Should a new left of center political party be started?

[Cascadian]

Poll question: Should a new left of center political party be started?

This is only if the DLC continues to control the Democratic Party agenda. I put this out in response to my earlier posting of hopping the DLC will fade away. I think if the party is started, we should look to the Canadian New Democratic Party for influence. Check their website out. Many of their policies are consistant with what we as progressives believe in.

http://www.ndp.ca


So the question is if the center continues to run the Democratic Party, would you support a new political party?

[KG]

1. there are already several left of center parties.

[Cascadian]

3. If only they would come together and start a coalition.

But the factionalization is such a problem and BTW, why are there 2 Green Parties instead of one????


John

[KG]

4. good point

green party and socialist party USA aren't that far apart.

[fujiyama]

92. But in realistically speaking

how big do you honestly believe the combined forces of the green party and the socialists and other similar parties to be?

I would guess no more than 5% of the electorate at most.

[mouse7]

85. BETTER IDEA! Get off your dead asses, do the work to move Party left

The people who whine the loudest about the party being too centrist also never show up to local Democratic Party monthly meetings to vote on diddly squat.

If a progressive activists started showing up to their monthly County Party meetings with 15 people who voted as a bloc, they'd take over their local party. Period.

The problem isn't that there aren't enough progressives. The problem is the vast majority of the loudest ones refuse to do any work that they aren't getting glory and spotlight time for. Nader is the best example of this, but there are thousands of mini-Naders across the country. People who don't play well with others. People who have shown no indication of being capable of leaving aside personal agendas in order to work for the greater good.

[mouse7]

86. self delete

[mouse7]

88. Self-delete

fingers don't want to work as a team with keyboard tonight

[democracyindanger]

2. Greens?

Or are they too left? Not left enough? :shrug:

[Classical_Liberal]

20. They are about right, but they are politically retarded

If a third party leftist sees that s/he will play a spoiler role s/he should drop. We have an electoral college winner take all system and any serious third party must be mindful of its effects.

[bigbillhaywood]

5. If American unions enter into the Labor Party, Greens, New Party or

WFP Party in force, donate organizers and money, and start running local candidates, you can bet the Dems will come back around or face the fate of the Whigs.

[mouse7]

87. Labor won't put it's future in hands of Progressive primadonnas

If US labor unions have learned anything, it's that progressives will not do any actual work that doesn't involve a live shot. Organization work? That's beneath most of those on the left.

[bigbillhaywood]

102. Nor do I think they should

Realistically speaking if say SEIU, UNITE, HERE, LIUNA, UE and CWA entered the Labor Party, who do you think would control the Labor Party? College lefty activists and old hippies or the unions? Or they could just constitute their own Labor party. This model worked in Europe for years. The reason it didn't happen here is:

1. Universal suffrage came early to the US v. Europe
2. Consequently, our political parties were formed before an organized labor movement existed (unlike Europe)
3. With a federal system and no unitary state to capture, it made sense for unions to work through the Democrats.

Problem is that the Democratic Party was never completely in line with labor's interests-- too much corporate control and presence of segregationist Southern Democrats. Howevr, I think the time has come for Labor to seriously begin the process of political independence from the Democrats-- when your more "liberal" Party members like John Kerry are voting for NAFTA and PNTR for China, it should be an alert that the Democrats no longer take your interests seriously.

[TheWizardOfMudd]

6. You best define "center"

So people will know what you are talking about.

[FDRrocks]

7. We got one started...

The Greens. And even though it isn't large, the groundwork it has would be hard to rebuild from scratch.

One of my favorite aspects of the Greens is that it is an international party, which is a very positive thing, in my mind.

Of course our 2 party system isn't very friendly to third parties.

[TheWizardOfMudd]

8. What issues does the Green Party deem most important?

And what are its positions on those issues?

Thanks.

