Where Else Are Those On The Left Gonna Go?

[Me.]

That was the statement on KO last night, when he said that was what the dem leadership was counting on. So basically they can do anything they want and we will still back them because where else are we gonna go? They're right, they've got us right where they want us. We're certainly not going to vote republicon and most of us cannot even bear the thought of not doing our due diligence as citizens and not voting. What's a progressive to do?

Holding back money from dem organizations and directing it to specific candidates is one way. Money in the coffers can be very encouraging, just ask Dodd. Another way is to start targeting and supporting progressive candidates.

Any other suggestions?

[bdamomma]

1. sometimes you wish we had more parties and more competition

that no one party can/could be so dominant.

[inthebrain]

2. There are a few candidates up there I will absolutely not vote for.

I'll just stay home.

Face it, the corporations OWN this election. All the people leading the races are all bought and paid for and have masters other than the people to serve when it's all over.

I, OTOH, am not owned and serve NO MASTERS.

[NoodleBoy]

3. instead of complaining, why don't you volunteer somewhere?

Have you ever done a neighborhood canvass for your local democratic party? Do you know who represents you in your State House of Representatives and State Senate? Do you know if your city council member is a Democrat or a Republican?

All this talk about netroots means nothing if it's not solidly connected to grassroots. You want to move the party further left? Fine-- get out and get known as an activist. They don't pay attention to complaints on the internet; they do pay attention when progressives on the local level organize to support progressives for local elected office, and it lays the groundwork for a future career in higher state or Federal office for solid progressive Democrats.

It's very empowering. Whenever you knock on a door for a candidate, or phone bank, YOU are effectively the Democratic Party to the person you're contacting. That's powerful.

[inthebrain]

6. A LOT of people here have done that

It doesn't help when the process in the party is completely broken.

I think the greatest example is that after the Bankruptcy Bill, Biden somehow got the idea he is a viable candidate!!!!

In the end it just feels like rooting for laundry.

[NoodleBoy]

8. have you?

I've been doing it for years. Alot of DUer's seem to forget, Federal is not the only level of government, and it's alot easier to influence local politics.

[Me.]

7. First Of All

I was asking a question and encouraging discussion rather than complaining. Secondly, it is a fact demonstrated by Congress' is disregard of the wishes of the people of this country. The last election, which by the way I worked for, was quite clear in the message it delivered, that the people want change. The question I am posing what are our alternatives if our party continues to ignore the people who got them where they are.

[NoodleBoy]

10. the last election was for congress, not for president

And I think this Congress has done as much as it can in the way of changing course for America, but it's hampered because there's still this other huge branch of government it doesn't control.

Impeachment is off the table because it probably wouldn't get the votes needed in the House and it definitely wouldn't reach 67 in the Senate. Same as cutting off funding for the war-- not nearly enough congressmen would support such a measure, and it would look like Congress was playing partisan games.

Also, I don't know if you noticed, but in the last election cycle, many good Democrats were elected to many different offices, a good portion of which may run for President one day, or at least be better Congressman than what we've got now. Drastic changes rarely happen overnight. Even FDR's Presidency was a long time coming, after he started out in the NY Senate, then undersecretary of the Navy, than Governor of NY, and then President, there's a good quarter century between his entry into politics and his earth-changing administration we all long for.

[Me.]

17. You Make A Good Point Regarding Change Taking Time

However there are a few areas where I have different thoughts. The point of the last election was to give dems more control of the direction this country needs to go in. In my opinion they haven't done nearly enough. The leaders in both houses determine which bills make it to the floor. A republicon resolution or bill like Kyl/Lieberman should have never done so. Period. It is also the job of the leadership to marshal the troops. Voting in favor of what * wants should be an absolute no-no.

As for impeachment. Only 51 votes are needed, the 67 is to convict. It should have never been taken off the table, it was not her place to do so. Taking it off the table means no investigations, no placing the truth before the American people. Further it it sends a message that accountability is not necessary.

Just today we see where McClellan points a finger at the most powerful men in government (or those who were) in the matter of Valerie Plame. Yet that issue, betraying the security of our country for political gain, will never be addressed because impeachment is off the table.

[NoodleBoy]

20. you don't need to impeach to investigate

and the actions of the Democratic congress investigating the Bush administration has led to many high-ranking officials, such as Alberto Gonzales, to resign. If and when Bush is directly and irrefutably indicated as the one to personally authorize violating the Constitution, he should be impeached, but these bastards learned from Nixon and Reagan, and when they go about violating the law of the land they don't tell their boss what they're doing.

And, you need a majority in the House to impeach, and 67 in the Senate to remove from office. If that 67 number is not reached, the actions of the House mean nothing-- just look at Clinton. During his impeachment, conviction got more than 50 votes in the Senate, but that didn't amount to anything because it takes two-thirds and not a simple majority.

