The "Name our Populist Movement Poll" Results!
Last edited Sun Nov 30, 2014, 05:19 PM - Edit history (1)
First, here are the results:NOTE: as there was no single choice that gained a pure majority of votes, there will be a runoff.
The Democratic Wing - 19%
The Populist Progressive Party - 10%
The Citizen's Reform Caucus - 5%
The Progressive Caucus - 10%
The Social Democrats - 2%
The Populist Reform Group - 3%
Second, I have to be honest -- I had some problems with the original poll:
1. The original poll was setup without the full approval of the Host Group
2. The existing name of the Group was not offered as an Option till the voting was already done
3. The OP heavily promoted a favorite and may have inadvertantly biased the poll.
4. The poll selection tended to consolidate a specific voter preference under one option, and diffused any opposing preference over several very similar options.
5. A hard deadline was the wrong approach - IMO, there was no need to force a quick decision
That being said the rest of the Hosts (including me) allowed to the poll to stand, so now we have to act on the results.
Third - here are some ideas on those results:
• Since we are a group seeking Reform, the idea of "Reform" should be a part of any name we choose..
• "Roosevelt Party" was most popular, but also most controversial. Still, we should honor the Roosevelt Family as Populist icons.
• Few people liked the "Party" tag. If we get the IDEA right behind the name, then "Wing," "Caucus," "Coalition," etc. matters less.
• "Democratic Wing" and "Social Democrats" both tip the hat to the fact that we are the Democratic Party. We should honor the ideals of our Democratic Party heritage.
• The remaining 4 choices were variations of our Group name. Yes we want reforms, but we want specific reforms. Populist and progressive -- a meeting of two ideals. Our name should reflect both of those ideals
Finally, based on the above, I propose we vote on a runoff of those ideas, not of those names.
This time the poll will stay open without hard deadline, the only limit being inactivity. When the poll goes a week without a vote, I'll lock it.
| 8 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited | |
| Roosevelt Reform (Wing, Caucus, Coalition, etc) | |
2 (25%) |
|
| Democratic Reform (Wing, Caucus, Coalition, etc) | |
0 (0%) |
|
| Populist/Progressive Reform (Wing, Caucus, Coalition, etc) | |
6 (75%) |
|
| 1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
| Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
|
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Kermitt Gribble
(1,855 posts)but "Roosevelt Reform Coalition" would work well too. I vote for "Roosevelt" again, simply because the Roosevelts have already laid the groundwork for much of what we're trying to do here: The New Deal, The Second Bill of Rights and trust busting are a solid foundation for a populist movement.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)A name that looks ahead, not backwards.
We can stand for the PRINCIPLES of the New Deal and the Second Bill of Rights and trust busting without calling out dead presidents. I'd rather spend time and energy explaining the PRINCIPLES than explaining what the name "Roosevelt" has to do with what we're what about.
Teddy Roosevelt was a happy Imperialist. FDR ordered the Japanese-American internment. The Roosevelt name is not without its dark sides. Why burden ourselves with the historical baggage that comes with invoking the Roosevelts when what we need to do is forge a new movement in the here and now?
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)And I appreciate how you and the other hosts have resolved it. I have to admit, it sort of took me aback the way the one choice was being pushed so blatantly.
Thank you.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I am ok with the choices but have a concern that those that voted for the favorite (Roosevelt Party) will be ok changing from "party" to (wing, caucus and coalition).
I assume you will have an additional poll to decide between, wing, caucus and coalition?
Thanks for your work on this.
demwing
(16,916 posts)And sure...we can absolutely throw another poll for group type 
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)However, I'd rather use only the Populist part of it. I feel like the word "progressive" has been co-opted, and I think it's better to draw attention to the roots of this movement: that we are reforming the party for the benefit of all, not only a few.
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Using terms like "reform" and "Roosevelt"
just seem backwards looking?
Given the demographics and the oft repeated term "reform"
it's understandable how it seems like an obvious choice.
However, it's a term that is so overused it's almost meaningless.
How many times do we here reform in Dee Cee?
Given the scale and scope of the necessary changes for the
Democratic Party and in Washington, "reforming" it sounds impossible.
Also Reform has a connotation that we could go back in and
make changes to fix what is broken...
we can't fix many of these problems, we need NEW SOLUTIONS.
Buckminster fuller once said or wrote something to the effect
that solving world problems is such a HUGE endeavor that we could
never "reform" policy or practices... he suggested "New-form"
as a better conceptual frame of reference give how vast the
necessary changes need to be. From "Spaceship Earth", I think?