[FDRrocks]

11. Here thier party platform

http://www.greenparty.org/Platform.html

[TheWizardOfMudd]

18. Thanks

[Jeebo]

9. Thom Hartmann says we should work within the Dem. Party...

... and I agree with him. If there is some justification for trying to get a left of center party started, this is not the year to do it, because we've got to oust the Bushies this year. That's more important than anything else. Besides, if the Democratic Party is not a left of center party now, the Green Party is, so we've already got one in any case. But I think Thom Hartmann is right, that we should start trying to infiltrate the Democratic Party the way the right-wing extremists have the Republican Party. And I think the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party is very much in line with mainstream America, anyway. Read the chapter entitled "A Liberal Paradise" in Michael Moore's book "Dude, Where's My Country?"

Ron

[Poiuyt]

95. Hartmann is also a fan of Proportional Representation

The way it is now, any third party will most harm the party which it is closest to. So a left of center party would harm the Democrats. Proportional representation really sounds like a fair way of being represented. Many countries in the world have some variation of it.

[Walt Starr]

10. I think we there SHOULD be one and it should start fielding a 2008

candidate on November 3rd.

Don't give Kerry a day of rest before starting to hold his feet to the fire.

[mouse7]

89. No better tactic to build a movement than non-stop whining

People LOVE the guy in the back of the room who heckles, whines, and moans the loudest while others are trying to get something done.

[UnAmericanJoe]

12. I had a dream once that

Al Gore defected from the Democratic party and joined the Greens making them a legitimate pure left party...(yeah I know, Al Gore?? But he did go pretty hard left after the election and it WAS a just a dream...)

Then the Republican party split in two with traditional conservatives becoming a center/right party and Neocons becoming a pure right party. DLC democrats then became a center/left party.

There you go. A four party system!

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[UnAmericanJoe]

19. Funny, I thought this board was for all progressives...

[sangha]

21. Try again

This board is for all progressives who share our goals

Not all progressives share our goals

[bigbillhaywood]

30. "our" goals? you speak for yourself sangha. nt

[wyldwolf]

34. the quote was from the DU rules page

the DU owner decides what the goals are at DU.

[bigbillhaywood]

42. Is sangha the DU owner?

[wyldwolf]

48. no, but he/she is allowed to quote from the DU rules...

...like this...

Democratic Underground may not be used for political organizing activity by supporters of any political party other than the Democratic party. Supporters of certain other political parties may use Democratic Underground for limited partisan activities in political races where there is no Democratic party candidate.

and this...

once the Democratic party officially nominates its candidate for president, then the time for fighting is over and the negative attacks against candidates must stop. The administrators of this website do not wish for our message board to be used as a platform to attack and tear down the only progressive on the planet with any hope of defeating George W. Bush. Constructive criticism and even outright disappointment with the candidate may be expressed, but partisan negative attacks will not be welcome. If you wish to contribute to the defeat of the Democratic candidate for president, then you are welcome to use someone else's bandwidth on some other website. As the election season draws closer, we may expand this rule to include Democratic candidates for other political offices.

[AntiCoup2K4]

60. "once the Democratic party officially nominates its candidate..."

Damn, I knew I was tired today, but I didn't realized I slept right through May, June, and half of July......

[wyldwolf]

71. yeah, you slept through most of this thread

because my post was a demonstration of how rules at DU can be quoted and not a comment on a specific rule itself.

[Classical_Liberal]

52. no but when he presumes to be one you should report it.

.

[wyldwolf]

57. how did he presume to be one?

[Classical_Liberal]

64. By implying people who don't like the dlc don't belong here

which is against the rules.

[wyldwolf]

69. he didn't imply that

he said there were progressives here who don't share the stated goals of DU. Never once said or implied that people who don't like the DLC don't belong here.

[Classical_Liberal]

74. Post 13 and post 21

look like a pretty stong implication to me. I report what I report. I leave it up to the mods to determine whether I am right.

[wyldwolf]

75. still doesn't imply what you've said

post 13: maybe you'll post on their board. That is just a suggestion.

Post 21: Again, merely quoting the rules.

