What if we started a "new" Party?

[kentuck]

We could support single payer health care for every American. We could support withdrawal from ill-conceived wars. We could support cutting the defense budget by 50% immediately. We could support campaign finance reform and outlaw the bribes paid by lobbyists. We could support a program to put the American people to work. We could support an immediate nuclear freeze and a drawdown of all nuclear weapons. We could support a progressive income tax and a surtax on all incomes above $500,000. There are so many progressive ideas that we could put into law.

But what would you call such a Party??

[phantom power]

1. the Bull Moose Party!

No, wait, sorry.

[villager]

2. I'd call such a party "vastly overdue..."

n/t

[Laelth]

4. +1 n/t

:dem:

-Laelth

[Echo In Light]

6. +1

[Union Yes]

16. DUZY! nt

[mike_c]

3. I believe all the positions you've advocated are already part of...

...the Green Party platform. Why start another new party when there's already one that's based on real, liberal democratic principles?

[Ron Green]

11. But...but...

Didn't they nominate Ralph Nader? Who gave us Bush? And made himself irrelevant? Don't we have to be realistic, and work within the two-party system?

:crazy:

[Vincardog]

Who gave us Bush? A croup ruling by the SCOTUS and then BIEBOLD forced bush on us

[mike_c]

17. at least they've never given us crimes against humanity wrapped in patriotism....

eom

[Xithras]

15. The biggest problem with the Green party, imo, is its name

You wouldn't BELIEVE the number of otherwise liberal people I've met who have responded to mentions of the Green party with an: "Is that some kind of environmentalist party?"

If the Green Party were to rename itself something more generic...like the "Progressive" Party, or (gasp) the "Liberal" party, they'd probably double or triple their votes. A huge portion of the voting populace mistakenly considers them a single-issue party because "Greens" = "Environmentalists" in common American parlance.

[mike_c]

19. that's an interesting point....

The name derives from the political/environmental movement in Europe, IIRC.

[Xithras]

28. I know where it originated, but it translated to "American" poorly.

Europeans have been dealing with, and voting for, Greens for decades, and know exactly where their politics lay. When you say that someone is a Green in Europe, everyone understands that it's a political designation, like Democrat or Republican here.

In the U.S., calling someone Green conveys a very different message. It says that the person is an environmentalist and is earth friendly. Unfortunatly for the Green Party, this means that many people erroneously consider them to be a single issue party, and few people actually vote for those.

I understand that GPUSA likes the name for historical reasons and to maintain their association with other Green parties around the world, but it's a political anchor in this country.

[Thickasabrick]

42. I've always liked "True Majority"...I wonder if that group is still around. nt

[chimpymustgo]

18. Can't be the Green Party. We need a fresh start. Many thought we WERE in a new party with Oabma

all that CHANGE.

Progressive Party.

[mike_c]

20. I think any such party would largely attract the same people anyway...

...since the electorate is ripe for a real liberal alternative that builds the case for real alternative policies. But I certainly agree that it's time for liberals to find another political representative!

[Vincardog]

5. We could also support full employment at a living wage and call ourselves the Democratic Party

Add Woman's right to decide her own medical treatment and you are a long way there.

[kentuck]

10. We could also follow our Constitution and prosecute those..

that lie and profit from their criminal acts.

[Vincardog]

14. I am down with that... Well Mr. President?

[opihimoimoi]

7. at this point...."Futile" Party

[NightWatcher]

13. are you saying that we couldnt compete with the billion dollar bi-party system?

if that is what you are saying, I agree.

The Dems and Repukes are entrenched and have to strong a grasp on the system, and the big $ donor-corps want to keep it that way.

We're also never going to get REAL campaign finance reform

[opihimoimoi]

49. Never say NEVER...if there is a will, we will find a way...

[derby378]

8. If we nominated the right Democrats during the primaries...

...we could call that party the Democratic Party.

But there will be a fight. Nobody said this was going to be easy.

