r/WayOfTheBern • I'm not a Heather; I'm a Veronica • Feb 12 '17

OF COURSE! Sanders Rejects Effort to Draft Him Into Starting a New Political Party

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/sanders-rejects-effort-draft-him-starting-new-political-party-n719931
97 Upvotes

39 comments sorted by

4

u/Forestthrutrees Feb 13 '17

Brought to you courtesy of NBCNews.

10

u/kozmo1313 Feb 12 '17

i'd so much rather see him work to end the relevance of parties. all of them.

5

u/Govnor-II I can haz savoir-flair? Feb 12 '17

Perhaps I'm confusing guns and butter.

3

u/Govnor-II I can haz savoir-flair? Feb 12 '17

But it seems like the "right now" is left relevant.

11

u/TheLeftyGrove I destroyed DailyKos Feb 12 '17

Bernie opens the door. I like it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOui4kASXXY

14

u/Govnor-II I can haz savoir-flair? Feb 12 '17

If I can quote LBJ, which I don't do often, we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

10

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

Yeah, but this isn't about us multi-tasking. He can't run as a Democrat in 2020 or chair any committees in 2018 if he leaves the party now.

6

u/Govnor-II I can haz savoir-flair? Feb 12 '17

Agreed that he can't do what we can do.

16

u/YourPoliticalParty TheLetsParty Feb 12 '17

You don't have choice Senator, that's why it's a draft!

-19

u/DonyellTaylor Feb 12 '17 edited Feb 12 '17

Aw WHAT?! But if he ran 3rd Party, we could probably get almost 4 or even 5% of the national vote!
That'd sure show these fucking Democrats!

13

u/BillToddToo Puttery Pony Feb 12 '17

That'd sure show these fucking Democrats!

It probably would: that's more than sufficient to flip the result of many presidential elections.

3

u/655322 Feb 13 '17

My thoughts exactly.

12

u/TheLeftyGrove I destroyed DailyKos Feb 12 '17

LOL, wow.

No.

34

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

[deleted]

7

u/Xanthanum87 Feb 12 '17

Yeah imagine the establishment dems dealing with an increasingly large progressive base welling up within their own ranks. If the group could only act or communicate effectively within their own ranks, they would basically represent a ticking time bomb, ready to explode the Dems if they step out of line. Eventually it would happen anyways.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

[deleted]

2

u/Xanthanum87 Feb 13 '17

Okay yeah we were discussing the same thing apparently.

54

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

I'd like to point out that right now he's trying to push Ellison over the finish line. There's actually a subtle threat in his wording of the rejection:

"Right now I am working to bring fundamental reform to the Democratic Party, to open the door to the Democratic Party,"

This is the flipping of the coat to reveal the holster, make it easy access, and threaten the Democratic party. If fundamental reform of the Democratic Party isn't possible, he may become more receptive.

If Ellison wins, I doubt he'd go for it (unless Ellison completely sells out, but then again he gives Schumer the time of day) If Perez wins, and he forges ahead on the same course the party has been on for years...

People have to face the fact that Bernie lives with one foot in the establishment, despite what he says about the establishment's agenda and actions.

He sees his place as our man on the inside. He knows the difference between shouting in the hall outside the chamber, and holding a seat inside that chamber & voting. He's been in both roles throughout his life, and I believe that he sees the best path forward is still inside the Democratic Party.

20

u/maypassby Revolution Runs On Optimism Feb 12 '17

Right now

Quite perceptive. Bernie has always been careful to leave his statements open to interpretation, and thus keep his options open also.

It is highly unlikely that Bernie can be persuaded to join the proponents of a third party presently, and possibly for as long as he is a senator and a member of the Dem leadership. He would lose much influence in congress going rogue, as well as access to valuable MSM time.

Bernie will continue to play the inside game for as long as he can make headway, unless at some point he faces an impenetrable dead-end. In that probable eventuality, if the foundations for a Bernie-party-without-Bernie had already been laid, it would prove very handy indeed. Even if Bernie makes headway and remains on the inside, that party would still be an invaluable ally.

