entrenched.

would be a disaster. We would have no leverage as a third party.

And w/o someone like her leading the party, we don't have a chance anywayz. I am afraid that a lot of grassroots progressives won't jump to a third party.

We just call ourselves the Democratic Wing.

trying to retake the Dem Party from Republican Lite Third Way Leadership.

A Third Party, iow, has infiltrated the Democratic Party already.

And they have even named themselves 'The Third Way'.

They do not represent Democrat Party values by any means.

So for me, this is about restore the two Party system.

After we have done that, we can talk about a Third Party.

Right now though, people would like to see a Second Party reemerge from the rubble created by the Third Way.

Autumn: I'm not sure we can wrest power
away from the third Way.

All that needs to be done is look at the
Tee Party playbook.
It's full of tried and proven techniques.
They started with school boards
and now they are on the national stage.

Use what works.

Public funding of elections, Proportional Rep, IRV, etc.

I think as "Third Way" folks lose or people realize it's "%1"-lite, we'll get there.

If not, I may need to look for a 2600 group. . .

We need to take it back from the Conservatives.

Build from the ground up.

Do what the Tee Party did...
but for real, not AstroTurf.

Real Dems need a strong "Farm League"

under the 2-party system it would seem 3rd parties might help in the sense that competition encourages a better product. IMO the more parties the better. The current 2-party system is just too easy to corrupt. As we have seen over and over again in the last generation.

people have had it with status quo and we have enough conviction to separate ourselves from the status quo murdering our Government.

From what I've seen Democrats have capitulated, compromised, bowed down and kissed the asses of a leadership who literally hates them and everything they stand for.

We need a message to send home that this shit of rewarding the rich and punishing the non-rich has to stop.

Something as simple and resonant as the Reform Party transcends political boundaries.

Conservatives don't want reform, so there is no chance they'll be confused about intent.

I'm actually surprised that the Tea Party didn't use Reform Party because those bastards are famous for hijacking names and doing the EXACT opposite of what is implied by the name.

The Reform Party made a big splash in 1992. In fact, its presidential candidate, Ross Perot, outpolled both Clinton and Bush just prior to the election. In a 1-900 pool. Making it the #1 party among people stupid enough to pay for a meaningless vote.

By 1998 it was the third largest political party in the United States. It was always a rightwing, populist party. In fact, rank-and-file Teabaggers would have fit the 90's Reform Party to a tee. It is at the leadership level that the Tea Party swings wildly away from populist to the point of making the rank-and-file look like deluded idiots.

Hard rightwingers led by Pat Buchanan then took over the party causing it to fracture. This was made easy for the Right because the Reform Party used a national caucus

Ultimately, the hard right abandoned the party to join the Tea Party leaving today's Reform Party a shadow of its former self. But it does still exist. But it now just stands for the flavor of the day. One election they nominated Pat Buchannan. Next election they nominated Ralph Nader! It doesn't get any more disjointed than that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Party_of_the_United_States_of_America

another problem with "reform party" is that it sounds temporary. Once "reform" has been achieved, then what?

So a better name is something that indicates long standing, immutable principals up front.

I just Edited a reply to you. I misread your post before and gave the link to William Greider's article about we need a "Rump Wing" of the Dem Party for Dissenters.. I replied that I liked that idea but thought there might be a better name than "Rump Wing."

I re-read and realized you were suggesting: "Progressive Reform Caucus" as the name for Dem Party Reformers.

Yes it sounds good. Not as catchy as "Tea Party" but, it's solid and serious.

And I totally agree with you about NOT going third party.

Wellstone's lasting legacy.

Hiya!

We're getting a light but freezing snow. Roads are crap. 25 mph.

How's by you?

Now it's just damn cold.

I hope you don't have to have to go anywhere on your crappy roads. Stay warm and keep safe!

This place is mine, my ideology lives here. They worked to break it, I'll work to fix it.
(I have issues)

One thing I want to remind everyone amidst all this doom and gloom. The Third Way and Oligarchs are actually few in number. They may wield an enormous amount of power and use it to obfuscate and clog communication, but they can't conceal all of the truth all of the time. They know that, so they work to garble the truth.
So, speak the truth, speak it calmly in the face of screaming. Unclog and make clear the communication.

If only we had a place to do this.....somewhere off the mainstream..........maybe underground..................later.

I was thinking in general terms yesterday after a wonderful, wide-ranging discussion with Scuba.