[kctim]

9. Another irrelevent

group who share a minority view.

[Dinger]

33. BS. Who Wants A Party Of Sheep? Wait, I Know . . (nt)

[JackintheGreen]

12. Delusional

and with that, my fall into curmudgeonly cynicism is complete.

[Wednesdays]

21. It's guaranteed to be successful!

Just ask presidents Thurmond, Wallace, Anderson, Perot, and Nader.

[marmar]

22. The Scandinavian Ambition Party

:)

[Veruca Salt]

46. As much as I like the sound of that.....

Due to the readily apparent acronym, we'd end up known as the SAP's.

[OHdem10]

23. Will this "New Party" really stand for social justice , protecting the

Middle Class and Poor?

[omega minimo]

24. The Second Party

[AndrewP]

25. I wish

But it's probably nothing more than a dream once reality sets in.

[StarfarerBill]

26. The "Too Sensible For Most Americans To Comprehend Party"

[anonymous171]

44. With that attitude you might as well become a fascist. nt

[StarfarerBill]

48. With the local equivalent of the Church Lady on the case,

I imagine I won't stray too far from the sanctimonious path you've laid out before me.

But you'd better get busy; I'm sure there are others here in need of your purity, and a scold's work is never done.

[Xenotime]

27. how about simply "The People Party"

[Xithras]

30. That actually used to exist.

It later became the Populist Party. In the late 1800's it was actually big enough that it took several states in a Presidential election.

[OHdem10]

31. People's Party is an excellent choice.

[optimator]

29. working within the system has failed

We are going to need massive people's conventions to get some ideas.

[MineralMan]

34. The ideas are already there.

What's needed is for people who hold those ideas to convince a majority that those ideas are the right ones. A new party won't do that. A new party will just do what third parties always do: Lose.

Instead, take over the Democratic party. Join your local Democratic Party system and take the damn thing over. It's not hard. The current leaders on the local level are old and tired and ready to leave. Replace them.

Here in Minnesota, we have a caucus system. So few people show up at caucuses that all it would take to completely override the centrists is for a couple dozen people to show up at the local caucus level, then select themselves to move on as delegates to the next level, and so on.

Take over the Democratic Party and replace the old farts who now hold the leadership positions. As an old fart myself, I can tell you that it's not going to be difficult. They won't like it, but all you have to do is get like-minded people to show up and vote for new leaders at the local level, then do the same at the regional and state levels.

The 2008 election was my first exposure to the caucus system. I walked in, got made a delegate to the next level (we didn't even fill all of the delegate positions...not enough people showed up). At the next level, I led the movement to choose delegates to the State Convention. I could not go, myself, due to some health concerns, but by speaking, we elected only real progressives to go to the State convention. It was so easy that it surprised even me.

In 2010, I'm going to become the head of the local level party organization. All I'll have to do is put my name in for it at the local caucus. Whoever does gets the job. Then, I'm going to try to get on the board of the next level. That will almost certainly happen.

I'm retired, now, almost completely, so I have time. It's time to take over the Democratic Party and move forwards. If you haven't gotten involved, do. It's easy. It takes work, but isn't it worth it?

Third parties? Feh!

[kentuck]

32. The power of such a Party would be to change the existing Parties..

The two-Party system is in control of this country. But the Democratic Party needs the liberals to win. If the liberals stopped voting for everyone that has a "D" by their name, they would soon get the message.

[Mari333]

35. It exists already but until campaign finance reform happens

it wont work.
thank god for Kucinich, Grayson, and Bernie Sanders anyway.

[LooseWilly]

36. TV 20 Dance Party?

Too Bay Area specific?....

[Prometheuspan]

37. WE THE PEOPLE PARTY..

great idea. Been working that angle for years now.