If you are looking for a positive, forward-thinking BRAND
the words chosen should embody the ideas.
Something like: awakening, renewal, rebirth, regeneration, rejuvenation?
Terms such as these are far more uplifting and inspiring
than the tired, and overused "reform".
The Democratic Renewal
The Populist Awakening
The Populist Rejuvenation
demwing
(16,916 posts)Do you have any research to support this?
I don't see the negatives in the term "reform" that you see. Regardless, you are welcome to try to sway the group...
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)It seems obvious that the term "reform" is overused.
Most major issues facing the US has a "solution" that
includes the term "reform".
banking Reform
education Reform
Campaign finance Reform
Healthcare Reform
Reform reform reform etc
The term has become the elevator music
of political change, but of course "reform" never happens.
As to research, no.
But there are people worth looking at regarding word choice
George Lakoff is all about issue framing.
Is "reform", "renewal", or "re-invention" more inspiring?
Does Frank Luntz use the term "reform"?
Sometimes, but take this example:
NEVER SAY: Tax Reform
INSTEAD SAY: Tax Simplification
The point being, depending on who this group is addressing
using wonky or politically laden terms makes average people glaze over.
Even people who are familiar with "reform"
should be aware with how frequently the term "reform" is applied...
and reflect on how infrequently "reform" actually occurs.
Lastly, not to be offensive, but using words which are so milquetoast
such as reform, caucus, wing, etc is kinda lazy thinking.
The problems on the table require serious, inspired consideration.
There is really little room for thinking "inside the box".
The "Populist-Reform-Party-Caucus-Wing" is not inspired thinking.
Branding of the group should reflect the mindset anticipated
as necessary to address those concerns.
Just some opinion
ON EDIT: "Reform" has a negative connotative resonance.
It puts the brand in the position of trying to "fix" a problem.
Whereas, renewal, re-invention or similar words can have a positive connotation.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)gets when you mention FDR and/or the New Deal. Just wondering.
And I think 'wing' should follow whatever name we choose.
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)It seems people are thinking like reactionaries.
Rather than worry about angering 3rd-Wayers
or identifying as "blue" or "Roosevelt" or "reform"
or "wing" why not just move forward and set
NEW terms of the game.
Thinking in a reactionary way inherently forces
us to maintain and fight against the current "frames"
There is little chance of capturing the "narrative" when
"populism" is defined in opposition to the current narratives.
Unless this group is going to define itself as supporting the
current political status quo, while seeking support in Congress
it will fail to inspire average voters, and won't even register
to current non-voters.
Seriously, will " New Deal Wing of the Dem Party" get
any interest outside of the few politically wonky people
who are already participating?
Maybe I'm not getting the point of this "group"?
Could someone remind me of the goals and who
is the target audience?
demwing
(16,916 posts)Do you have a recommendation for a name that you feel is supported by all of your points??
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Picking a name may not be that important.
It all depends on what this "group" or "movement"
is working to achieve.
Initially it appeared that this was to be a movement
that intended to marshal Democratic resources
with the intent to effect change in the Democratic Party.
As a "Populist" movement it seemed to intone an approach
that would generate a "voice" outside of the establishment
to effect change within the party.
That is in contrast to lobbying sympathetic Congress Critters
to take up Populist positions.
At the most fundamental level, Populism would embrace
the hopes, dreams and desires of average middle of the road Americans.
Those hopes and dreams are inherently liberal and traditional Democratic values.
If reaching those citizens and voters is the target, the BRAND
should speak to those people in a way that reflects their interests.
The "Populist Wing of the Democratic Party" probably won't resonate
with those people.
The more that is posted here the more disparate the focus appears.
Perhaps that's my projection because I don't see any common thread
other than "progressive good, 3rd-Way bad".
Though I do sympathize with that sentiment,
I'm sorry if the tone sounds demeaning.
It just reflects the confusion.
So, no there's no specific name in mind.
If the goals of the movement were more apparent,
more distilled, the focus could improve.
And then again, maybe the name isn't that big of a deal?
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Interests which has been underway with the infiltration of the party by the DLC, now the Third Way fior decades and return it to the control of the People who it claims to represent.
I wouldn't call targeting the Third Way in any way possible to be reactionary. THAT is what we have been doing for a couple of decades now. Merely reacting to the damage they have done.
Openly reacting to them now, taking the OFFENSIVE is necessary.
Their goal is to end the New Deal Social Programs and turn them all into Privately controlled programs and they have SUCCEEDED in doing that to a frightening extent.
