The Occupy 99'ers need to vote out every incumbent that does not vote in our interests...

[kentuck]

That is the only way I see this movement succeeding. We have to become a threat to the political status quo. We should not vote for any Democrat or any Republican that votes with Wall Street and the Big Banks over the interests of the 99%.

We should put every incumbent on a list to be voted out. Their voting record should be carefully analyzed to see if they deserve to be re-elected. The chances are that 75% or more of the House and Senate should be sent packing.

In my opinion, this is the direction the Occupy Movement needs to go. Politicians need to fear the people, not the other way around. We need to become more political toward both Parties. Nobody gets a free pass. You are either with the people or you are against the people. There will be a National General Assembly meeting next July 4th of 2012. That will be the beginning of the organizations political future. Mark it on your calendar. https://sites.google.com/site/the99percentdeclaration/

Unless the movement is seen to have political power, we will be ignored by the powers that be. We must unite in such a way that gets the attention of the politicians in Washington. We need to make a wholesale change in our government. It no longer works for the people. It is rotten to the core.

(edited to change "they" to "we")

[Enrique]

1. the establishment dems tell us, "you have to vote!"

ok, but not for YOU, necessarily.

Is there some law that says that Barney Frank, friend of Wall Street, is the ONLY Democrat that can serve in his district?

[TheKentuckian]

2. That is part of it but the general assembly needs to be fostered and grown

as a competing government to apply outside pressure as well.

The system is highly corrupted and perhaps completely captured so it cannot be seen as a sole source for change. There can be no sustained success in it without pressure from outside it.

[kentuck]

3. If we are to remain a peaceful movement...

then the only way we can change it is at the ballot box, in my opinion.

[TheKentuckian]

15. Be peaceful or be peaceably responded too?

I said nothing of initiating violence nor hinted at such. I am suggesting a less passive position and one I grant may escalate the protectors of the status quo. I do indicate a level of civil disobedience not seen in this country and I certainly suggesting bot the ballot box within the existing structure and forging a system outside of it that would be in direct competition with it which would be very unwelcome in many quarters.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

4. Occupy the Election!

:bounce:

#OccupyTheElection

#Occupy2012

#OccupyVote

[tblue]

5. You're probably right

but I can imagine a lot of them not voting because they're disgusted with both parties, and rightly so. I hope things look a little different a year from now and the Dems turn into the populists they're supposed to be.

[kentuck]

6. We need to understand that...

our vote is our most powerful weapon.

edited per suggestion.

[jwirr]

13. Okay our vote is our most powerful weapon - but only if we have good

candidates to vote for. I do not see a lot of progressive candidates stepping up to take the place of such idiots as Ben Nelson. What are we going to do with that part of the problem? And it is real - in Nebraska and other states like them it will be the idiots if we do not get some good people to step up.

This year I have Amy Klobuchar running for the senate and two candidates running to replace chaavick. I will vote against chaavick. I don't think anyone is running against Amy. Anyone know if she is progressive?

[lunatica]

7. We are the 99%. On the issue of voting it is us who vote.

It helps to stop thinking of the 99% as 'they'. We need to vote incumbents out and progressives in.

[kentuck]

8. Very true.

Thank you.

[socialindependocrat]

9. I vote for Bernie Sanders!!! We need a list... n/t

[sandyshoes17]

10. The 1% own the voting machines

That has to be on the top of the list, stop the privatization of the elections, get the money out and give the country back to the people

[DirkGently]

11. Yes. Yes. And ... yes. Pay to play has effectively nullified democracy.

The only "constituency" any leader currently needs is a handful of monied interests prepared to finance a campaign. Nothing gets proposed without a lobby behind; nothing gets passed without a tacit promise of payment in return.

But they can't (in theory) take away the actual votes. If enough people are paying attention, it doesn't matter if a billion dollars is thrown into this campaign or that one. We can hold leaders to account. Pay attention to what they're actually doing.

Occupy is one way to SHOW where Americans' interests lie, and DEMAND they be protected. Hard to keep saying "America demands tax cuts for corporations, more war, no healthcare, and less environmental protection" when they are thousands of them standing outside your window saying otherwise.

[Odin2005]

12. OWS needs to become a shadow government and integrate itself into civil society at all levels.

[kentuck]

14. We can't let the movement die...

We truly do need to take our country back.

[indepat]

16. In 2012, vote out every incumbent in the Democratic and Republic party who does not vote in

the interests of the 99% and continue this cleansing process in future national, state, and local elections until the job is done and will stay done. :patriot:

[loyalsister]

17. And replace them with

what- replace blue dogs with Republicans and republicans with blue dogs or further RW republicans?

Voters who elected Ben Nelson and Claire McCaskill (who do vote in our favor sometimes) will never ever elect a progressive democrat. They will only be replaced with republicans.

How does voting them out help us when the republicans that replace them will be way worse? Unless punishing 99% is the goal the "vote them out" strategy should be reconsidered.

If we want to change the political environment get progressive Democrats in the pipeline to run for statewide and federal posts. Better yet, run for yourself. Get elected to school board, neighborhood associations, city councils, county commissions, etc... Progress is a process. We can be a part of it if we want.

[kentuck]

18. Get rid of the cancers...

and pick up the seats elsewhere. No need to compromise everything you stand for just to have assholes like Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman stab you in the back. Screw them.

[indepat]

19. Three cheers

:thumbsup:

[loyalsister]

21. Who is replaceable with a progressive Democrat?

Is there one in Kentucky, Oklahoma, Texas? Leiberman and Walker are the only ones I can think of.
Living in a deep purple state that is getting redder all the time, I am under no illusion that there is some massive number of liberal seats waiting for the right candidate.

[kentuck]

22. That's not the point..

In fact, that is the totally wrong way to look at it. This is about the 99%, not the 2 or 3% we need to appease to try and get a political majority to carry on the status quo. We need to think differently.

[loyalsister]

23. That math doesn't work

Unfortunately, there are many 99%ers who vote republican. A lot of the population votes republican and support them on issues they are invested in. This movement is not going to change their opinions on guns, abortion, gay marriage, etc.
Poor people in poor states consistently vote in Republicans. Many opposed HCR against their economic interests. Is the formula to flip that and have Democrats give in on those social issues?

[kentuck]

24. First...

You make aware. You inform. You educate.

No, you are not going to change every Republican to a Democrat.

The basic question is: Do you want to continue the status quo?

[loyalsister]

25. I've been making those challenges for a very long time

as I have been involved in the Disability Rights movement. We have gotten laws passed and policies enforced by working with allies in government. Some of whom I mostly disliked. But real change materialized by being smart about where we targeted our energy.

"The status quo" "wall street" are very vague. There is nothing concrete to indicate what kind of change is sought or what it might look like if it were to happen.
If challenging the status quo means an anti-incumbent election that puts more republicans in office, I see no good coming from it.

[kentuck]

26. There are things that need to change...

But we need to get the money out of politics. Wall Street needs to be policed. The big banks do not need to be bailed out again. We need more jobs. We need the wealthy to pay more of their share of taxes.

If you vote for a person that supports the status quo of the above, then you are not helping the cause, in my opinion. It cannot be defined as a simple Democratic or Republican issue. It must remain somewhat vague in order to get people to think for themselves, rather than what their Party tells them. If we do not know what is good for us, the people, then we don't stand much of a chance of making and change at all.

[quaker bill]

20. Which requires that they vote and vote for someone

You cannot cast a negative ballot.