Bernie has already created a third Party.

[kentuck]

He doesn't have to change anything. He is a Democratic Socialist. He has been validated within the Democratic Party and within the primary process.

In four years, if the Democratic Party does not show itself to be inclusive to the ideas of the Democratic Socialists, then they run the threat of having a separate, third Party of democratic socialists to compete with.

The challenge for Hillary and the Democratic Party establishment is to persuade the Bernie supporters to support them in this upcoming election. The Bernie supporters have no deep loyalties to the Democratic Party as it is at present. The Party will need to change or face the possibility of a possible split in the Party. Hillary will need to work for their support. There is no automatic support.

Bernie has laid the foundation for a Third Party run for the Democratic Socialists in the future. They will say that they are the "real" Democrats.

[PeaceNikki]

1. Cool. Maybe they can start www.DemocraticSocialistUnderground.com

[Hiraeth]

11. will that make you happy?

god knows we want to make #uppermiddleclassolderwhitewomen happy

[PeaceNikki]

12. Getting Democrats elected makes me happy.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

23. You can rest assured that the Progressive Wing of the Democratic Party will present...

...a candidate to challenge Hillary in 2020.

ETA: That is if the Progressive Wing doesn't form it's own party. And if that happens, that new party will challenge Hillary.

[PeaceNikki]

25. I shall wait with bated breath.

[rock]

55. I love it when one gets their idioms correct!

And I like your posts.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

22. In what way can support for Clinton be considered 'underground"? Maybe DU needs a name change...

[PeaceNikki]

27. You should run that by the admins. I obviously am not the decider on such matters.

[PeaceNikki]

30. ??

[ChisolmTrailDem]

32. In what way can support for Clinton be considered 'underground"?

[PeaceNikki]

34. You're trying to pick a fight and I am not interested today. #FeelTheJoy

Lookit this damn kitten:

[ChisolmTrailDem]

37. Because you can't answer the question honestly. Well, at least you're being you. nt

[PeaceNikki]

38. .

[ChisolmTrailDem]

39. You continue to be you. It is who you are, after all. nt

[PeaceNikki]

41. Yes, and you - you.

[yallerdawg]

44. You do understand...

a lot of us live where "Democrat" is fighting words.

The US is not some giant liberal socialist-mecca dream!

"Democratic Underground" remains exactly that for many of us!

Let's see how the Republican rightwing mud machine labels Hillary!

[redstateblues]

54. That is the case where I live

People that live in these big blue or purple states don't realize what it's like to live in a red state.

[monmouth4]

2. Excellent OP...n/t

[Hortensis]

42. Yes, go for it. Be aware that the name

Democratic Socialist already belongs to an organization that has not formed itself into a party. But maybe a bunch of you could take them over. Warning: All who want to participate on their site have to be approved. Apparently they got burned at some point. Who knows, maybe even berned.

Not all the left approves of Bernie. Like the Greens. I read they lost 30% of their membership to a man many of them consider hardly different from other Democrats. Hey, maybe they'd be ripe for takeover.

I'm being snarky because of all the takeover hot air regarding the giant Democratic Party, but actually I really do think those who disrespect the Democrats so much should try to form their own party and do some good that way. If I were far left and weren't proud of being part of something great as a Democrat, I would absolutely want to.

[Vattel]

3. I think you might be right. The two party thing is being stretched to the breaking point.

Both parties are coming apart. I wouldn't be surprised to see some realignment before too long. Personally, I think that would be great for democracy here in the good old US of A.

[Fast Walker 52]

4. I would prefer that he has engineered an important change in the Democratic party

and I think he has

[kentuck]

5. That would be preferable.

I would agree.

But it is going to take more than lip service to keep these "Democrats" within the Party, imo.

[Fast Walker 52]

48. yeah, for sure-- we need to keep the young liberals within the system!

:0

[Exilednight]

7. Hold that thought

That remains to be seen. Only time will tell, but we will get our first bit of evidence at the convention.