Therefore it is necessary to openly challenge them, to expose them to voters for what they are.
As you can see, the reaction to their policies in this last election by Dems was not to vote at all. They KNOW something is wrong, but many are not aware of what is causing it.
The demonization of Democratic Social Programs USED to be the work of the far right, but now we have it happening right within the Dem Party itself due to the efforts of the Third Way.
I pointed out how angry they get when people talk about the New Deal Programs in a positive way only to show how determined they are to denigrate social safety nets that have been the hallmark of the Dem Party.
I see nothing reactionary about identifying the problems we face and then targeting them.
It is not reactionary to take the offensive for a change, something voters have been encouraged not to do.
And doing so doesn't preclude using many other tactics to make sure it is actual Dems who are reaching the voters rather than the Third Way which is nothing more than a Think Tank embedded in the Dem Party as a front for Wall St interests.
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Take a look at your signature line avatar.
It is the perfect metaphor of how to deal with the right-wing.
Right-wingers are all about clashes, head-to-head, saber rattling, etc
that pic is about the delicate balance, poise, control, and fearlessness
in the face of an enraged and deadly beast.
Rather than play matador against an opponent that outmatches you
in every conceivable way except perhaps cunning, change the game.
This is about hearts and minds
Persuade, Change and Influence
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)I see the main problem as informing voters who know their party is on the wrong track on many issues, but haven't had time to figure out why, that they are not imagining things, that there has been an actual assault from within the party against the principles they thought the party was all about.
I think that is happening to a great extent, especially among younger voters(see Occupy, still going strong btw, but moved on to a different phase) who are far better informed on what the problems are.
That is why I think it is necessary to talk openly about the Wall St Wing of the Party, the Third Way and to expose Corporate Candidates and the money that is behind them.
I think there is a need to be too confrontational. But I remember my own confusion about decisions that were being made by the Dem Party, votes cast by elected Dems. It didn't make sense to me 'why are they doing this, what are they thinking'?
But then I learned about the DLC. I spent a lot of time reading about it, and suddenly it all began to make sense.
THEY knew the voters were on to them also, around 2008, which is when they 'shut down' the DLC and morphed into the Third Way. I remember exactly when that happened. Obama had been highlighted on the DLC website. That caused a huge storm of questions about who he really was. His profile was quickly removed.
Cunning, yes, we need to be as cunning as they are. But mostly people have to have facts in order to know how to begin to know how to undo the harm being done.
And how to fight all that money? In part it can be fought by exposing Corporate Funded Candidates, attaching their photos to the funds they are receiving from Corporate Interests. Maybe a website dedicated to exposing the money being poured into elections.
Anyhow, I think this group is necessary on DU where we can talk openly about these issues, rather than in GD where people are constantly attacked for even speaking about them.
Cosmic Kitten
(3,498 posts)Explaining that right-wingers exist in the Democratic Party,
pull back the curtain and expose the machinery,
re-orient people to their self-interests over ideology,
all useful techniques.
Most of all, make the process of learning and discovery FUN!
Congress Critters are much more interesting than congress members...
especially when they wear the uniform of their "owners".
We could use some grassroots Colberts and Stewarts ;~)
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)We could use some grassroots Colberts and Stewarts ;~)
He filmed Congress on the day the new members were to be oriented. Above the heads of those walking into the Capital Building were little tags showing how much they sold out for. It WAS fun, to see them WEARING what they cost.
Maybe MM would allow us to use a still shot of that scene. It was excellent and told the story perfectly with no long explanations needed.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to demand their liberty and freedom. They apparently think their status quo is precious, obviously not caring about the poor and our seniors. They are making Thomas Pain cry. They claim to hate the Right Wing but they are helping them by not demanding jobs, ending poverty, and curbing corporate control.
The Democratic Party is in crisis. The true Democrats that work for the people need to expel the "New Democrats", DLC, Third WAy.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)"The Roosevelt Party" looks and sounds boring and antiquated to me, and I have the same reservations about the original poll that you do, demwing, and your idea and reasons for another poll are valid and truly democratic populist in spirit.
Well done.
jeepers
(314 posts)called his domestic program The Square Deal.
Cousin Franklin called his The New Deal.
I like The Fair Deal platform myself and think it would speak to the essence of both men, to Eleanor, and to what the people need.
Not sold on "Roosevelt Wing/Party/etc" but I like the Fair Deal 
jeepers
(314 posts)We Demand a Fair Deal hand held sign or bumper sticker.