Bernie Sanders announces plans for a new left party

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: jacobe001

I wouldn't get to excited... Australia has a second left party (the Greens), but as soon as they formed a significant amount of popularity, they just sold out to the main left party (labour) and formed an alliance.

Now its just business as usual, the same old two party system!

I agree that it too will descend into business as usual because it is the nature of the beast.
It is a war over power and as long as humans exist, I do not see that changing, but the solution is certainly not to lay down and give up because the other side is certainly not going to stop fighting.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
With all of the games of the DNC's Wasser Schultz colluding with the HRC machine to insure Hilley is the Democrats presidential nominee, Sen Sanders has had enough, Sanders is going to start a new left wing party in 2017.

I wonder if this is hisway of telling the Dems he will be challenging their sweetheart Hilley in 2020?

I feel that Sen Sanders has gained name recognition and interest in his campaign platform to the point he could become a very serious threat to corporate politics, Go Bernie!


Bernie Sanders announces plans for a new left party


Standard Communist strategy. When the current party is no longer in favor, set up a "salvation front" and reconstruct a new Communist party. They did that in the fallen USSR countries.

My fellow Americans, it is always difficult to admit you are wrong especially when you are a Senator. But the refusal of the convention to approve or even consider reforms that will make the Democratic Party more attractive to voters leaves me with no alternative but to begin the difficult but necessary task of building a new party that not only embraces such reforms but fights for them in municipal, state and national elections. It was my hope that the Democrats could return to the values of the New Deal and the New Society but in the final analysis they insisted on defending the values of Wall Street banks. If they refuse to stand up for the middle class, we have no alternative except to make a stand for the overwhelming majority of Americans who survive from paycheck to paycheck.

After meeting with my closest advisers, we have decided to launch the new party at a national founding convention in Chicago on May 1, 2017. At this point what we call the party is far less important than what it stands for. We are confident that we can win a majority of Americans to a program based on the goals I identified in my campaign for President, especially that of ending income inequality. As long as the superrich use their wealth to game the system, especially the electoral system, it will be difficult to achieve any other basic reforms.

As an independent third party, we will obviously have to deal with attempts by the one percent to marginalize us but at least we will be able to rely on our own resources and not be beholden to the kind of corporate influences that have made the Democratic Party willing to throw the middle class under the bus. Concretely, our new party will benefit from the ten million dollars that remain in my 2016 campaign’s treasury that will be used as seed money. The priority will not be on glitzy television commercials but in creating the infrastructure that can help us get rooted in all fifty states and begin the process of funding the campaigns of party members running for municipal and state office. To that end, I have asked Jeff Weaver to staff an office in Chicago that will organize our founding convention and begin the process of carrying out our agenda of creating a new political party that has a nationwide reach.

source

(This is a thought experiment based on some of the discussion taking place around the need for the Sanders campaign to “continue the struggle” after Clinton becomes the Democratic Party candidate for president. It is of course highly unlikely that Sanders would ever follow such a path so in terms of the real world I will be voting for Jill Stein in November and urge everybody else to do so as well, even in “swing states”. )

From the OP's source link.

Why is it that everyone is looking at different forms of government, but no one is looking at less government?

originally posted by: watchitburn
Isn't there already a socialist party in the US?

Why didn't he just run with that in the 1st place? Seems a little disingenuous to me.

But with that being said, I'd take Bernie over Hillary any day of the week.

because he is a democratic socialist not a socilist

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Why is it that everyone is looking at different forms of government, but no one is looking at less government?

Because we love the servitude.

a reply to: AlaskanDad

OMG OMG OMG!!!!!!

Third party go-for-it!

He's going to continue disrupting the status quo - he is my hero.

DBCowboy will need to just suck it up and quit balking.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Why is it that everyone is looking at different forms of government, but no one is looking at less government?

Because we love the servitude.

That is so true.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Why is it that everyone is looking at different forms of government, but no one is looking at less government?

Given the record amounts of money going to parties and politicians, do you see the deep pocket corporations and banks looking for smaller government?