And although I hate Kyl/Lieberman passionately, the bare truth of it is if Pelosi and Reid had killed it by not assigning it to a committee, or packing the committee only with people who would vote no, it would be as un-democratic (small d) as when the Republicans constantly rotated committee assignments to favor the most reactionary agenda possible. With a Democratic president and a larger congressional majority, miscarriages of justice like Kyl/Lieberman would be much less likely to happen. As it stands, it will probably be heavily amended when the new Congress convenes after the election.

In other words, don't give up. Evil will hiccup once in a while, but I believe the election we're approaching will definitely be a re-aligning one. There won't be a permanent Democratic majority, but 08, 10, and probably 12 will definitely be a signal to anyone considering running for office not to trample on our civil rights. If we keep together, and push back against fascism in unity, by 2016 it may be impossible for someone like Bush to get even the Republican nomination, and then we'll know what we've been killing ourselves for is worth it.

[Me.]

25. I Certainly Hope You're Right About This

'In other words, don't give up. Evil will hiccup once in a while, but I believe the election we're approaching will definitely be a re-aligning one. There won't be a permanent Democratic majority, but 08, 10, and probably 12 will definitely be a signal to anyone considering running for office not to trample on our civil rights. If we keep together, and push back against fascism in unity, by 2016 it may be impossible for someone like Bush to get even the Republican nomination, and then we'll know what we've been killing ourselves for is worth it.'

As to impeachment, we will probably not agree. * himself has not been investigated, per se, and that needs to be front and center. Also, impeachment is so monumental it is attention grabbing, no escaping the ramifications of seeing the evidence front and center. A warning to all those who would dare to tread in that direction.

[NoodleBoy]

26. I'm glad we could find common ground.

:thumbsup:

[mmonk]

4. Those are the things I'm doing.

The other is joining NGO's such as Amnesty International. I've signed on to the American Freedom Campaign. I belong to UNA/USA. We might be reaching a point whereby the democracy we want is not attainable in the near furture, so joining NGO's to try and keep democracy alive is one way.

[IndianaJones]

5. zzzz. nt.

[mmonk]

27. You can't win without us.

And one day, we will be gone.

[IndianaJones]

29. who's us? nt.

[converted_democrat]

32. I can only speak for myself, but I'm tired of being taken for

granted.. I have many friends from the left and the right that are tired of the machine.. I was a repub for many years, and converted awhile back.. I've seen both parties in action, and as much as I would love to believe that there is a difference, there really isn't. Both will take your money and promise to do the right thing by the people of this country. So far I ain't seen nothing that makes me a believer.. I like options, and green is looking good to me these days..

[nashville_brook]

9. i heard that! made me wonder about the nader run in 2000 -- seems there's a disconnect

he supposedly "threw" the election -- which seems to be a counter-example to the "nowhere to go" meme. seems like there's an argument that his defeat of Gore, after 8 years of Clintonian corporatism, is an example of a place where progs went.

i wasn't a Nader supporter. i think i lost friends arguing about it during the election. but, this "nowhere to go" meme really bugs the shit out of me because 2000 seems a very likely counter-example.

as for suggestions, doesn't it seem like the progressive left is a lot like the religious right in terms of appealing to the base? doesn't it seem like there's plenty of unused energy on the left, that, if the Dems plugged-in to it, there'd be nothing to lose and everything to gain?

also on the suggestion side, seems like the DNC has gone AWOL in supporting state and local dems -- seems to me a localized progressive movement is a wise move for Dems who seek local election. the religious right has CHURCH as a massive captive audience. progressive Dems have our netroots and progressive orgs.

[spotbird]

11. The Supreme Court

is the reason Bush "won" the election, not Nader.

I hated Nader in 2000 and 2004, but now I understand what he tried to say. It's just ridiculous to blame him when Gore won the fucking election. Yes, the margins may have been different, but we don't know that. We do know Gore won.

Keep in mind that in 2004 Clinton supporter James Carville sabotaged the Kerry campaign in Ohio. Nader is nothing compared to the betrayal we suffer from our own.

[democrank]

12. Thanks for posting this.

I`ve been thinking about "nowhere else to go" since I heard it last night. I found it upsetting, probably because it`s true. Today, it seems a majority of Democrats are willing to put up with just about anything from their "leaders." Democrats who demand real action are "far-leftists" or worse. It`s go-along-to-get-along, even if that means our party morphs into a Joe Lieberman-type coalition of the willing, bought off by corporate donors and devoid of any old-fashioned populist platform.

As far as I`m concerned, three-quarters of America should be out on the streets protesting Bush`s horrific mess in Iraq and the loss of our basic rights. Here we are umpteen years later and we can`t even outlaw waterboarding or reign in those out-of-control mercenaries. All we need to hear is...."The surge is working" from some newsreader nitwit and we`re off to the mall.