[Classical_Liberal]

78. I reported both.

I let the moderaters decide. I interpreted as an implication. You didn't. The moderaters will untimately decide whether I am right or not. Saying someone should go to another board looks like an implication that a person doesn't belong here to me. Saying that not all progressives share are goals looks like Sangha is accusing the person of not sharing our goals. I reported that. It is up to the mods now. Those who feel the same as me should report it as well.

[Eric J in MN]

14. existence of the Green Party sure didn't help us during the 2000 election

nt

[Classical_Liberal]

15. Don't know

I would only be part of one that promised not to play spoiler when the polls look like that is what will happen. We do need an alternative to the dems in case the dlc can't be dislodged, but the the Nader policy of playing spoiler is unattractive to me and I won't be a part of it.

[Dirk39]

16. After what happened in Europe with the Greens, esp....

in Germany, it seems to me that rather the system is the problem. Germany's Green Party in the late 70ies/early 80ies was a story of success, but today the Green party is even more neoliberal and corrupt than the Social-Democratic-Party.

And our Social-Democratic-Party was taken over by the Blairists, just like the DLC and Clinton did it with the Democrats. But the Greens are worse.

The Greens were attractive for a new middle-class, tired of the old-party system, engaged in Grass-Roots politics, when they were young - and about to defend their middle-class income, prestige and security, when they were getting older. And maybe some responsible members of the real elite wouldn't sell their soul for 10.000€ a month, but some former teachers would:-)
Just take a look at the former cab-driver Joschka Fischer or at Schroeder and you get the lesson...

Today, even the Social Democrats with their bureaucrazy and their old ties to the unions are not as bigott as the Greens. But still disgusting enough, to not vote for them - at least for a leftist like me.

And I hardly doubt that those in the USA, who would back and support a more left-of-center party, would be workers or unemployed people or those, who live in the ghettos.

The question is, how to change the relation between parties like the Democrats and the people. The question is how to separate the Democrats from the Lobbyists and the Corporations.

And the question is, if you can do it within the existing democratic party or not.

It's an illusion to believe that a more left of center party with a working relation to the people, reaching enough voters to somehow push the Democrats to build a coalition with them as the only chance for the Democrats to win, would be the way to go.

It's exactly what the more progressive and liberal and leftist people in Europe, esp. in Germany tried. And we failed badly.

It MIGHT work, but it isn't the holly grail, if you ask me.

After nearly one catastrophic decade of neoliberal politics commited by a coalition of Greens and Blairist Social Democrats here in Germany, who are nothing but corporate whores, it rather seeems to me that the traditional SPD has more problems with that than the Greens.

Since Blairist Schroeder is the head of the SPD, the SPD has lost nearly half of it's members within 10 years. Couldn't say that the members of the Greens did care...

And within the given system, small parties are much more attractive for careerists than big parties, go figure...

Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[MAlibdem]

17. they basically need money...

$300 million or so to break in, I would wager, if they wanted to do it at once.

[leftofthedial]

22. until there is substantive systemic change

in the two-party system, further fragmenting the left would be a monumentally BAD idea.

we need to find constructive ways to move the Democratic Party to the left.

Better yet, we need to eliminate the radical right.

If the past four years have not utterly discredited them, it will take extreme measures.

[wyldwolf]

23. I say yes, but I don't think you can

...you are referring to a party more left of center than the current DNC.

I say go for it but you'll have a difficult time. You'll have to organize and accept contributions from people with varying agendas then you'll have to please them in return - alienating some of your base, who'll then run off and start their own further left of center party who will then have to organize and accept contributions from people with varying agendas ...

[Classical_Liberal]

25. Not really

Dean proved you could raise lots of cash with just small donations. That is why the dlc were so threatened by him.

[wyldwolf]

28. but he ran out of all that cash quickly.

[Classical_Liberal]

32. Primarily because of dlc attacks

anyway, again we are learning. The Dean movment is by no means over. It is like what Goldwater started for the conservatives.

