOL.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)...I see a light now...so bright...(hack)(gasp)....such a cold, bright white light..............
dionysus
(26,467 posts)SidDithers
(44,273 posts)Sid
siligut
(12,272 posts)Much too convenient. I sure hope we don't see support for this guy on DU, it goes directly against the DU TOS: "Winning elections is important therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground."
Martin Eden
(13,554 posts)... when Instant Runoff Voting is in place.
Our nation has not recovered from Florida in 2000.
If a Repuke takes the White House, we are in d e e p s h i t .
OregonBlue
(7,943 posts)Why waste everyone's time with this when we should all be out opposing the Teahadists.
JohnnyRingo
(19,392 posts)I think the maximum donation is something like $2200, and he most certainly needs it. Liberal idealists don't want him tainted by corporate cash, so that leaves only one source of campaign money.
Throwing away one's vote as a protest to get a Republican in the White House is an innefficient tactic. If people really think this guy would do a good job, put a month's pay on it or quit pretending he has a chance.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)and keep themselves secret while doing it.
Any politician who wants to be catapulted to the national stage can get funding from a major corporate donor of the GOP and see his name on every ballot in every contested state in the union. The e-vote fraud folks will then see that he gets 4% of the vote---peeled straight from the Democratic votes. Just like Nader.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Isn't that right?
jtrockville
(4,266 posts)He'll only accept a maximum of $100 from anyone. At least that's what his donation page said when I kicked in some $ to him.
SidDithers
(44,273 posts)Last edited Sat Dec 24, 2011, 03:22 PM - Edit history (1)
the Democratic candidate in the General Election?
Edit: looks like that donation to Rocky cost you your posting privileges at DU3. Oh, well.
Sid
JohnnyRingo
(19,392 posts)That means he'll run a lot of commercials in the Posti-Vac time slot.
Phone bank calls will end with a request to stay on the line for an important message about your credit cards.
Bumper stickers can have JD Byrider crossed out and his name penciled in.
Campaign rallies will be held immediately after the Zumba class ends.
I could go on, but it's ludicrous to think we'll hear anymore from this guy. He has no money and an underground base of supporters that couldn't fill an amusement park. But hey, if all 65 million democrats send him $100 each he'll have almost enough to print some flyers and sandwich boards.
Maybe I'm wrong though. Perhaps he'll become a household name like Stewart Alexander who's also running from the left side of the ticket.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)"I don't really believe this crap but I want your opinion"
is intellectually dishonest.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)I hope it's someone else because I never wrote the comment you quoted.
Did you just make that quote up or are you quoting some other DU'er?
Well?
You have the floor.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)disingenuous line like;
"John MacArthur proposes a Democratic primary challenge against President Obama which I'm opposed to. BBI"
or
"I don't support Anderson's presidential campaign but I think progressives need to pay attention to what he is saying and doing."
You are an absolute fountain of postings that you say that you don't agree with.
There are a couple dozen obscure third party candidates but you choose to focus not on the ones that would run and hurt the Republican nominee but the one that didn't support Obama in 2008, doesn't "trust Obama", and is the Republican wet dream if he could draw off 3-4 % of the Democrats.
You find it 'interesting' and you want to get it widely distributed and publicized but you seem to always post these types of things without explaining why you find it interesting.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)And if the truth and honest criticism of Obama and the economic interests he serves disturbs you that's too bad.
I'm not a parrot for Anderson nor any presidential candidate, including President Obama!
If you demonstrate as much independence you won't appear like a political apologist on every issue involving President Obama. Echoing White House talking points in defense of Obama's less than liberal/progressive policies and blasting anyone who expresses less than slavish adulation and/or uncritical support for all of President Obama's policies won't win you much respect or attention from people you might call "the professional left".
If you actually monitor my posts you should know that I indicated some time ago that I agreed with the position of "The Progressive" editor on a primary challenge against Obama. They are opposed to such a challenge and so am I.
Are you familiar with The Progressive and other liberal/progressive websites and the writers that don't function as mere White House public relations outfits that simply repeat Obama election campaign talking points?
