Make the consequences of no filibuster go BEYOND the Senate

[Walt Starr]

The only thing the Democratic Senators will understand about a filibuster

No Filibuster = No Money = No votes.

Anything short of that will result in no filibuster.

Call your Democratic Congresscritters and let THEM know that they had better convince the Democratic Senators to filibuster or you are done with the Democratic Party. Call your State legislators and Senators. Call your governors.

Make the consequences of failing to filibuster go BEYOND the Senators.

[global1]

1. No Reason To Tell Them You Are Done With The Dem Party....

because with 'no filibuster' and Alito making the SC and * claiming victory at the SOTU - the Dem Party is done.

[mom cat]

2. Tell them this is the decicive vote for the rest of their political career

[ScreamingMeemie]

3. I will tell those who don't support this that I will actively support

another Dem in the primary. That's the route I am taking.

[Tesla]

4. We already have a name......

The "Constitution" Party.

We believe in the Constitution and how it was set up to work.

No Unitary Powers!!!

[global1]

5. Sen. Byrd - Mr. Constitution Himself Is Voting For Alito....... nt

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. Unfortunately there is already a party by that name, and they are rather

right-wing. The GOP is too liberal for the likes of them.

--------------------------------
http://www.hostdiva.com/liberalchristians/">Would Jesus love a liberal? You bet!

[Sammy Pepys]

11. There already is a Constitution Party....

I don't think they'd appeal to you much :(

[Jawja]

14. How about

calling it the Revolutionary party? :shrug:

We believe in the principles set up due to the American Revolution and we believe it's time to water the tree of liberty? Peaceful, of course. As a political movement, as long as that works.

[mmonk]

6. Yes. Call the DSCC and the DNC.

Elections are coming up.

[TahitiNut]

8. Jeffords is more of a 'Democrat' than Ben Nelson

This is just part of why I view partisanship as a hypocritical charade. It's a label/trademark with essentially no quality control. :shrug:

[katinmn]

9. The consequence of Reid and others not fighting for Dem principles

means there will be a bigger surge in committed independent voters.

Independent voters are becoming the most powerful voting bloc. One-third of voters already identify themselves as independent (polls range from 31% to 38%).

Examples:



Jesse "the Body" Ventura won the Minnesota governor's race in 1998 with 37% of the vote and hardly any money. He ran under the Reform Party banner. People simply rejected the bland no-issue candidacies of the Democrat and Republican running.
http://www.studyworksonline.com/cda/content/worksheet/0,,EXP545_NAV2-76_SWK546,00.shtml




http://www.progressivemajority.com/about/

With the current level of disatisfaction -- we are fast approaching 2/3 of Americans dissaproving of Bush -- people will bolt from a party that is not stopping Junior's power grab. Independents and progressives (hopefully progressive-independents) with a backbone and a willingness to face the crises will win big in November.

Pols ignore independents at their peril This was written in 2003! The movement away from the parties has intensified since then.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/103011_independent02.shtml

"With the country split 50/50 along partisan lines, the independent voter may well decide the upcoming presidential election. As the movement grows in influence it could decide a lot more, including that the American people – not the parties, or any other special interests – should determine the policies of our government." - Jacqueline Salit, Executive Editor, The Neo-Independent

http://www.cuip.org/inds/civky.html
6% of Kentucky voters are independent--
The current law in Kentucky makes clear that voters should have the right to register and declare that they don't want to join a party - but the current Voter Registration form dosen't allow for that. It is one more example of the partisan bias in the system. In response to your signature, the Board of Elections agreed to count the number of independents registered to vote. But that's not what we're asking for! We want the Board of Elections to include a category for those of us who don't want to be a member of a party. We're mobilizing hundreds of independents to change this and pave the way to grow the independents movement in Kentucky. The Kentucky Committee for an Independent Voice is organizing a campaign for independents to speak out. You can help.

http://www.cuip.org/inds/nhciv.html
42% of New Hampshire voters are registered independent--
that's a 15% increase in just 8 years--while Democratic and Republican registration has been steadily declining. Yet, the Democrats and Republicans are not only refusing to accommodate this trend, they are actively obstructing it. In February, the New Hampshire House of Representatives passed a measure to force independents who vote in a primary to remain a Democrat or Republican for 90 days. Without gaining recognition as a political force, independents in New Hampshire and elsewhere will continue to be ignored by elected officials of both parties. The bill now goes to the Senate. The New Hampshire Committee for an Independent Voice is organizing a campaign for independents to speak out. You can help.

...and so on.

[Walt Starr]

10. I'll be heading to my local county clerk's office

and altering my registration come Tuesday, I believe.

[AbbyR]

12. I think I'm going to do the same.

I'm going to become one of the great, undecided swing voters. Wonder if it will help?

[katinmn]

13. I don't think it will register with them because they have been

ignoring us for so long.

Instead of listening to the people, they are trying to get the people to follow their insipid message.

The facts, polls, angry calls, articles are telling them that people are fed up but the party is like a huge heavy machine grinding along, moving ever further away from us.

If they did suddenly wake up and have a change of heart, I would question their sincerity. I am concerned that we will get lip service before the election when they realize what they've lost, but once they have secured their elections they will revert to their cog-in-a-wheel state.