If the platform takes a more liberal tone, and if Hillary doesn't attempt to pivot further right during the campaign, then we MAY have made a dent in the system.

[snooper2]

6. Um, YOOO HOOO< you already have a socialist party LOL

Why don't you just go ahead and work with what you have? Infighting?


Meet the Socialist Running for President in the Shadow of Bernie Sanders

?resize=* &output-quality=75

"You gotta see this real quick. You're gonna shit," Mimi Soltysik tells me. It's an afternoon in late February, and Soltysik, the presidential nominee for the Socialist Party USA, is leaning over his laptop in the living room of his cramped, cat-dominated Los Angeles apartment, showing me a YouTube video of a legendarily awkward performance by a seemingly deranged Chicago pop singer named Bobby Conn.

"It almost makes you uncomfortable, which is great," he says.

No matter who he's talking to, anytime there's air in the conversation, Emidio "Mimi" Soltysik (pronounced "saul-TISS-ick&quot tends to ask the other people what kind of music they're into, or what they listened to when they were younger.

When he first met his vice presidential candidate, Angela Walker, he picked her brain about music too, but his reasons were political. "What's one of the songs that shaped you politically? What were you listening to that pushed you to be who you are?" Walker recalls Soltysik asking. Music was important to Walker as well—her identity, she says, was shaped by "being a black metalhead." Her reply to Soltysik included Rage Against the Machine and Public Enemy.

https://www.vice.com/read/meet-the-socialist-running-for-president-in-the-shadow-of-bernie-sanders

[Exilednight]

8. there is a difference between a socialist and a democratic-socialist.

[tonyt53]

17. Not in the eyes of most of those over 55. Go ahead and discount that voting bloc too.

[ashtonelijah]

13. In other words, you're voting for Donald Trump. A vote for Jill Stein is a conduit for voting Trump.

[tonyt53]

18. Right after Bernie releases his tax returns, as every person running for prez has done, except two

Bernie and Trump. Nobody releases speech transcripts.

[tonyt53]

36. But the argument that has been made for many years and with multiple candidates.

About those transcripts. A speaker is hired by groups, companies, and organizations to speak. They are asked to speak about their life experiences and observances. The more interesting those experiences, the more they are paid, the more celebrity the speaker, the more they are paid. Those speakers rarely ever talk about the business of those groups, companies, and organizations and usually have nothing in common with them either. Bernie has just never fit the criteria as a paid speaker. Ya want an example? My wife is an IT executive. In 2001 she was in DC at a gathering and one of the speakers was Oliver North. Not sure of the connection, but the next day, 9/11/01, we all know what happened. I was on a committee that hired Sally Ride to speak before a group that had nothing in common with her. Again, Bernie has just never fit the criteria to be wanted as a paid speaker.

[yallerdawg]

45. As a member of Congress...

Bernie has been prohibited from paid speeches.

But all of that might just be changing now - "money changes everything!"

[PeaceNikki]

50. huh. welcome to du. what brought you here today, of all days?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. No it isn't.

Trump won't gain a vote and Hillary won't lose a vote if someone votes for Jill Stein.

0-0 = 0

[Smarmie Doofus]

46. +1. It's not your dad's DEM Party. It's not even your Grandad's.

It's your grandpa's REPUBLICAN Party.

I look at Clinton and I see a female Herbert Hoover.

But not as fat.

Welcome to DU, btw.

[adigal]

56. This is SO true! I mourn the things we all fought for in the 60s and 70s

They would be considered commie pinko socialism today.

[clarice]

59. We also fought against THE MAN...Big Business/Government power....now look at us.nt

[adigal]

65. Now we LOVE the man as long as our 457s keep going up nt

[clarice]

66. Ironic isn't it?nt

[whatthehey]

10. A system configured like ours will always devolve into a two party choice

There's a reason Duverger is one of less than a handful of Poli Sci theories which became accepted as a law. When you have a winner-only electoral system like the EC, any rational agent will prefer to get most of what they want with possible winner X than try for all of what they want and get zero with sure loser Y. The identity and divergence of the two parties will morph with the zeitgeist, but the electorate will always coalesce around two electorally viable options.

