CommunityMy FDLSeminal

“Dump Corporate Dems” – Going Green at the State Level, to “make Dems do it” at the Federal level

Please read Dixon’s diary for details of how they intend to make GA go Green.

I assume that his plan is workable. But the question immediatey arises: "Where else is it workable?"

Well, Dixon’s plan takes black incarceration as it’s signature issue. While that may be fine for GA, I can’t see that as being an optimal signature issue for the rest of the country. I’ll leave it to others to figure out what an optimal signature issue should be, for each state. Suffice it to say that progressives in each state should be able to figure this out, for themselves, without too much trouble!

What I suggest is that a similar plan (with localized signature issue) be used in, say, 50% of the most progressive states and 50% of the most progressive districts. (For a Day 1 rollout, you can take this to mean 50% of the most progressive districts within the 50% most progressive states.) Furthermore, I suggest that, at least for the next election cycle, candidates for Federal offices not be put forth. Instead, only candidates for state and local offices.

The main reason for eschewing Federal offices is that many progressive Democrat-leaning voters won’t consider voting for a non-Democrat, due to fears of splitting votes. Those fears are, of course, based in reality. It’s not the purpose of this diary to argue the merits and demerits of either deliberately or accidentally throwing Democrats under the bus, at the Federal level.

Rather, I’m simply pointing out that, by restricting pro-Green political activity to the state level, fears of accidentally throwing a race to Republicans at the Federal level vanish. In the meantime, a loud, explicit message needs to be sent to Dems at the Federal level, viz., "We may not be targetting you during the current election cycle, but we eventually will if you fail to perform." If and when the progressive Dem/Green voting bloc grows large enough, it can then make credible demands of, and threats to, a Congressmen, with a deadline. If the demands aren’t met by the deadline, then the threat can be carried out, at the next election cycle. That threat is to replace the Democrat with a Green.

Obviously, the threat is more credible if the respective state has been taken over by Greens, where previously Democrats held sway.

An additional benefit of going this route is that progressive Dems and Greens will learn to cooperate. There is doubtless a learning curve that needs to be hurdled. But if ever there was a natural voting bloc of allies, progressive Dems and Greens would be it.

Oh, yeah, the "Dump Corporate Dems" name I’ve tentatively assigned to such a political effort or movement is inspired by "Dump Obama". (See also Dump Obama: More Urgent than Ever).Not everybody can handle "Dump Obama", so "Dump Corporate Dems" can be viewed as a gentler path to force the Democratic Party into a more progressive direction.

Also, by making "(Dump) Corporate" part of a signature meme, such a voting bloc can more easily attract independents and even conservatives who don’t appreciate corporate influence in America’s elections. The end of this video, of Lawrence Lessig lecturing at a recent Coffee Party gathering, has video of real, live conservatives who support real election reform (against corporations).:

N.B.: The diary by Rayne, that Dixon refers to, and is a must-read, is The Angry Left: A Starter Map for the Road Ahead

Previous post

Progressives unwittingly perpetuate group think/racism

Next post

C Street: The Fundamentalist Threat to American Democracy - Book Salon Preview