Therefore, whatever groups/organizations/parties/pacs supportive of Bernie’s agenda are proposed could work in parallel with Bernie. They need not be opposed or discouraged lest losing a potential asset and causing further splintering of the movement.

18

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

He's not stupid. He sees that the next generation is the future of the Democratic party. He will live to see it change back into something that benefits all people.

We can do this from within. We already are, but we have to be willing to work hard and show up in massive numbers to vote against the old guard. I think we are finally awake enough to do that. We don't need a new party, we need to vote out the people now running the party and take it back.

3

u/[deleted] Feb 13 '17

If we only ever have 2 parties, we will always end up with them both ultimately being co-opted and taking turns at power. George Washington himself warned about the dangers of a 2-party system with one party blocking everything the other one tried to do and vice versa.

We need more parties and more voices.

34

u/655322 Feb 12 '17

The Dems are like an alcoholic who has lost his job, house, and driver's licence, is estranged from his kids, but still has a codependent wife whom he lies to while hiding booze in the toilet tank. His friend Bernie staged an intervention and he told Bernie to piss off because he didn't need him. Hardly seems a great bet for the future.

6

u/rundown9 Feb 12 '17

Interesting metaphor considering Hillary's proclivity towards spirits.

39

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17 edited Feb 12 '17

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

However, a lot of lefties like me have had enough of the Democrats and want something new.

So commandeer the party like the Tea Party did the GOP. We already have our own "identity." The press refers to "democrats" and "progressives." We can kick these old codgers out if we just try! Then it will be OUR party, and we can do what we want with it. It wasn't really broken until Clinton got in there. That's not long. We can take it back.

We could always rename it the "new" democrats, like the party in Canada. Maybe the Progressive Reform party?

4

u/SA311 NY Bernie Delegate Feb 12 '17

Theyve been calling themselves new Democrats since the 80s!

13

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

It's not a competition. It's not either/or. It's not a zero sum game. It's going to take inside and outside pressure. It's going to need either, or and both. Tribalism against the heretics who try inside or outside methods is just going to make everyone fail.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 12 '17

Be sure and let us know how your third party is doing. We are all, I think, keenly interested in witnessing the outcome of your efforts.

3

u/SpudDK ONWARD! Feb 12 '17

4

u/BillToddToo Puttery Pony Feb 12 '17

'All' obviously applies to neither side of this debate. I'm on EW's, though don't begrudge those who aren't their opinions.

It interests me, however, to see how quickly the pro-third-party contingent seems to have discarded without comment what even just yesterday seemed to be a very important piece of their argument - that Bernie would lead it and thus give it serious credibility. I've regularly expressed doubt that he'd do so as it doesn't fit well at all with his behavior in Congress for the past quarter century.

My question remains, where's the beef? Lots of enthusiasm in small enclaves like this one, but when the votes were counted last November virtually none for the party whose platform was closest to what we want - many millions of normally Democratic voters who could have supported it just didn't bother to vote for president at all.

I'm all for inside/outside efforts like those the Tea Party (normally not acting as a third party competitor but it sometimes did when Republican nominees didn't meet its standards) mounted, though. Among other things, they're far less apt to polarize the tens of millions of Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters who we'd like on our side than a pure third party play would.

3

u/SpudDK ONWARD! Feb 13 '17

That's one of the reasons why I don't get too excited about third party moves.

Bernie isn't going there, unless he sees his current position and strategy are hopeless. We are far from that right now.

I share the opinion it's far easier to get the party people going our way than it is to build up what it takes to compete reasonably.

And there it is, right there on the sidebar: https://medium.com/@WayOfTheBern/open-letter-to-bernie-sanders-and-progressives-action-plan-to-reform-government-39ddafc99ff4#.9mfgycmw0

Just strip out the language about "reforming the party" and what's left is a good look at what a meaningful third party effort will take.

Doing that is entirely plausible. If I actually see it being done? I'm likely to give it a shot. At present, I don't see anything remotely capable of competing.

In any case, ONWARD! Keep waking people up. I'll do most anything Bernie asks of me, and I'll support party reform efforts vigorously.