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)I'm relatively sure the comment was directed to you. Since you're such a copy/paste fan, take a look:
Paraphrase ( /ˈpærəfreɪz/) is restatement of a text or passages, using other words. The term "paraphrase" derives via the Latin "paraphrasis" from the Greek <<παράφραση>>, meaning "additional manner of expression". The act of paraphrasing is also called "paraphrasis."
A paraphrase typically explains or clarifies the text that is being paraphrased. For example, "The signal was red" might be paraphrased as "The train was not allowed to proceed." When accompanying the original statement, a paraphrase is usually introduced with a verbum dicendi a declaratory expression to signal the transition to the paraphrase. For example, in "The signal was red, that is, the train was not allowed to proceed," the "that is" signals the paraphrase that follows.
A paraphrase does not need to accompany a direct quotation, but when this is so, the paraphrase typically serves to put the source's statement into perspective or to clarify the context in which it appeared. A paraphrase is typically more detailed than a summary. One should add the source at the end of the sentence, for example: When the light was red trains could not go (Wikipedia).
Paraphrase may attempt to preserve the essential meaning of the material being paraphrased. Thus, the (intentional or otherwise) reinterpretation of a source to infer a meaning that is not explicitly evident in the source itself qualifies as "original research," and not as paraphrase.
Unlike a metaphrase, which represents a "formal equivalent" of the source, a paraphrase represents a "dynamic equivalent" thereof. While a metaphrase attempts to translate a text literally, a paraphrase conveys the essential thought expressed in a source text if necessary, at the expense of literality. For details, see "Dynamic and formal equivalence."
For the full citation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphrase
Hope that helps!
frazzled
(18,402 posts)and looks angry. We likes us some guys who puts their fists in the air and get red and angry.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)You know the type .... someone who sounds like a professor and ivory tower academic when a speech prepared by professional handlers has not been written for him or her.
Real emotion and passion sucks!
Is that also your preference?
dionysus
(26,467 posts)SidDithers
(44,273 posts)Sid
dionysus
(26,467 posts)Turbineguy
(38,481 posts)Last edited Thu Dec 22, 2011, 07:28 AM - Edit history (1)
We should vote for this guy so we can get the repubs back into the White House. It worked for Bush and we all know how happy we were about how that turned out.
WonderGrunion
(2,995 posts)When this gets an inevitable alert to the jury, I would like to point out that Rocky Anderson and the Justice party are not DUers, they are not members of the Democratic Party and they have no chance of keeping any Republicans out of office.
calimary
(84,573 posts)a well-funded republi-CON.
Look, Obama's not perfect. But we do NOT need ANY diversion of votes away from him. Can you say Nader in 2000???????????? Do you REALLY want that????????
PLEASE, guys. Think about it before you cut off your nose to spite all our faces. Last time we thought we had a serious progressive shot at it, or wanted to "send a message" or some such fairy-tale crap, we got dubya for two terms.
I don't care how wonderful this guy is. And yeah, I know about him and there are lots of things I like about him. But he doesn't have a prayer - except to peel away enough votes from Obama that we get a republi-CON in the White House.
bertman
(11,287 posts)dionysus
(26,467 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)but most here seem to have liked him as mayor. I met him at a rally when I was visiting in 2008- seems like a nice enough guy.
Re how he got elected in Utah: Salt Lake City is the liberal island in a sea of Mormon locksteppers. Ralph Becker, the current mayor, is also a (D), as is SL county mayor Pete Corroon.
ETA: I'd like to see him run in 2016, on the Democratic ticket. I really would. Now would not be a good time though.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)It certainly is against the TOS and yet I've seen this crap all over DU lately.
dionysus
(26,467 posts)emulatorloo
(45,591 posts)no matter how transparent they are.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,443 posts)joshcryer
(62,506 posts)Otherwise I think the new DU3 is more free form and less censoring.
RZM
(8,556 posts)It will be enforced once the Republicans settle on somebody.
They'll start with locks accompanied by messages with stern warnings to cease and desist. Those who don't heed them will dine on granite, DU2 style
joshcryer
(62,506 posts)The detractors are too much revenue at this point.
RZM
(8,556 posts)Where the admins have to commit to one path or another. Either this is a site where loyalty to the Democratic Party is enforced, or it isn't. This is the first time in DU history that a sitting Democratic president faces a re-election campaign. It will most likely call for either new policies, or more rigid enforcement of longstanding policies. I find it hard to believe that they will allow posters to disparage the Democratic candidate with impunity in the middle of a hard-fought election campaign that could go either way.
