• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

A New US People's Party?

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
5,369
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The spoiler effect? Yes, the Greens were likely spoilers in the 2000 and 2016 Presidential races.

Let me explain what I think this really means.

People like Nader, the Green party, and Sanders helped get presidents like Bush and Trump elected.

That gave the USA things like 9/11
Afghanistan
The invasion of Iraq
Massive federal deficits
The recession of 2008

Heightened ethnic divisions
Increased federal deficits
C19 disaster
Jan 6 insurgency
Erosion of public trust in USA institutions

That's what we got from such efforts, for starters. I see no rational reason to think that this new political effort will be better.


Frankly, were I an evil billionaire, I'd strongly support The People's Party. People like them are better at getting taxes cut and corporate welfare spent than Hillary Clinton ever thought about being.
Tom

Well, the People's Party and other looney fringe third parties get most of their campaign funding from wealthy conservatives! But I don't equate Sanders with the green party and Nader. Nader deliberately wanted to throw the election for the republicans. He wanted to crash the system, devastate the dems, then have the democratic party come crawling back to him. Sanders tried to work within the democratic party. He's trying to build a coalition that shares his agenda within the democratic party. I'm to the right of Sanders, but I have no problem with this. Due to the system, the democratic party must be the big tent party. It's not fair, but our side must have millions of more votes than republicans in order to win. His support of Clinton in 2016 was a little luke warm in the beginning. But i understand. He had lost a grueling race. I blame the loss of the supreme court and the the rise of the trumpsters to our crazy election system and the Green party. And if you read statements made by the People's Party, they only condemn the meanie democrats. They never critique Trump and all bat shit insane policies.
 

Swammerdami

Squadron Leader
Staff member
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
2,220
Location
Land of Smiles
Basic Beliefs
pseudo-deism
The sad part is, The People's party may very well siphon off Democratic Votes and Independent votes guaranteeing a GOP win. The best bet might be to run as a Democratic caucus. This tactic has been a bust since Ralph Nader and the Green party.

Imagine (Warning: It will make you want to cry) how HUGELY different history would have played out if Nader hadn't run in 2000.

Gore would have undoubtedly won and promoted a Green agenda. (Ironically Gore was far more pro-Green than the Green Party's Nader.) 9/11 might not have happened. (There were already intelligence pointers to it, which Bush rejected since his guiding "principle" was simply to do the opposite of whatever Clinton recommended.) But even if the terrorist attack went through, the U.S. response would have been far less stupid and greed-driven than under Cheney-Rove. The Cheney-Rove Administration also abetted the Wall St. excesses which led to the 2008 credit crisis. The changes to American history we would have seen had Nader not run would have been tremendous.

A Republican would have been elected in 2004 or 2008, but probably Romney, much more competent and less corrupt than Cheney-Rove. Even John McCain would have been an improvement on the dolts from Texas. Obama's election, if it occurred at all, would have been delayed. Without the racist backlash from a Black in the Big Job, Trump would never have a chance.

So yes. Nader's candidacy came at gargantuan cost to America and the world. Let's snip any thoughts of a repeat in the bud.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
18,123
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Considering the sheer difference between both the Democratic and Republican parties today and their yesteryears, I don't get why the party name matters. Just jump on the main tickets and fight. It's not like either of the major parties are anything like what they once were. The Democratic party will be the Green Party in the 2050s for all we know. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ask Brand New Congress about that. :D

Back in 2018, BNC succeeded in recruiting 30 candidates to run on a Bernie-Sanders-like platform. Of them, 28 ran as Democrats, 1 as an Independent, and 1 as a Republican.

The Independent: Marc Whitmire - Ballotpedia - TN-02, 2018
  • Tim Burchett (R) 172,856 - 65.9%
  • Renee Hoyos (D) 86,668 - 33.1%
  • Greg Samples (I) 967 - 0.4%
  • Jeffrey Grunau (I) 657 - 0.3%
  • Marc Whitmire (I) 637 - 0.2%
  • Keith LaTorre (I) 349 - 0.1%

The Republican: Robb Ryerse - Ballotpedia - AR-03, 2018
He was defeated in the Republican Primary by Steve Womack, 84.2% - 15.8%

In the general election, the vote was Steve Womack (R) 64.7% - Joshua Mahony (D) 32.6% - Michael Kalagias (L) 2.6% - Other/write-in 0.1%


Some members of Brand New Congress didn't like that tactic, and in early 2017, they split off and formed the Justice Democrats, focusing on the Democratic Party. But for 2020, and so far for 2022, BNC is all-Democratic.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
5,369
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The sad part is, The People's party may very well siphon off Democratic Votes and Independent votes guaranteeing a GOP win. The best bet might be to run as a Democratic caucus. This tactic has been a bust since Ralph Nader and the Green party.