[Prometheuspan]

38. How to do it..

Viral Internet Information Paradigm Shift

The true key to changing society is changing the ideas in that society. The simplest, straightest path for real change in This users opinion, (--john bassist 02:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)) This simply consists of putting enough lucid and useful information in one place such that the lies and misinformation and disinformation can be swept away. The Two party Duopoly and the Republicans in particular absolutely rely upon the ignorance of the public, and upon the lack of a single easy reference source of information to debunk their lies and disinfo. The best key to radical transformation is simply education. This is dynamically more true than most people realize, because most people do not have expert level information on any subjects of political import. For instance, the question of energy is easily solved via geothermal power, and a genuine education on the topic of energy science reveals biofuels, nuclear power, coal, oil, natural gas, and etc to be expensive, polluting, and to have no merit at all in terms of providing useful energy to the public. When you do have the facts about the actual science and a realistic cost/benefit analysis, you also then know that solar power while great will always be far more expensive than geothermal, and that the focus on solar and wind power is in fact a focus to divert attention away from the cheapest solution, a solution which utterly transforms the conceptual landscape when it is fully understood. There is no reason to waste billions of dollars on oil or natural gas or nuclear power or biofuels when the easy, simple, well understood solutions of geothermal power and solar power and electric cars are clear and present technologies which can solve the energy problem for well under a trillion dollars, probably well under 100 billion. And yet, the oil and natural gas and nuclear energy and biofuels lobbies play funny math with short term cost/benefit analyses, and dupe the public as well as congress and the president about what the facts actually are. Once the facts are understood there can be no argument. This is only one example which is now proven by the information currently on the wiki. Every single issue out there resolves in a similar fashion with depth knowledge of energy science, civil engineering, sociology, ergonomics, and political science. What keeps those issues from being resolved is that both major parties are merely social parasites, which actually bleed their life off of maintaining the problems, not fixing them.
We The People Political Party

A simple solution which might otherwise be easy to miss, we could change the national political landscape by simply creating a new third party and then making it the dominant party. While this may seem hard and it may have been tried before, what has not been tried before is using a wiki to directly empower We The People to actually solve the problems far better and more lucidly than the two major political parties can, nor has the potential viral energy of the internet been thus far harnassed towards such ends. We could in theory put all of our own people in Congress, Senate, and elect our own pick to the office of president. If we get lucid and start working real solutions rather than dickering around with the old game, there is no reason to suppose we could not go viral and then take literally every major political office in the USA in the next two major elections.

[proteus_lives]

39. Then we could give every American a jetpack and puppy and a jetpack for their puppy.

How about the Fantasy Island party?

[Prometheuspan]

40. whats ridiculous is calling a duopoly democracy

and then fighting for your slavery.

[anonymous171]

41. Scrap some of the anti-defense stuff and call it the "Populist Partry"

[Codeine]

43. We could call it the 1% Party

because that's the extent of the vote it would receive. Like it or lump it, we're a two-party system these days.

[MineralMan]

45. Hey, if you could get 1%, you'd beat the Libertarians.

This third party stuff is just wishful thinking. Instead, taking over the Democratic Party, starting at the most local level, is entirely possible. But only if those who are calling for change are willing to actually do something.

See my current journal entry for more...

[robdogbucky]

47. First I propose we start a new message board

called ProgressiveUnderground.com, or PeopleUnitedforPeople.com or something like that.

Then we can count heads. Have stimulating exchanges of ideas. Completely reject trolls and closet Pubs and blatant DINOs, et., IOW all the posers the more radical/progressive minds hereabout oppose the most already.

After counting heads we can start raising money from grassroots contributions. We can adopt some maverick like Jerry Brown (the only politician to ever advocate the end to unlimited contributions, etc. and limiting all to $100, etc.) or Kooch, or Feingold, or whomever resonated and responded to our beat. They would have to be more committed to the people than the current lobbyist controlled pols on both sides are now.

Every good thing on this earth started out as someone's dream or vision.

We could make it happen. All it takes is the will.



Just my dos centavos

robdogbucky

[branders seine]

50. The Democrats, circa 1950