[spotbird]

14. Jesse Jackson

once supposedly suggested voters should "go fishing" when asked where African American would go other than the Party.

They won't keep me home, but they will have to earn my vote.

[Me.]

19. I Didn't Like Hearing It Either

And have been thinking about it until I posted.

[nashville_brook]

24. do you remember what segment it was on?

[Me.]

33. Think It Was # 4 Or 5

with the emphasis on 5 because I believe it came up up during the conversation with Milbank

[Me.]

34. Another Thread On The Same Subject Says It Was The Segment With O'Donnel

and I believe they are right

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2319448

[nashville_brook]

45. yes thanks! i found it! -- link to transcript -->> and the direct quote

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21900169/


O‘DONNELL: Well, the only thing, Keith, is the possibility of doing an all-out real filibuster fight which is to say, all they‘re doing now is taking a vote in which the Republicans in effect threaten a filibuster if you try to go around this vote. A filibuster is a pretty ugly thing. And I think the Democrats are afraid of running a real filibuster fight in the Senate because it will look like the whole government has ground to a halt, and it‘s just showmanship. So, they fear-looking ineffectual in one way and they fear-looking like showboats in another way. And they‘re not getting where the left side of that party wants to go and they‘re just hoping that they will have forgiveness on the left side of their party on Election Day in 2008.

OLBERMANN: Any chance that they won‘t? And what happens to the left side of the party if it doesn‘t support the Democratic candidate in 2008?

O‘DONNELL: The Democratic calculation in the Senate is always the left has nowhere to go but the Democratic party. I‘ve never been in a meeting in the Senate where there was any other presumption.

OLBERMANN: Lawrence O‘Donnell of the MSNBC and the Huffington Post, many thanks as always, sir.

O‘DONNELL: Thanks, Keith.

[Me.]

46. The Arrogance Of It Is Astounding

'I‘ve never been in a meeting in the Senate where there was any other presumption.'

[AndyTiedye]

13. So the 2/3 of Americans Who Want to End the War Are Effectively Disenfranchised

[Me.]

18. They Still Can Vote

And they did and sent a message which so far has been ignored. I will say that if recent developments in Congress, where they insist on bills that include withdrawal, we will be going in the right direction. And I wonder if low poll numbers for Congress has been an important factor in this push.

[Birthmark]

15. They don't have you.

I have no intention of voting if there are no liberal candidates --and it looks pretty unlikely that there will be any liberal candidates. If you know the roulette is rigged, why play at all?

[closeupready]

16. Change is scary and can be disruptive to lives.

In a scenario where the interests of a dem constituency is not being served by the party which has traditionally done a better job of that, voting third party in close elections and thereby helping give the government to the opposition is a scary notion. But I suppose theoretically, no major systemic change ever is easy; there is always disruption, meaning that yes, sometimes, when you vote third party, the opposition wins. The hope is that such a loss reinforces in your traditional party the notion that you can not rest on your laurels, and if you take your constituencies for granted, you will LOSE. Everybody loses under such a scenario, of course, but everybody is to blame for that loss, as well.

(The disclaimer here is that obviously, we all here on DU want to see the dems win. I'm just addressing the statements in the opening post.)

[AndyTiedye]

36. And Writing off the Supreme Court, Roe v. Wade, Habeas Corpus, etc.

If the opposition wins, they get to totally dominate the Supreme Court for at least the next 20 years.

Roe v. Wade would be overturned.
Griswold v. Connecticut would be overturned.
Lawrence v. Texas would be overturned.
Habeas Corpus would be a distant memory.

And, of course, every election dispute would be resolved in favor of the Republicans.

[closeupready]

37. Essentially correct.

Which only underscores why, just as it is an essential civic duty as citizens to get out and vote for whoever it is for whom we feel we must vote, it is even MORE important for parties not to take their base constituencies for granted, if they wish to continue to thrive.

[LWolf]

21. We will go several places.

We will put our time and efforts into local politics, working to elect left-leaning people to local and state offices.

We will look outside the two major parties for an appropriate candidate when one is not present on the ballot. Or,

We will write left-leaning, non dlc/corporate candidates in national and state elections.

Some will stay home; not I.

[MuseRider]

22. I gave you a K&R

for this because I have done what you mentioned and other than that and working for liberal candidates I am at a loss what to do. I wish I knew because I find this present situation almost intolerable and probably it will be intolerable very soon.

To the poster who said we should quit complaining and work for it I say that many, I would think the vast majority, are already doing that. I know I can't possibly find one more minute of time to give but I still see little movement away from corporate captivity.

[Me.]