That's why those who believe Dems to be too right would get results best by doing exactly what the Tea Party did to great success (dominating local nominating and other committees and primary voting in the GOP until nobody in deep red districts could succeed without being an inflexible far-right candidate) but for reverse ideology, and not by doing what the Constitution Party did by splintering off into an irrelevant hyperpure fringe which never has achieved anything and never will.

[Garrett78]

60. Yep. 3rd party success likely depends upon major structural changes.

If not a parliamentary system, then at least the establishment of instant run-off voting (ranked choices). If more people felt comfortable voting Green, as a result of knowing their vote would go to the Dem if the Green didn't win, then maybe the Green Party could make some headway.

As others have pointed out in this thread, under our current system, the only way to build a viable 3rd party is from the bottom up (win some city council races and go from there).

[Baitball Blogger]

14. Yes, I agree.

There is enough interest to grow a third party, but if he doesn't win the primary the only right thing is to let the neo-liberals win this hand.

If Bernie supporters want to make an impact they can organize a legal team to provide legal remedies and aid to those who are going to get run over in the local and state arena by the shenanigans that go on when neo-liberals and small government types reach illicit compromises.

[Duckhunter935]

15. Well someone lost alert privileges for 24 hours

7-0 leave

[Blue_Tires]

19. If Hillary has to beg, cajole and plead for Berniestans to vote for her

then they were never real Dems in the first place...

And can we call a moratorium on this "new third party" bullshit? There are plenty of third parties already out there for people to join if they want... So either collect the hundreds of millions of dollars it will take to start a new party, or keep quiet about it... Either put up or shut up.

And you don't even have to wait four years to start it, either... Congressional midterms, governorships, state houses, city/county councils, etc will all be up for grabs in TWO years... HINT: Stop trying to build your party from the top-down with some hail mary presidential run... In this country, parties are built from the bottom up...

[Surya Gayatri]

40. A-friggin'-men!

"There are plenty of third parties already out there for people to join if they want... So either collect the hundreds of millions of dollars it will take to start a new party, or keep quiet about it... Either put up or shut up."

See here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512148171#post21

[anigbrowl]

61. I keep saying that. I'm big on the Working Families Party

Instead of endlessly speechifying about revolution they run local campaigns and get seats on boards. Less glamorous, much more effective.

[Surya Gayatri]

21. It's up and running and ready to go. Bern could've run on their ticket (he IS a member),

but strangely chose not to.

http://www.dsausa.org/

"DSA is the major organization on the American left with an all-embracing moral vision, systematic social analysis, and political praxis rooted in the quest for radical democracy, social freedom, and individual liberties."

—Cornel West,
DSA Honorary Chair

Who we are & what we do

Democratic Socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few. We are a political and activist organization, not a party; through campus and community-based chapters DSA members use a variety of tactics, from legislative to direct action, to fight for reforms that empower working people.

#WeNeedBernie: Support Sanders for President in 2016!

Help further a desperately needed political revolution in the United States. Join with DSA in supporting the only openly democratic socialist candidate for president.

Democratic Socialists Get Ready for the People's Summit!



This June 17 to 19th, DSA will join National Nurses United, People for Bernie, National People's Action, and many more in Chicago for the People's Summit. The convergence aims build networks to keep the growing progressive energy mobilized well past the primaries and general election. Click here for more information on the People's Summit and how you can participate. The website will have more information on registration, housing, travel scholarships, program, and other event details.
DSA Supports Striking Verizon Workers!

______________________________

The obvious new choice of a home for Bernie and his disaffected minions.

[ismnotwasm]

24. That was my thought

Last edited Tue Jun 7, 2016, 03:42 PM - Edit history (1)

It already exists, it's not new. Perhaps it will now gain members.

[TwilightZone]

26. The Democratic Socialists Party already exists. You know that, right?

Cornell West is a member. Maybe Sanders should have run on that ticket. Hmm, wonder why he didn't.