[wyldwolf]

36. yes, I remember. Dean attacked everyone and when they attacked back..

...he whined to Terry McAuliff "make them stop."

That's politics.

[Classical_Liberal]

39. They deserved to be attacked.

and we are recalbrating. Also the trends in the world aren't good for the dlc, which depended on a bullied and compliant developing world, a bullied and compliant working class, and a bullied and compiant EU and UN. This isn't happening anymore.

[wyldwolf]

45. ok

So Dean should have been coronated, huh? He could attack with impunity? Yeah, right.

[Classical_Liberal]

47. I think the party should be more concerned about right

and wrong, rather than taking bribes from rich people. I think those who attacked Dean have impure motivations. I don't expect them not to be there. As I said, we are recalbrating.

[bigbillhaywood]

29. Visionary economic organization of the working-class through

progressive and courageous unions. Do that and anything's possible. That's what got FDR elected and the new deal passed. And it could get a third party real political muscle, too.

[TheWizardOfMudd]

24. Wake up and get real people!

Regardless of the merits of forming a more leftist party, if that were the desire of enough Americans, Kucinich would have won the primaries.

I love Dennis and America would benefit greatly if he were President, because his agenda is geared toward enriching the lives of the common man and woman.

But what in the world would make you think forming a party more to the left of the Green Party or Reform Party would attract any meaningful votes in this country?

Are you out of your mind?

What would be the agenda of such a party?

[bigbillhaywood]

26. Yeah, just give up hope of moving the American center to the left.

Just like the conservatives gave up hope of moving the American center to the right, that's why they didn't establish a visionary long-term plan of grass-roots political and cultural organization, and that's why they don't hold political power right now. Oh wait, it's the exact opposite of what I just said! You're right Wizard, people do need to wake up, get some vision, and prepare for some initial short-term losses in exchange for long-term gains through an effective long haul organizing program.

[FDRrocks]

31. A side note to this is

That most people get thier information on candidates from media sources consolidated in the hands of massive corporations, who, of course, aren't left of center. The coverage of candidates and thier issues is selective.

[wyldwolf]

33. be smart about it

instead of banging away at your keyboard on DU, get out there, run, and win some local elections.

That is how the Christian right hijacked the republican party. You want power? Take over the dem party by acting, not complaining.

The reason moderate and DLC dems are in power is because we've organized for years at local levels and worked our way up.

[Classical_Liberal]

37. Actually you organized at the top, through corporate donation

to dems, and have no grass roots, but the grass roots are the only way to go for people who have my views.

[wyldwolf]

43. not so

every member of the DLC or moderate democrat, like most, started at the local or state level.

[Classical_Liberal]

50. DLC and moderate are not the same thing

There are many moderates that aren't dlc. The DLC was founded in the 80s by people who were already national politicians. Many of the people who run it have never run for any office, but have lots of corporate lobbying experience.

[wyldwolf]

59. I'm referring to the elected politicians on the DLC

sure, staffers aren't necessarily elected officials.

Most DLC elected members are moderates. Not all moderates are a member of the DLC.

[bigbillhaywood]

51. Yeah, we had a couple of young State and local Democratic functionaries

working at a union I was doing organizing work for a few years back. Young, rich spoiled kids in Range Rovers-- I could defnitely see them as future DLCers suckin the corporate nipple.

[wyldwolf]

66. and, in the same vein

..I've encountered young suburban subversive wannabes who were rebelling against their middle class upbringing by wearing frumpy clothes, smelling like stale cigarettes, and going days without taking showers - I could definitely see them as future far leftists complaining about corporatists the rest of their lives.

[bigbillhaywood]

80. Heh, heh. I gotta give you credit for that one wyldwolf. Those kids

annoy me about as much as the yuppie DLC folks. Unfortunately, a lot of those kids just happen to be on the right side of issues, even if its for the wrong reasons.