It's either going to be rigid enforcement, or some sort of policy shift. A year ago I would have predicted a policy shift. Now I'm leaning towards rigid enforcement.
Going to be interesting.
joshcryer
(62,506 posts)There'd be a view bump as people watch the fallout of such an enforcement, but it could result, long term, in a viewer crash, and that would eat into ad revenue. I figure as long as Obama has a 5 point lead it will not happen. And I don't think Obama is really in much trouble in that vein.
Most of his supporters will be out GOTV or directly campaigning. I know I likely will be (depends on my moving situation).
RZM
(8,556 posts)I'm not so sure, frankly. I'd be surprised if Obama could maintain that. I think it's going to be closer than that.
That's assuming of course that Newt's not the nominee
MADem
(135,425 posts)I don't think that will change, unless the site gets sold and there's a new paradigm overlaid on this lovely new software!
REP
(21,691 posts)Not that I have any feelings on it one way or the other, of course, but those are words that could be used by some.
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)I'm sure you're breathless with anticipation to learn more about "someone as liberal or progressive as Anderson," you being so darned "liberal or progressive" yourself.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- that BBI has been a great champion of liberal/ progressive causes all along.
You also don't realize (DUH!) that his only concern is getting a "true progressive" in the WH - because Rocky A, once elected (no doubt about that) is going to change everything - overnight!
Yep - everything.
Welcome to my IGNORE list, Dewey. You apparently don't recognize pure progessives/liberals when you see them.
MADem
(135,425 posts)"All along?" A long-time lurker, were you?
Forgive me if I look askance.
Member since: Wed Dec 14, 2011, 11:28 PM
Number of posts: 68
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)- here and elsewhere. (Had personal reasons for not signing up and participating on message boards, which I'd rather not go into.)
Feel free to look askance if you want to. Surely someone posting on a Dem site about an independent running for the presidency couldn't possibly be construed as hoping to siphon off Dem votes, or split the party so as to help the GOP.
That would just be so obviously wrong, wouldn't it? And surely not allowed here on a site that "supports" Democrats.
MADem
(135,425 posts)And that's a good thing.
I do like this transparency--it lays it all out there for all of us.
Better Believe It
(18,630 posts)Presidential Candidate Rocky Anderson - on tonight's 'The Young Turks' (VIDEOS)
By April MacIntyre
Dec 23, 2011
On the December 22nd episode of Current TVs The Young Turks with Cenk Uygur host Cenk Uygur interviewed Rocky Anderson, the former Mayor of Salt Lake City, and progressive 3rd party presidential candidate.
The Power Panel discussed whether a third party candidate should get progressives votes and The Young Turks own Jayar Jackson reacts to the $335 million Countrywide settlement.
Cenk interviews Rocky Anderson, the former mayor of Salt Lake City who is running for president as a candidate with the newly formed Justice Party. "The Republicans and the Democrats are completely in bed with the same folks, these corporate interests who are in control of our government," Anderson says. "The reason I'm doing this and the reason the Justice Party was formed is so that we can take the reins of our government and make sure that those in Washington are doing what's in the public interest." Cenk says, "Rocky, the problem here is I agree with you 100 percent and disagree with you zero percent," though he acknowledges that it would take an actual miracle for Anderson to win the presidency.
You can see the TV interview at this link:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/smallscreen/news/article_1682560.php/Presidential-Candidate-Rocky-Anderson-on-tonight-s-The-Young-Turks-VIDEOS
Anything else I can do for ya?
Dewey Finn
(176 posts)Thanks, comrade.
paulk
(11,587 posts)of the Democratic Party. But, once again, it's being done backwards...
A party needs to start at the bottom - school boards, city councils - state reps, then on to the Fed level.
Starting with the Presidency, like Nader and the Greens did, amounts to little more than a vanity campaign and can have disastrous results, like the 2000 election.
I think that this guy has some things worth hearing, but I hope he doesn't become a serious contender for next years election. We can't afford as a nation to have a Republican in the White House - no matter how disappointed we are in the current resident.