Daily Archives: March 26, 2017


Why Don’t We Just Reform The Democratic Party?

There is an organization called Draft Bernie For A People’s Party. In the March 23, 2017 weekly conference call, they had an experienced organizer explain exactly why we don’t just reform the Democratic Party.

The Draft Bernie organization sent an email summary of the conference call from which I quote.

Last night on the second call, we were joined by Bill Bianchi, the former head of the Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) in Chicago and now a member of Draft Bernie, and Lee Camp, comedian and host of Redacted Tonight.

Bill Bianchi traced the history of many failed attempts to bring progressive ideas into the corporate-controlled Democratic Party over the years. Not even Bernie Sanders with his millions of followers have been able to make a dent in the party after his historic run in the Democratic primary. Bill thinks it’s necessary to fight the corporate Democrats by drafting Bernie to unite progressive groups into one huge movement and people’s party.

Lee Camp emphasized the impact of election fraud that has been documented by experts for well over a decade. He described how it was used in the primary to thwart Bernie’s victory. He ended by telling us to, “Keep fighting”!

Here is the audio of the conference call. Bill Binachi’s part starts within the first 2 minutes of the audio.


The DLC Lives: “Third Way” Democrats Are Trying to Push the Party Rightward

Truth Out has the article The DLC Lives: “Third Way” Democrats Are Trying to Push the Party Rightward.

I think the main value of this article is to arm you against the attack of the Democratic Party oligarchs who will try to convince you to support them against your own best interests.

I may be on the hairy edge of the principle of fair use in the excerpts I show below. The irony of that is the fact that there is so much more of the article that I wanted to quote. I guess, you’ll just have to read the article for yourself.

The basic premise: Democrats are wrong to appeal to growing demographics that lean liberal, such as Latinos and young people. Third Way claims that this thinking has led Democrats to “pursue a base-only strategy without worrying about persuading a broader swath of voters to support them.” Democrats are failing to acknowledge, it argues, that voters are increasingly registering as independents and do not identify as liberal. It declares that the party must move to the center.
.
.
.
However, the more persuasive argument is that the Democrats lost the election precisely because they are too much like what Third Way wants them to be: deferential, non-ideological and too close to Wall Street. “Secretary Clinton does represent the establishment,” Sen. Bernie Sanders explained during the primary.
.
.
.
Third Way’s rhetoric repeatedly conflates “independent” with “moderate.” This conflation is repeated frequently in the media as a truism. And while the specific politics of “independent voters” vary widely and change from election to election, pollsters agree that “it’s critical not to confuse ‘independents’ with ‘moderates,'” as 538 acknowledged in an article about Bernie Sanders’ success among independents.

The reality that “independent” does not equal “moderate” has been affirmed by many other pollsters and experts, including Tom Jensen at Public Policy Polling and even the DLC’s still surviving sister think tank, the Progressive Policy Institute, which acknowledged as much in 2010.

“One of the frustrating things about contemporary political analysis is the frequency with which key terms get used in a very sloppy manner that reflects highly biased or inaccurate assumptions,” the Progressive Policy Institute stated in a 2010 article on its website. “A perpetual example is the use of ‘independent’ and ‘moderate’ as interchangeable words for unaffiliated voters.”