Imagine (Warning: It will make you want to cry) how HUGELY different history would have played out if Nader hadn't run in 2000.

Gore would have undoubtedly won and promoted a Green agenda. (Ironically Gore was far more pro-Green than the Green Party's Nader.) 9/11 might not have happened. (There were already intelligence pointers to it, which Bush rejected since his guiding "principle" was simply to do the opposite of whatever Clinton recommended.) But even if the terrorist attack went through, the U.S. response would have been far less stupid and greed-driven than under Cheney-Rove. The Cheney-Rove Administration also abetted the Wall St. excesses which led to the 2008 credit crisis. The changes to American history we would have seen had Nader not run would have been tremendous.

A Republican would have been elected in 2004 or 2008, but probably Romney, much more competent and less corrupt than Cheney-Rove. Even John McCain would have been an improvement on the dolts from Texas. Obama's election, if it occurred at all, would have been delayed. Without the racist backlash from a Black in the Big Job, Trump would never have a chance.

So yes. Nader's candidacy came at gargantuan cost to America and the world. Let's snip any thoughts of a repeat in the bud.

Yes, Nader's legacy is very bad for us. It also condemned an entire generation to live under a very conservative supreme court. It's very ironic as Nader is an attorney and understands the impact of the law on everyday life.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
18,123
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The People's Party | Free Of Corporate Money -  Movement for a People's Party

The latest news: The Florida People’s Party Announces Ballot Access, Begins Voter Registration Drive - The People's Party
Jlorida is the first state party to achieve ballot access and official party status with the People’s Party. The People’s Party is currently working to achieve ballot access in every state across the country, noting Florida as a milestone toward a major new party free of corporate money.

Voters in Florida can now register to cast their vote as a Florida People’s Party registered voter. State Chair Victor Nieto noted that the Florida People’s Party will be ramping up efforts toward voter registration drives and future candidates in the Sunshine State.
Thus joining California, Colorado, Maine, Ohio, and Oregon, and beating them in ballot access.
 

lpetrich

Contributor
Joined
Jul 28, 2000
Messages
18,123
Location
Eugene, OR
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The party's main recent effort has been to organize chapters in states. The Florida People’s Party Announces Ballot Access, Begins Voter Registration Drive - The People's Party

But I found nothing in general, no list of state chapters with the status of each.

But under "Organize", I found Nominations Now Open For People’s Party Candidates 2022

"The first round of People’s Party campaigns will help us build a strong volunteer base and campaign infrastructure that can carry over to future races. It will be a guiding light for campaigns beyond the midterms. While we are focused on electing a slate of federal candidates, nominations are also open for state and local candidates."

One can apply to run or else nominate a candidate. This is a departure from Brand New Congress and Justice Democrats, which both support only nominating a candidate, because they think that it will help screen out egomaniacs.
The People’s Party is opening nominations for its first generation of candidates. The national People's Party, in collaboration with our state chapters, will be supporting a diverse and dynamic slate of about a dozen congressional candidates in the 2022 midterm elections. These future representatives will help us blaze a trail for races at every level of government and shape the movement to give a real voice and choice to the voters of America. We're looking for candidates with a history of activism, organizing, and service to their communities. People who have lived the profound injustices that the corporate parties have imposed on our country. Future representatives with strong ties to their communities, who will fight hard for their constituents and the transformative change and policies embodied in the People's Platform. We look forward to making lasting change together.
Seems like they want to support Congressional, state, and local candidates.

But no further announcements, like candidates announcing that they are running as People's Party ones.
 

Lumpenproletariat

Veteran Member
Joined
May 9, 2014
Messages
2,155
Location
Santa Mira
Basic Beliefs
Utilitarian
What's the point of a new "Third Party" which only duplicates what has been done by dozens of already-existing "Third Parties"?

If we need another "Third Party" it should be one that offers something different than the many already-existing "third parties" competing with each other and canceling out each other.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
5,369
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
What's the point of a new "Third Party" which only duplicates what has been done by dozens of already-existing "Third Parties"?

If we need another "Third Party" it should be one that offers something different than the many already-existing "third parties" competing with each other and canceling out each other.
Well, the democratic tent is far larger and diverse than the republican tent. Republicans are simply motivated by the supreme court, guns, lower taxes, religion and Trump. If you're a republican and you favor these issues, you're in. The dem party is far more diverse. But it's also far easier to split and demoralize the democratic vote. And that's the purpose of the America's Party, Green Party and etc: split the dem vote, create confusion and doubt, lower the democratic turnout. And it works. Third parties hurt dems far more than republicans. As long as dems are so stupid, third party efforts will continue.
 
Top Bottom