[Walt Starr]

15. BINGO

I'm sick of the shit. I've been loyal for 25 years, but they can't show me a speck of loyalty in return.

Fuck 'em.

[katinmn]

16. Yep. Loyalty is a two-way street.

Next week I am going to start hunting down and compiling lists of all the progressives and independents that have declared their candidacies, unless someone has already done that.

[mzmolly]

17. Yeah man! Let's assure another ~@#% Republican gets to nominate the

remaining justices, woohoo!!!! :sarcasm:

Then we can threaten Dems and empower Republicans for uhm, centuries! :eyes:

Grow the H up - people! If we stop putting the Dems in the minority - WE WON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THIS SHIT FOR ANOTHER 8 plus YEARS!

[coldiggs]

18. ya you are right on. people need to be pragmatic

[Walt Starr]

19. That's what the Paleo-cons told the Theo-cons in 1992

Who controls the GOP today?

[mzmolly]

20. Like the GOP was different in 92? The only difference was THEY were not

in complete control after the election.

As for what you suggest, ~ that's what Nader told the "disgruntled" in 2000. Who controls the frikken world today?

[Walt Starr]

21. WRONG, Democrats controlled the House, the Senate, AND the WH

No difference.

[mzmolly]

29. As I said "they were not in power." How's that wrong?

:shrug:

[LoZoccolo]

24. The Democrats weren't fucking up life as we know it in 1992.

The Republicans know that the biggest consequence of failling is maybe they get higher taxes or don't get a tax cut. Thanks to splinterists in 2000 we have:

- Almost nothing to mitigate the 160,000 deaths per year due to global warming.
- Widespread death and homelessness due to lack of action during the biggest natural disaster in our nation's history.
- An unnecessary war which has shattered our credibility and left us unprepared to defend ourselves.
- Illegal wiretapping and curtailment of civil liberties.
- Torture prisons.

And finally:

- Alito's nomination; yes it's the fault of people who held the same philosophy of yourself.

Now did you go and get signatures to get a good candidate on the primary ballot? Did you Walt? You stand on a street corner and ask people to sign your ballot petition and watch 9/10 of them ignore you or lie to you?

Of course not. That would require work. I'm surprised you haven't found some way to change your registration over the phone so you won't have to leave your house.

[LoZoccolo]

23. This situation is the fault of splinterists!

Gore would never have nominated Alito.

[mzmolly]

32. Exactly! Though we were told otherwise by a well known "splinterist."

And that worked out great ey?

Incredibly frustrating.

[katinmn]

25. If people keep electing DINOs it is assured

It should be clear by now that the Dems are putting THEMSELVES in the minority by not listening to their constituents.

I'll vote for progressive Dems or anyone who best represents my views but not wussies that won't take a position and are waiting for new leaders to come in in November and hold their hands!

Some of the candidates running for office in our state promise to be as silent as the ones we have now. And guess what? They are the ones getting party establishment support. (Examples: Tinklenberg and Klobuchar) That is really angering a lot of people.

[LoZoccolo]

27. Yeah, that's why Kucinich won the primary!

All we need are progressive candidates!

[katinmn]

28. There are a lot of regrets today, too, about how that turned out!

What were people thinking??

Well, we are living with the results.

[mzmolly]

30. Kat, for gosh sakes we KNOW 80% of Democrats support a filibuster.

What we are electing is people who think independently. NO political party full of "liberals" is going to agree on every issue all the time. Take DU for example. We have "debates" here regularily. I don't know any ONE person who agrees with me 100% on every issue.

On the voting for Dems who represent your views, I agree. I will vote for the dems who represent ME in the primaries, and I'll support the nominee in the run against Republicans. I'll give my time/money to those who represent ME in the primaries, but again - I'll support the person who got the most support in the end.

[Dr Fate]

31. Or, DEMs could filibuster and rally and unify the base like never before.

n/t

[mzmolly]

33. Uh huh, until the next purity test. 80% plus of elected Dems support a

filibuster from what we know today.

Now share with me here and NOW, if the Dems DO filibuster, do they have your undying support in 06/08? Or, will there be another "demand" from you in the near future?

The dems are not lying down, they are fighting, they are floating the names of those who don't support a filibuster so YOU will call and pressure them. Have you done so?

[Dr Fate]

34. Of course I have. Obsessively. n/t

n/t

[mzmolly]

35. And the answer to my other question?

Now share with me here and NOW, if the Dems DO filibuster, do they have your undying support in 06/08? Or, will there be another "demand" from you in the near future?

[Dr Fate]

36. 100% yes like always. You have my word.

But if not, there will be a little change.

I'll send money to DEM candidates and organizations who I feel listen to the Democratic base. No one else.

If they want to follow polls instead of the base, then they can ask whoever takes these polls for money and volunteers.

[mzmolly]

37. That's the right idea.

:)

[onenote]

22. Have you checked the congressional delegations in these states?

Delaware (Biden) has one seat in the House. Its occupied by a repub.
Louisiana (Landrieu) has seven seats. Five are occupied by a repub (as is the other Senate seat).

See a wee bit of a problem with your strategy?

onenote

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.