[ibegurpard]

54. That's what we're doing.

We made the mistake of being naive enough to think the DLC Democrats were corporate whores because they didn't think they could get money and support to compete with the Republicans any other way. We actually believed the bullshit line that the party needed to put on a more moderate face to attract money and support. Imagine our surprise when they reacted so savagely to a moderate candidate who proved that it could be done. That signalled to me and thousands of others that the Democratic Party would never be able to champion the values that had made it great as long as these people were in charge. So enjoy your time in the sun because as soon as soon as the little problem in the White House is solved, we're coming for you and we won't get caught napping again.

On edit: We also realize that it's not going to happen overnight. The fascists didn't take over the Republican Party in one election cycle.

[Classical_Liberal]

63. Perfect rallying cry. Yay!

.

[wyldwolf]

72. what are you doing?

besides empty threats on an internet message board?

[Classical_Liberal]

82. Why would we tell you?

surprise is the best weapon.

[Redleg]

35. Good point.

I am quite left but I don't see the rest of America, or even a good portion of America voting for a leftist candidate.

[aljones]

27. A left of center and a Right of center party!!

The democratic and Republican parties should be split up into four parties. A system more like that of Great Britian should be created! I would give us more choices and political leaders would be more accountable for their actions. IMAO

[FDRrocks]

40. I agree the Parlimentary system is better n/t

[dumpster_baby]

44. yep, both left of center and right of center parties are needed

If we could only do that and get enough people into congress and a president from one of the non-center parties, we could amend the constitution to get proportional representation and other electoral reforms....

[DU GrovelBot]

38. ## Support Democratic Underground! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v2.0
==================
 
The time now is 12:57:18AM EDT, Sunday, May 16, 2004.
 
There are exactly...
0 days,
23 hours,
2 minutes, and
42 seconds left in our fund drive.
 
This website could not survive without your generosity. Member donations 
pay for more than 84% of the Democratic Underground budget. Don't let
GrovelBot become the next victim of the Bush economy. Bzzzt.
 
Please take a moment to donate to DU right now. Thank you for your support.
 
- An automated message from the DU GrovelBot

Click here to donate.

[Solon]

41. Possible, however...

it would be best if the groundwork laid by parties such as the Greens, GPUSA, and the SPUSA are used. If these parties actually compromised on some issues and negotiated the rest then maybe a coalition can be formed, then eventually a new party, that would be a true force in at least statewide and some national politics. One thing to avoid is the cult of personality that permeats all parties, to ensure party loyalty and make issues the important aspect of the party. That way it could survive the rough and tumble politics of the United States. NO MORE SINGLE ISSUE PARTIES!!!

[wyldwolf]

46. the only problem is...

the more idealogical one is, the less willing they are to compromise.

I can't imagine Greens, GPUSA, and the SPUSA giving an inch to each other.

[Solon]

67. We need an ISSUE driven party...

That's the problem with ideologes is the refusal to compromise. The SPUSA is an excellent example of this, when they found that they were out of most national races, they found ways to have influence on national members of the Democratic party. Democratic reps who require the Socialist vote to win their seats usually pay attention to that parties platform. That is perhaps the best way to win influence and political power. If I were to start a party tomorrow, the LAST thing on my mind would be slating someone from the party to campaign for President. I would focus on local candidates and issues FIRST, then increase influence on the other 2 major parties through guaranteed votes from my party.

[genius]

49. To do this, we need the support of leaders with supermajorities

If we could get Representatives like Maxine Waters, Diane Watson and others who regualry win by 90% to switch and convince others that we are the real Democratic Party, we might have a chance. The party would need a title showing that we are not just going off to the left but are heading for the party that truly represents the heroes of the Democratic Party, such as FDR and JFK.

[Cleita]

53. The Democratic Party is left of center right now.

Why do you think Ralph Nader can claim there is no difference between corporate entities? To go any closer to center you will be right.

[TheWizardOfMudd]

55. Based upon the 8 years of the Clinton Administrations

Your assertion is debatable.

For his time, Clinton was a centrist.

What has changed since then is the Bush administration pushing things off of the right cliff into fascism.