They want the freebie contracts, legislation favoring them and trade pacts with other nations and all that takes a big government to serve them.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Why is it that everyone is looking at different forms of government, but no one is looking at less government?

Because most people were educated by the government.

Handy how that works.

So nothing new.

We're just slaves debating which master will treat us best.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Wrong. Here's why:

Here’s What ‘Social Liberal but Fiscal Conservative’ [Types] Just Don’t Comprehend
(The actual title says "Millennials", but DBCowboys and many, many ATSers don't get it as well):

The white, butthurt feelings that drove the 2010 mid-terms put hardcore Tea Party Republicans in power, and very few of the SLFC [socially liberal, fiscally conservative] young people who voted for Obama turned out to vote.

The Tea Party’s only purpose is to say “no” to President Obama.

When the Tea Party Congress isn’t busy trying to repeal the Affordable Healthcare Act or pass laws to criminalize abortion, it’s finding new ways to resist agreeing with the president on anything.

That^ = Puerile Oppositional Tantruming. The Tea Party.

One of the best ways that Congress has found to prevent the government from enforcing any of its responsibilities is to plug up the financial pipeline. That TSA line? A victim of the budget power play where Tea Party activists decided it would be better to threaten to default on the national debt rather than see any increase in the national budget.

Asinine, petulant, juvenile behavior.
(e.g. Ted Cruz)

That's why. The GOP sucks.
Selfish bastards, to a one.

A third, fourth and fifth political party ... I say "huzzah."

Perhaps that will remind us of the true importance of the House of Representatives ...

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Why is it that everyone is looking at different forms of government, but no one is looking at less government?

Because we love the servitude.

The love of freedom, liberty and independence has been successfully bred out of the population it would seem.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Except that the TEA Party got its start in response to the bank bailouts which began BEFORE Obama.

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: jacobe001
I hope this is true.
If he gets it started at least there will be others that will keep it going.
The establishment types that infest the DNC and RNC should not be allowed to join.

Ah. I see it will start out as a very inclusive party then.

That is what the DNC and RNC is right now. They can stay on their inclusive team The people tell them who they want and they give the finger to the people.

Yeah. OK. I think it would be a good idea to have all the leftists in one place. If they were to leave the Dems this would weaken the Dems so that only the Yellow Dogs would be left. The Lefties (Commies Lite) would be weak as well leaving the GOP in the driver's seat.

Good plan!

A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have.
-Thomas Jefferson

a reply to: ketsuko

I don't give a crap who 'started it.' The Tea Party is asinine. They (and their supporters) really need to dry up.



They got their start after the bank bailouts; and then what? How did they get so belligerent and obstructionist and downright ugly, and why does anyone think they are right? They would rather starve EVERYONE than admit that they are idiots.

End of chat with you - read the article I posted and learn something. Or don't. I don't care. Deliberate refusal to learn is deliberate.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
So nothing new.

We're just slaves debating which master will treat us best.

It's like over in the authoritarianism thread ... the best push back would be to dismantle the power structures enabling systemic authoritarianism, but no one ever talks about that. Instead, people all talk about, not smaller government, but "smarter" government ... as if anything makes an authoritarian structure better, it's just not punishing you this year.

a reply to: greencmp

Ha.

That always reminds me of the radical ideas in the Christian Bible:

2. Isaiah 58:10 If you give some of your own food to [feed] those who are hungry and to satisfy [the needs of] those who are humble, then your light will rise in the dark, and your darkness will become as bright as the noonday sun.

3. Isaiah 58:7 Share your food with the hungry, and give shelter to the homeless. Give clothes to those who need them, and do not hide from relatives who need your help.

4. Ezekiel 18:7 He is a merciful creditor, not keeping the items given as security by poor debtors. He does not rob the poor but instead gives food to the hungry and provides clothes for the needy.

5. Luke 3:11 He answered them, “Whoever has two shirts should share with the person who doesn’t have any. Whoever has food should share it too.”

6. Matthew 10:42 I tell all of you with certainty, whoever gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is a disciple will never lose his reward.”