On Sunday, August 30, the Movement for a Peoples Party held a founding convention on-line. One of the leaders is the former co-chair of the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign. See this article by Scott Owen in Counterpunch. The Peoples Party will begin seeking qualified status in 2021 and will contest the 2022 congressional and state office elections.
The party says 400,000 individuals listened to at least part of the proceeding.
The fact that anyone would need notes to say that about Trump or Biden tells you all you need to know about the absence of intellect with this group. Nevertheless, I say Go For It! There are plenty of Antifa and BLM miscreants who will vote for their candidates.
DONKEYS NOT COMMUNIST ENOUGH FOR MPP TOP HACKS ???
https://peoplesparty.org/
MORE WORK FOR PUTIN/XI TROLLS/ SPIES / AGENTS — MORE USEFUL IDIOTS TO MESS WITH ???
Lovely, ANOTHER goddamned minor party run by clueless idiots that will fizzle out within a year like Americans Elect and other groups that have come & gone.
Join an EXISTING minor party and build it up idiots!
Unless they become part of a broader movement for electoral reforms, such as ranked choice and/or approval voting, fusion candidacies, and multi-member districts, their movement will have about as much success as any other leftist third party has had.
Cody Qirk that’s what some parties are doing currently. For instance, the Alliance Party consists of various centrist parties that merged together. Perhaps there would be progressive parties that will merge with People’s party such as Progressive party of Oregon. Hey they have the name! By the way Progressives are not necessarily Socialists. Many of them believe in a market economy-social Democratic style in democracy and not command economy and Revolution like socialists.
The progressive movement has been growing in America, the Democratic Party has been reluctant to embrace it, the Green Party has years of baggage attached to it. It makes sense to me.
Why not work on getting the Communist Party on the ballot instead? They’re pretty much one in the same.
There seem to be are at least two recent groups already calling themselves a new national progressive party.
The Vermont Progressive Party announced its intentions to form a national party some time ago. So far the only movement on this seems to be a contact form on the Vermont party’s website.
The other one has a site at https://progressivepartyusa.com . The formation of this one was announced on Drudge Report earlier in the year.
Both parties take their inspiration from Bernie Sanders campaigns, congressional and presidential respectively, but nothing on either site indicates they’re the same effort or are even aware of eachother.
Now we have this effort, inspired by Williamson but including Sanders supporters and some other leftwing causes célèbres with their followings. Pessimism and past experience dictate these three wont merge, everyone preferring to be the big fish and amplifying minute differences in platform and strategy to justify it.
The WFP and PP of Oregon seem to be nowhere in any of this.
My criticism of this group is that they did not call on their supporters to vote for Howie Hawkins (or another third party presidential candidate) this year. That being said, it will be very interesting to see how this new party evolves. Does it become a new, really independent political party on the left, like the Greens, that actually runs a presidential candidate against the Democrats every four years? Or does it instead become a fake, satellite party of the Democrats (like the so-called “Working Families Party” entity)…
There is a hundred years of progressive electoral history in the SPUSA, a multi-tendency, democratic socialist organization. There are decades of electoral experience and organic growth in the GPUS, organized on social justice, nonviolence, grassroots democracy and ecology. These have made history this year by joining (rather than splitting) to co-nominate Hawkins/Walker.
“Progressive” or “peoples” party efforts that say “forget your values this election, we are going to finally unite the left next election,” are simply sheepdogs that will return to the DNC fold, just as Sanders, the Labor Party, the 21st Century Party, the Rainbow Coalition and many others did. They are drawn to the bright lights of power; not guided by their values and moral compass.
What Cody said. What Charles said. What Nate said. I stand by calling this butt-hurt Berners, including Our Revolution grifters, driving this. AS for “progressive”? Having half-Libertarian Trump Whisperer Jesse Ventura speak, and Knight inviting neocon loving Islamophobe Tulsi Gabbard, belies their claim to be pergressuve.
https://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2020/08/fuck-movement-for-peoples-party-and-its.html
Do only Lenin/Stalin/Mao secret police firing squads know who the purist RED commies are ???
Super-EASY to be a RED commie [or ANY other type of STATIST looter] with the STOLEN income and assets of other folks.
I have not heard much about Duverger’s Law, Top Six or PLAS in this MPP hubbub.
They are BY FAR the most important issues involving the divided left.
Anybody who knows anything about American politics knows the S word-socialism-is the kiss of death.
That is why Trump is trying to pin the S on the donkey Biden.
That is why the fix was in for Howie from the beginning of this election cycle.
Didn’t you notice?
We have little or no evidence of anything like RCV or anything else working against Duverger’s Law.
Except what happened in 1912 and 1992/96.
A centrist party can be formed if a charismatic billionaire asks supporters to put him on all ballots.
If you get me on all ballots, I will come.
Sorry, I am not interested.
I speculate that if Wilson had bolted the democratic party like Roosevelt bolted the republican party, the Progressive party could have had a fusion ticket and won in a close three way race.
Or four way if you include Debs’ paltry 6%.
A fusion ticket is the key to Progressive party victory.
Like I said, if MPP supports actions against Duverger’s Law like Top Six and PLAS and fusion tickets, then they have my support.
If not, I am not going to bang my head against a brick wall.
BTW, in addition to the rash, I have developed various respiratory symptoms. Very clogged nose, dripping, sneezing jags, very sore throat. Strong urge to cough which I have suppressed. Fever? Idk.
My best option if it gets worse is to go to Cooper Hospital Urgent Care or Emergency Room.
I live alone, Somebody poisoned my two cats.
I pretty much do not see anybody or go anywhere,
except to Walmart. Where I unfortunately present as a vulnerable target.
If I was my political enemies, I would attack me there, with some sort of infected mist or thin gel.
Will they start a Fifth International, too?
It seems like the principle “baggage” of the Green Party is “spoiling” Hillary in 2016. So, presumably, the point of this new “Peoples Party” is to pressure the Democrats into nominating more so-called “progressive” candidates (whatever the over-worked “progressive” label means today), or lose the election to some lefty renegade. The Democrats need to smarten up and promote ranked choice or approval voting.
WZ —
ALL incumbents LOVE the rotted systems that got them into POWER —
minority rule gerrymanders — 1/2 or less x 1/2 = 1/4 or less.
plurality nominations / elections.
—-
NO primaries
PR and AppV – pending Condorcet.
TOTSOP
WC and RM; Re; “one-party systems”
Ranked choice voting (RCV) must be in multi-winner election districts using Droop or Hare Quota or it brings a one-party system.
The correct math for pure proportional representation (PPR), the Hagenbach-Bishoff Method, gets combined with RCV to attaint perfection.
The perfection of PPR using the strict math under one-man-one-vote and one whole vote per paper ballot, hasn’t been improved since around 1900, no variation is acceptable.
Approval voting (AppV) is a one-party system because the biggest faction doesn’t worry about split-vote harming their status, they hold multiple votes and can strategically use that on multi-winner districts through slate voting, winning 100% of the seats or at least a regular super-majority of the open seats.
Fusion isn’t a good choice because that means having names on the blank printed ballot in two or more places. That creates big problems for vote counters and also destroys the chance for the only perfect system, PPR.
Condorcet — in the 1780s — repeat 1780s
— akin to calculus vs simple addition.