Hell, a Gingrich conservative is practically a leftist these days.

[Cleita]

58. I disagree with Gingrich, but a Pat Buchanan conservative

these days is a bleeding heart liberal. (I am kidding but these are interesting times we live in.)

[TheWizardOfMudd]

68. You nailed it

It is difficult to speak using terms and labels in these times. Historical contexts have shifted so rapidly. It all turns upon one's reference point according to where the political pendum or spectrum was at the time one defined a label or term. That'll make me crazy. :)

In any event, Bush has got to go!

[Romberry]

56. No. Progressives just need to re-assert control....

...over the Democratic Party. If the DLC was able to take it over there is no reason we can't take it back. Fracturing into yet another party would just be a Republican wet dream. It would assure continued losses for years to come and that is a luxury we can not afford.

[wyldwolf]

that's what I'm saying!

As a DLC moderate I say, take control of the party if you can. Splintering will give you less power.

[DaveSZ]

70. The Deaniacs need to become the Democratic Party

just as the Reaganites and Fundies became the modern GOP.


All this corporate money in the government is a very bad thing.

[wyldwolf]

73. the difference

the Reaganites won.

[Classical_Liberal]

76. The Reaganites began with the Goldwater movement in the 60s

Dean is our goldwater.

[wyldwolf]

77. If you say so

[Radical Activist]

61. It would only take three major groups with money to make it happen

A viable 3rd party on the left could be formed if it had the solid financial and organizational support of just a few major liberal organizations.

You would need one major Union like SEIU, AFSCME, or CWA.

One major environmental group like the Sierra Club or LCV.

And one group that works on economic and social justice like the NAACP, Rainbow/Push or ACORN.

Take one organization from each of those three groups working together and you would have a major 3rd party with the resources and ground organization to beat center/right Democrats.

It truly would not be that hard if leaders from those groups would get together and finally stop putting up with DLC BS. They could even agree to support individual liberal Democrats but give institutional support to the new 3rd party.

Greens are great on issues, but they have no money, no support from major groups like the ones I listed, and no one who has any idea how to run a political party. They're so divided and unorganized at the national level that they're a joke, and Nader is partly to blame for doing nothing to strengthen the Green Party for the last 8 years.

[Classical_Liberal]

65. If they don't do something about the spoiler effect

I am not sure a strong third party is desirable. If should be a rock solid commitment of any serious third party to not spoil an election in favor of the republicans. Arrianna provided a model in California. She dropped to avoid hurting Davis. Davis had no-one to blame but himself when he lost.

[Radical Activist]

79. They could simply endorse the liberal Dems

But I would like to see the Democratic party pledge to not elect conservative Democrats in liberal states or districts. Its such a waste to have these blue dog moderates in solidly Democratic areas. What the hell was Gray Davis doing as Governor in a state as liberal as California anyway? If Democrats are going to run a moderate like that in a liberal state then we shouldn't be surprised when 3rd party candidates make things more difficult for us.

A strong 3rd party on the left would force Democrats to nominate liberals in order to get the 3rd party endorsement.

[Classical_Liberal]

83. You can only work to nominate liberals dems as dems

. Fusion candidates are illegal in most states. The only reason to have a third party is because the Dem nominated a slouch. I agree that blue dogs in liberal states are stupid.

[Cascadian]

90. Look at the mayoral election in San Francisco.

They came very close to electing a Green candidate as mayor. That should be another message to the Democrats to quit playing Republican Lite. I will bet you will be seeing more of this on the local and ultimately the state and national levels before you know it. Don't count out third party candidates just yet.


John

[dumpster_baby]

94. good post! Good to see posts from real activists here

Why are the unions here so moribund compared to those in the EU? But even the EU unions seems to be headed south, too.

[bigbillhaywood]

103. Good point. nt

[John_H]

62. Nooooooo!!! Then they'd have to split the one-percent of the vote!!!

The Greens want that all to themselves.