28. Thanks

It is something we all need to think about. Our very existence has been recognized. That's step one. Now we need to move on and how to do this is what we should all be considering. I don't doubt others are thinking about this and a solution/s will appear. We haven't come this far only to lose. And the difference between us and the right is that our intent is for the good of all and not hate driven.

For the time being I'm letting my money doing the talking, along with letting my reps know I ain't happy and they will have to work for my support in the future. Many races are starting to be contested in dem primaries. We need more of that. Their positions can no longer be taken for granted. That is a lesson we should strive to teach them.

[closeupready]

31. I'm really lucky that my rep has a stellar, liberal voting record.

You name it, she voted as I would have. Yes, she's a dem.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. Well, there's that handy little "write-in" line on most ballots.

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." --Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

"Were parties here divided merely by a greediness for office,...to take a part with either would be unworthy of a reasonable or moral man." --Thomas Jefferson to William Branch Giles, 1795.

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." --John Quincy Adams

[Me.]

30. Terrific Quotes

Much needed thoughts, thanks.

[dysfunctional press]

35. DO NOT vote for a candidate you don't believe in- even if it's the Democratic nominee.

especially if it's the Democratic nominee.

[RainDog]

42. Seems like bad advice to me

especially at this time in history. this is no ordinary election because of the way Bush and Cheney have shat upon the Constitution. Because, as a female, I do not want an ultra right wing Supreme Court. Because America needs to show the world that we have the common decency to get rid of the current party in power.

if this is really politics, if the dems know the left don't have anywhere else to go, the issue then is to negotiate for something in return for votes - using the stay-at-home as leverage.

My pet cause is that the next administration should legalize hemp and decriminalize marijuana so that we can avoid cutting down so many trees, use hemp as alternatives to so many things without poisoning the soil, and making it possible for sick people to ease their suffering without fear of jail. Without, like the woman with unbearable pain who was recently denied medical marijuana, resorting to suicide because of an uncaring govt. Because of all the non-criminals in jail. Because people who have never voted before might actually get out and vote.

seems like a trivial issue compared to the fall of the dollar or corporate fraud, but those things, or parts of them, will be addressed. Citizens can file charges against the current administration for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The corporate dems can throw a bone to the junkyard dogs...cause surely they know what happens when you starve a dog like that.

[eridani]

38. Into local office to get some street cred as working politicians, hopefully

Or doing organizing and support for same.

[MadHound]

39. Where we've been going for years and decades now, staying at home

Only about half of the eligible population votes these days, for they really see no reason to vote. It is their opinion that no matter who gets in, they're going to get screwed, and frankly they have a point. Most of these non-voters are leftists. Sure, a few might be on the right, but frankly the Republican parts has, over the past forty years, made a concerted effort to appeal to these conservative non-voters, to bring them out on election day and vote. This is why the right has had such solid convincing victories ever since Reagan, they pulled out and developed an entirely new segment of the voting population and put it to their own use. The Democrats have failed miserabley in doing this.

Instead, the Dems have ignored this segment of the left, and instead they have gone on a thirty year quest for increasingly conservative voters. Not only have they gotten their ass handed to them more times than not, but they have continuously alienated more and more left voters, turning them into more non-voters. And thus the vicious circle continues.

It is my contention that if the Democratic party through out a major bone or two to the left, unconditional withdrawl from Iraq, repeal of the Patriot Act, single payer health care, etc., that they will win in a landslide, for all of those non-voters of the left will be given sufficient motivation to come out and vote for the Democratic party. Rather than continuing their swing to the right, the Dems need to swing to the left and pick up all those non-voters whose numbers nearly equal all of the voters, right and left, that are participating today.

But sadly, it doesn't look like the party is going to do this. Instead they are going to continue to pursue the corporatist agenda, swing further to the right, further alienate voters who will stay home, and sooner or later write the party's death warrant. Because at some point, the non-voting left is going to say enough, rise up and back a true leftist party, and sweep the Dems onto the dust bin of history. It may not be this election, it may not be the next one. But it is coming, the left is getting pissed at being ignored and spit upon, and we will rise up and throw the bastards out. Sure, the left may not have the money, but they have the votes and frankly that still counts for more than money in our elections.

[Me.]

40. Dancing With The One Who Brought You

Is something they need to learn

[leftchick]

41. that is my prediction as well

it will take time, but it is bound to happen. IF we have not been rounded up by then. :(

[closeupready]

43. Yes, I agree, Dems are going to continue to sputter out if

they continue trying to cater to right-wing voters. But as long as those who hold seats now continue to hold their seats, they don't care what happens to the party. Because they'll still get their guaranteed pensions and fully paid health insurance, 3-day work weeks, etc.

[EstimatedProphet]

44. Things like that are exactly what we should do

Instead of whining about not being able to impeach Pelosi, why not try to support candidates that are more progressive? and if there isn't one, why not run yourself?