Would you support a Full Court Press Democrat in 2012?

[Karmadillo]

Or maybe you could run as one.

http://www.correntewire.com/full_court_press_435_congressional_primaries_2012

Full Court Press -- 435 congressional primaries in 2012

The plan

The basic concept is simple and flexible. The plan is to file a candidate in all 435 Democratic congressional primaries in 2012. A Full Court Press (FCP) candidate would agree to the following 5 principles:

o WPA-style jobs program
o Medicare available for all
o Repeal Hyde Amendment and its ilk
o Repeal DOMA, DADT, support gay marriage
o U.S. out of Iraq and Afghanistan

These points in their entirety are designed to highlight the distance between the Democratic Party leadership and officials, on the one hand, and the progressive Democratic Party base on the other. If different issues face us two years down the line, they can be modified accordingly.

The bottom line is to have at least one FCP candidate on the primary ballot in every district.

The FCP activist would pay the required filing fee or gather required signatures or combination thereof to get on the primary ballot. While any FCP candidate could run a full-fledged campaign with the intent of winning the seat, a minimal candidate could:

o Ask the other candidates if they will actively support the FCP points and put that in writing.

o If they sign, the FCP candidate could simply endorse that candidate, or the best of those candidates (if such is the case) and campaign actively for their endorsee or not as the FCP candidate sees fit.

o If that candidate betrays the points, the FCP candidate would have the option of campaigning more aggressively.

The FCP candidate could minimally:

o Talk to the local press.

o Appear at candidate nights.

Tactically, that's it. That's the plan. This requires some money and some effort, and ballot requirements vary from state to state, but it is within the capability of the ordinary citizen. The main requirement after getting on the primary ballot is a willingness to make some phone calls and show up. If the FCP candidate wanted to do more and could do more, that would be excellent. But not required. The FCP candidate could raise other progressive issues based on local circumstances. Or not.

more...

[Goldstein1984]

1. I don't know if this is the answer

Maybe we need an exorcist to remove the NeoCon demons inhabiting the Democratic Party.

[taterguy]

2. Only if it's led by Walt Hazzard

[rhett o rick]

12. Man you're old. Don't ask how I know. I was going with Bob Cousy. nt

[cali]

3. I imagine I'll be supporting Peter Welch in 2012

He's doing a good job.

[LongTomH]

4. I like this comment..................

Aren't you imposing a litmus test?

Of course. About goddamn time, too. The Democratic Party as it now operates is an orgy of pragmatism. Judged in terms of pragmatism, it has failed utterly unless your pragmatic goal is to attract corporate contributions. Like it or not, litmus has been working for the Republicans in terms of moving public policy to the right, e.g., Stupak.

Is it too much too ask for a Democratic candidate to actually endorse some traditional (i.e. in the tradition of FDR, Truman, JFK) Democratic principle?:eyes:

[noamnety]

5. I would.

Or to phrase that another way - I wouldn't support a candidate who doesn't support those points.

[Sixties guy]

6. Full Court Press

Sure I would

[OldDem_63]

7. Why wait till 2012?

Aren't they up for re-election this year?

[robcon]

8. That's a plan targeted for disaster.

Might lose dozens, if not 50 currently held Democratic seats.

Naive, IMO. Politics is local. Setting up national priorities as make-or-break issues is an awful idea.

[gleaner]

11. I think that depends on how desperate you are. n/t

[bvar22]

9. Here.

There are a few other things I consider essential, but this will do for a core.
I believe that someone who endorses the above would be open to the other values I subscribe to.

K&R

[gleaner]

10. Yes I would .....

Look what we have now? Unless they come and burn our houses down could it get much worse?

[robcon]

16. We have control of both houses of Congress and the Executive branch.

And we're within one retirement of controlling the Supreme court.

We haven't had it this good in decades, IMO.

[Karmadillo]

13. Kick

nt

[Toots]

14. You seem quite naive. You actually believe politicians will do what they campaign on?

How does "One Brigade a Month" sound to you?

[Karmadillo]

15. Some will, some won't. First off, this is a means of holding politicians accountable.

Those who agree to be Full Court Press Democrats and don't follow through will have to deal with their actions at the next election (as opposed to now where we debate whether or not there really was follow through on "hope and change"). Second, the nature of this movement might result in some non-politician types gaining office. Again, some of them would fall prey to corporate money and move away from their pledge, but, again, we could clearly measure their movement and hold them accountable. Not a perfect fix, but it begins to apply an accoutability mechanism to Democratic politics. Hard to see where it would hurt and it might actually help.

[scentopine]

17. No - change must come from outside the party, now more than ever -nt