[opihimoimoi]

81. Divided we fail, together we live. Its a no brainer.

[Classical_Liberal]

84. We should only unite when there is a spoiler effect

otherwise I am going to try and defeat the dlc, who don't represent my interests on many things. I still lose when Kerry is elected. I just lose less and more slowly.

[fujiyama]

91. I say no

not because I don't want third parties to succede, but because I am skeptical of their ability to in the near future, atleast at the national level.

At the local level, it's a great idea. At the national level though, third parties are not only at a severe disadvantage because of the winner takes all system we have, but they also hurt the chances of the major party with the political views closest to it. A third party/independant candidate COULD win the president (Ross Perot did have an impressive 19% in '92), but it takes a LOT of money and a relatively moderate agenda. Even then, Perot didn't manage to win any states. Though several other independant candidates in the last century did manage to win some states. If I remembe correctly, George Wallace was one of them.

In a way the democratic party of today is like a coalition of different parties, representing different interests -- the corporate DLC types, the socially moderate to conservative southern democrats, the progressive/liberal types often from the coasts and the midwest. The goal of course is to give those in the latter group a greater voice in the party and the national political scene in general. I don't see how it can be done without working in the party. To create a party infrastructure from scratch is virtually impossible, and as the reform party and others have shown, it is extremely difficult to keep various different factions on board and in line. I don't see any new parties doing this anytime soon. Maybe as a long term thing, but even that seems unlikely.

[CJCRANE]

93. More left-wing pressure groups, think-tanks eom

.

[ulysses]

96. yes, but

not all the eggs in the electoral basket. Greens, some coalition of extant left parties, something entirely new - whatever form it took, it would need to open a dialogue at the local level.

[chaska]

97. Start a party, fine, but you damn sure better line up behind Kerry.

I don't think some of you people realize what's at stake here. The left dies if Bush wins. This one's for all the marbles. WE lose this one. You can forget about all leftist ideas. It will be over for us.

Line up for Kerry, and work your asses off. Unity now!

[Cascadian]

98. I am voting for Kerry....

just to get rid of Bush.


But don't think I am going to be too generous if he starts playing Republican Lite once he enters the White House.


John

[Cascadian]

99. If the Democratic Party is to be saved.....

people have to start backing groups like Democracy for America and get seriously behind progressive left of center candidates. That is the only way for the Democratic Party not become the Republican Lite Party.


Anybody put money in DFA yet?



John

[bigbillhaywood]

105. When I supported Dean, I always said I would be the first to protest

against him once he's President. Until we're not faced with voting for the lesser of two evils, the vast majority of the Democratic Party must be challenged, and when possible, replaced with someone better.

[bigbillhaywood]

104. "Left dies if Bush wins" Certainly debatable. nt

[Beam Me Up]

100. This question will be made irrelevant:

1) If voting is 'temporarily' suspended due to a "national emergency".

2) If we cannot guarantee to satisfaction that our votes are being accurately tabulated and reported.

3) If we can not regulate how political campaigns are funded.

I think campaign finance reform is THE essential issue, regardless of whether we have one party, two parties or three. But even this issue will be moot if the electoral system lacks integrity, or is suspect. Without elections both 1 and 2 are moot

[kiahzero]

101. No

Splitting the left makes it easier for the right to win elections.

Let's assume that there are 25% left-of-center and 25% center. Election results next time?

50% Right
25% Center
25% Left-of-center

The center voters will probably go one way or another. Let's assume that half lean right, and half lean left.

62.5% Right
37.5% Left-of-Center

How is this better than right now?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

106. Yeah, right in the middle of an election year is the perfect time to

recommend it too.

I don't think anyone argues that our party isn't imperfect and that many ( read MOST) people feel left behind by their government or largely unregarded. Be that as it may, we have just had 4 years of the most dangerous party imaginable in this nation.

So I guess when people post stuff like this, the TIMING of it makes me uneasy. Frankly, while I won't be satisfied with the center...the center is a hard pull back from the extreme right. Am I the only person in the worle who thinks that is WORTH IT?