[Surya Gayatri]

31. Sanders is also a card-carryng member. He could easily have chosen to run on their ticket...

WHY DIDN'T HE?

Because ONLY the Democratic Party had the infrastructure and resources that would allow him to realize his ambitions.

[TwilightZone]

33. Yep.

[Time for change]

35. Great point

I think we may see a situation where we cannot afford to wait 4 years for this to happen if we want to avoid a Trump presidency.

[Scuba]

43. Is a new major party now inevitable?

http://www.bluejeannation.com/is-a-new-major-party-now-inevitable/

Blue Jean Nation: Is a new major party now inevitable?


American politics is in system failure. In a democratic republic, the definition of system failure is when a clear public consensus emerges that we the people are being ruled, not represented. Current conditions fit that definition. The latest polling by The Associated Press shows nearly all Americans now believe that neither major political party represents the views of your average voter. A mere 14% say the Democratic Party is responsive to the voters while just 8% say the same about the Republicans.

An overwhelming majority of voters told AP in no uncertain terms that neither party is receptive to fresh perspectives. Only 17% of the public say the Democratic Party is open to new ideas for dealing with the country’s problems, and a meager 10% say that about the Republican Party. A whopping 90% of voters lack confidence in the country’s political system while upwards of half go so far as to say that the two-party structure is “seriously broken.” Seventy percent of voters, including equal proportions of Democrats and Republicans, admit to feeling frustrated about the 2016 presidential election and 55% say they feel “helpless.”

...

All of these findings are akin to tremors that foreshadow a coming earthquake. Seismic events have been rare in American politics. Never in our lifetimes has a major party splintered and disintegrated. Never in living memory has a new major party taken shape and seriously threatened the ruling parties. But it has happened before. On multiple occasions, as a matter of fact. The birth of the Republican Party coincided with the death of the Whig Party as the country wrestled with the evil institution of slavery. The Progressive movement produced major political upheaval in the Gilded Age at the end of the 19th Century, causing massive fractures within the major parties at the time and ultimately transforming both of them.

For the first time in a very long time, the signs are again unmistakable. You can feel the tremors. America is on the brink of the political equivalent of an earthquake. The landscape is going to be dramatically altered. No one has a crystal ball capable of showing us exactly when the quake will hit or where the largest chasms will open. But what is clear is that the conditions are ripe for the emergence of a new major party. Chances are the majority of Americans will get their wish soon enough.

[thelordofhell]

47. Will it have Blackjack and Hookers??

[artyteacher]

52. a democratic socialist who doesn't respect ...

Democratic results?

[brooklynite]

53. Wake me when it happens...

Building a functioning and successful Third Party is incredibly hard work, and you don't get to immediately leap to running Presidential candidates with any hope of success. Get some folks elected to a City Council (one person in Seattle doesn't count as a movement) and I'll pay attention.

[felix_numinous]

57. With election reform

the true voice of the people will be heard. We have been informed by this election what work needs to be done. Democratic Socialist Party it is.

[kentuck]

58. The "third Party" that Bernie has created is within the Democratic Party.

Most of his supporters identify as "Democrats" - just not the kind of Democrats that Hillary represents, with Wall Street, big banks, job-stealing trade treaties, etc.

The base is already there for another run in 2020. All they will need is a good Democrat that represents their interests. It will be a choice between Democrats - just like this time - except stronger.

[Garrett78]

62. You think primarying Clinton in 2020 would be constructive?

Oh my.

[kentuck]

64. It depends on the direction of the Democratic Party...

A lot of people want some big changes in the Democratic Party and away from corporatism.

[nolabels]

63. Four years? probably more like four months

But who cares about any of that mostly we just come around to contribute our time and money to go along for the ride

[lumberjack_jeff]

67. I have been a democrat all my life. Hillary has successfully and single-handedly made me reconsider.

[baldguy]

68. Right - it's called the "Not Hillary" Party - and it's leader is Donald Trump.