I'm developing a crude and rather shallow outline of political psychology that can serve as a sort of "Cliff's Notes" for the area. My intention is merely to spread the knowledge of what that area offers, and provide a toehold for anyone who wants to dig into it further.

People who know about other areas of interest might want to develop similar integrative synopses of interesting areas such as the application of psychophysiological measures to assess the effects of various concepts, phrases, memes, etc. I know little about this area & it would be great to have a resource

People are crowdsourcing science funding for indie scientists these days. I could see us putting together some social-science research on a topic that would benefit the advance of Progressive ideals (e.g. research on attitudes/belief/values as they vary across the sociopolitical spectrum).

If 90% of scientists are liberal, we ought to have quite a pool of talent around this site. I think it would be very useful to put our talents to work developing ways to advance our goals. It starts with a pooling of information.

This is just a bunch of partially-baked ideas, to which I invite your thoughts.

Somewhere we can easily find info, especially the latest, on particular issues. I tried to have pinned threads in the Progressive Media Resources Group for specific subjects. But that wasn't the best. For example, what's the latest on the TPP, XL Pipeline, etc.

Also, we need to develop a progressive strategy and work together.

I'm basically engaging in some crowdsourcing here--throwing out a few seeds to se what grows. Sure, organization, but what kind? I'd want to keep it leaderless (modeled on ideas derived from Starfish & Spider; Wiki-everything; Occupy) & controlled by consensus with spin-off SIGS as appropriate & useful.

Above all, I'd want the structure to stay experimental--society as an ongoing experiment, allowed to change as a result of feedback from everywhere.

Let us be the hand full of rocks slipping, that triggers an landslide.

That is if the third way/DINO folks aren't removed from the democratic party's helm. If they don't just leave an become independent dems first. Still maybe taking some lessons from the tea party and how they manage to take control of the repug party is the way to go.

Just because they are trying to lead, doesn't mean we have to follow.
Become active, attend local meetings of the Democratic Party; and make the case for moving Left. Become the message.

However, given the last 40 years of Party history, this seems unlikely. If the Party continues its rightward drift, Liberals and Progressives will either a) find another Party through which to voice their concerns or b) resign themselves to being used, manipulated and ignored by the Democrats.

the nod, or else it's third party time. I'm done. finito. If we can't find our power against all that is now, we never will.

And there just aren't enough actual progressives in there.

Warren....Sanders (not a Dem though).....Franken........that's all that's coming to mind.

Everyone else has some progressive issues they are o.k. on (pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, etc.) but all the rest are either really bad third way economic policy types or if not are more easily swayed by those types that we NEED to split the difference on conservative economic policy.

We really need a clown car smilie!

in major elections.

For instance, if Bernie runs, we may want to see if we can make a deal with Greens, Socialists, Independents, etc to get them to register as Democrats in order for him to have a better chance at knocking off the Third Way candidate in the primaries.

If we run a good campaign, and it looks like we have a real shot at upsetting the corporate "Chosen One", they just might go for it, and that extra 5% or more in the primaries would be critical. The stronger we are, the stronger we'll get, if it looks like we have a shot, enthusiasm will attract the positive attention of every disillusioned voter who desperately wants progressive change but sees it as hopeless.

What they'd want in return, I don't know, but we need to build a very substantial and unified liberal voting bloc if we are ever going to counteract MSM propaganda, and wrest power from the 1%.

Let me see if I have this straight. The purpose of this new group is to wrest control of the democratic party away from the corporate financed and controlled DLC by finding a principled candidate to primary Hillary and by reminding democrats that the third way doesn't work for them. You are going to want throw around a bunch of campaign rhetoric about the old democratic party and what needs to be fixed and you are going to want to make promises about what the new democratic party will do hopefully convincing lost democrats and bringing them to the polls for the victory.
In my world we call that tripping. You'd have a better chance offering Hillary more money than the LDC to represent your cause or getting Al Franken to campaign in a psychedelic dayglo jumpsuit. The strongest part of your argument is that no matter what, most of DU will vote for the democrat and if Hillary is the nominee you will vote for her. I bet that has them scared. Their battle plan will consist of co-opting your message and ignoring you. Business as usual.

What you don't want to do is exactly what the hero of many DU ers has done. Bernie Sanders is the one who speaks the truth to the issues and the problems we face. Bernie is neither a democrat nor a republican and therefore by your call unelectable. And you wonder how people vote against their own best interests.

We're on DU, we follow DU rules. I think your beef is with the Admins.