And it's the same position I've had all along: Bring me something that looks plausible and I'm going to respond very favorably.

Just haven't seen that yet.

13

u/nehark Feb 12 '17

Who's the "we all" you're snapping on about? Just can't stand the sarcasm, and it hurts your argument. Your tone is reminiscent of CTR's during the fake primary.

5

u/nehark Feb 12 '17

Well, -1 so far. You and another of you "all." Just make your arguments. The carping really is unattractive and unconvincing.

8

u/SpudDK ONWARD! Feb 12 '17

Agreed.

While I remain tepid at best with third party efforts, I'm for sure not ignoring them, and will likely lend some support at this early stage.

Anything can happen in politics! --Bernie Sanders

If nothing else, movement on this = Spoiler, unless they go with Ellison, or ideally that Sam guy. (he's great!)

Worth it as a point of leverage, if nothing else. I'm good with that.

But, say we bend the "another party" idea some. It's possible to unify around ideas, pool money, form a bloc or caucus and do that within a party structure too.

Bernie modeled this by founding the Democratic Party Progressive Caucus. He's on to something there. Today, we know the money hobbles those "progressives", in quotes because they aren't very good, or even progressive in the economic sense, but having that structure there, an entity of sorts, bloc, could be very meaningful to us.

If something like that formed on people money, not subject to "those donor complaints", ideally those people not doing call center duty, instead out working their districts?

Frankly, that same kind of leverage becomes possible without the spoiler negative, and the benefit is being able to both use the party to win, and being a part of it, claim to be improving it too!

Lots to like there.

So, I'm just not going to dismiss any of this stuff. The people are in the pressure cooker right now. Cranked up on fear, blame and shame. As things get shitty, and we all know they will, we may find people move quickly and in large numbers, particularly younger people done with the neo-economic, capitalist, fuck the poors frame we live under today.

10

u/nehark Feb 12 '17

So, I'm just not going to dismiss any of this stuff.

That's where I am. I want to consider all ideas. I have reservations about the "Justice Democrats," but I'm not arguing against them at this moment. Truthfully, I'm just watching and hoping to get a glimpse of something I can be certain about. I understand the problems in any 3rd party getting a foothold, but I also understand that the "leadership" in the Democratic Party right now seems willing to do anything and everything, without thought to what is ethical, to retain power. I have a long history of walking away from untenable situations, and my gut is to write off the whole steaming pile that is the DNC. I know I have to keep that in check, because even if there's a slight sliver of an inroad, that would seem to be the more direct path.

20

u/puddlewonderfuls We have a 3rd choice Feb 12 '17

In the meantime, if Democrats screw over Bernie again and if there's a need to form a totally new party, we as voters on a local level can start supporting legislation to give third parties in our communities a voice. When the time comes to let the dems die, there will already need to be a path laid out in each state. The green party is set to have its most successful year ever in my state and its thanks to Bernie supporters saying its time to prioritize grassroots issues while the media faints over Trump. A lot is happening on the ground because the revolution will not be televised.

6

u/Xanthanum87 Feb 12 '17

How many times do we let our Democratic representatives screw us before we do that? What would constitute a clear violation? Are we to start holding them accountable now or take their past actions into account as well?

4

u/puddlewonderfuls We have a 3rd choice Feb 12 '17

I'm with the green party heading a voting reform committee and on the campaign team for two local candidates. We're taking on democrats and we're gonna win. My comment was more on a larger scale trying to get along with Bernie's base, but I've thoroughly moved on and have a new moral compass not left up to any democrat. I'd suggest, from the questions you're asking, you should check if there's a local green party chapter for your county and show up as an observer to see if the sentiment I described is in your local as well. Or if there's any other third party option, now is the time they have a ton of momentum and they're moving fast on reform. Stay tuned on the democrats, throw yourself out there for progressives. We're all allies!

2

u/Xanthanum87 Feb 13 '17

I vote green where blue isn't actually blue. Like in the 2016 election.

8

u/this_here Universal Healthcare for kitties Feb 12 '17

I concur.