Justice Democrats work to rid party of corporate influence

[Sky High]

Alright, I jumped the gun. But explain to me how a new left with the platform of Cenk Uygur could possibly compete in American politics. Paraphrasing your response, what commonalities could a rational person find with that hedgehog of a man. If your answer to the current political landscape is an alliance with Cenk Uygur, you are full potato.

looking at the platform I'm hard pressed to find things that DON'T resonate with liberals and most people. his ideas on policy, I mean really it's not that hard to see common ground there, at least from where I'm at. hey I'm a big enough man to put aside differences of opinion if it's to reach a goal I agree with, I know that's a reaaal rare thing nowadays but that's how I roll.

[Dextroden]

Whoo! Let's go left equivalent of the tea party! Cause some party infighting!

[Cosmic Janitor]

They'd need to do more than that. There is some other fringes that they'd need to get rid of as well. Replacing corrupt politicans with nutters won't prevent a trump extension..

[Vargur]

How are they different than the Humanity Party, in regards to electorate traction?

[May90]

Populism is cancer and needs to be stomped out wherever it rears its ugly head. Sanders really wasn't a populist, at least not in the same way Trump is, though he attracted populist elements and bore some resemblance to it. The last thing we need is genuine populism coalescing and gaining traction in the Democratic Party.

It seems to me that both parties have recently been running mostly on populist rhetoric. Democrats promise a socialist heaven to everyone (without calling it socialist, obviously), and Republicans cater for the traditionalist Christian folks that slept through the social changes of the last 60 years. It is pretty scary, and both Sanders and Trump can be very damaging to the country, in different ways.

I think the US needs to somehow get away from the traditional 2-party system in the nearest future.

[Dextroden]

It seems to me that both parties have recently been running mostly on populist rhetoric. Democrats promise a socialist heaven to everyone (without calling it socialist, obviously), and Republicans cater for the traditionalist Christian folks that slept through the social changes of the last 60 years. It is pretty scary, and both Sanders and Trump can be very damaging to the country, in different ways.

I think the US needs to somehow get away from the traditional 2-party system in the nearest future.

Judging by the fact virtually no one voted third party despite bitching about how awful Trump and Clinton are, it's safe to say no third party will ever pick up steam.

Plus, I'm the enemy for voting Johnson instead of her royal highness Hillary. Main party people turn on EVERYONE who dares not vote for their greatness. Why do you think Nader got such a bad kick?

[May90]

Judging by the fact virtually no one voted third party despite bitching about how awful Trump and Clinton are, it's safe to say no third party will ever pick up steam.

Plus, I'm the enemy for voting Johnson instead of her royal highness Hillary. Main party people turn on EVERYONE who dares not vote for their greatness. Why do you think Nader got such a bad kick?

Doesn't matter what people say. The system "All or nothing", however, assures that third parties never gain any real political power, no matter how hard they try. In many European countries, for example, small third parties can start with getting a few members through in the government, and then slowly gain influence and followers. In the US, your chances at getting a seat in the congress, if you are neither Democrat nor Republican, are virtually null, and even if you get there, the system prevents you from ever being able to do anything meaningful.

If the laws similar to antitrust ones existed in politics, this problem would be kicked in the head hard. As it is though, the politics in the US (and many other similar countries) is an oligopoly with periods of monopoly.

[Daymanmb]

If the laws similar to antitrust ones existed in politics, this problem would be kicked in the head hard. As it is though, the politics in the US (and many other similar countries) is an oligopoly with periods of monopoly.

How can you have fair competition with so much corporate money dictating campaigns? Its all starts with Citizens United.

[Fugus]

Whoo! Let's go left equivalent of the tea party! Cause some party infighting!

The fact that you consider center to center left to being the Tea Party left shows just how far to the right we have slid.

Judging by the fact virtually no one voted third party despite bitching about how awful Trump and Clinton are, it's safe to say no third party will ever pick up steam.

Plus, I'm the enemy for voting Johnson instead of her royal highness Hillary. Main party people turn on EVERYONE who dares not vote for their greatness. Why do you think Nader got such a bad kick?

Considering in 2012 we had about 1.9 million vote 3rd party while in the 2016 election we had 7.8 million vote 3rd party, we had a pretty big uptick in those who voted 3rd party with a great deal of others who probably would have if it weren't for our elections being setup to basically prevent 3rd parties from existing.

But yes, no 3rd party will ever pick up steam in this country barring a miracle or an apocalypse until the current system is forcibly changed to allow it.

I wish these people luck, the party needs to swing in that direction instead of running away from voters and if these people are ones of rationality to do it so be it, especially since the only way to get traction in our elections it through the 2 big parties so you have to take them over from within to stand a chance.

Also, I was would also be considered "The Enemy" to the democratic party as I wrote in Sanders name on my ballot as I refused to throw my vote away on either Clinton or Trump and I didn't see Johnson as any better policy wise but did at least respect his honesty about it and his belief in his policies and I had issues with Stein as well but I would have voted for her if I was forced between voting between the 4 given my options.

[Macaquerie]

If you didn't have this shitty two party thing going on you could have an entire rainbow of political choices during the elections instead of having to depend on demagogues who keep undoing all the work of the previous legislation.

There are more modern political ideologies in the world than just Democrat or Republican, you know... (those aren't even ideologies, just synonyms ).

What difference does it really make though? No matter the electoral system you'd still need a majority coalition to govern, so you would inevitably end up with a broadly right wing camp opposing a broadly left wing camp. Also a multiparty system in the US would almost certainly lead to the growth of regional parties all focused exclusively on their own states, and that kind of geographical division has been pretty disastrous throughout American history.

[zenkai]

I really hope this group gains traction.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Democrats





https://justicedemocrats.com/?utm_ex...u6dZl0XxJRfw.0

I am all for corporations not having political influence, this is why we need to fix our campaign laws.

[Ryme]

In principle I agree with a lot of what they're trying to achieve here. However, I have reservations based on what the movement could end up becoming; 'grass roots' style movements have a tendency to lose themselves through subversion.

Cautiously hopeful.

[Deleted]

What difference does it really make though? No matter the electoral system you'd still need a majority coalition to govern, so you would inevitably end up with a broadly right wing camp opposing a broadly left wing camp. Also a multiparty system in the US would almost certainly lead to the growth of regional parties all focused exclusively on their own states, and that kind of geographical division has been pretty disastrous throughout American history.

You'd be forced to make coalitions/agreements with other parties, since with more viable parties in play and competing for the electors' vote, the chances of a single party getting a majority would greatly decrease. In time, you would have to compromise more often, and find middle grounds on dividing issues.

[Glorious Leader]

The momentum in the voters is already heading in that direction. Bernie Sanders hit on it and gave a big finger to big donors, Hillary made a SCOTUS nominee that would overturn CU a part of her platform, and its a good bet that any Democrat candidate that gains any traction in a presidential bid is going to make this a part of their platform.

We also have to keep in mind that just voting "better" politicians in won't cut it. Voters need to keep pressure on both state and national level politicians in order to result in actual policy changes that will curtail the influence and necessity of the donor class. Especially at a national level, the elected officials (I think for the most part) don't enjoy courting donors, but anyone that gives up the practice on their own is likely to lose to someone with donor money.

Indeed. Politics is meaningless when the electorate is unengaged and disinterested.

[Fugus]

Indeed. Politics is meaningless when the electorate is unengaged and disinterested.

Exactly, people kept trying to say the young were just not interested in politics and didn't care. Then Sanders came along and actually started talking to their issues and they were interested and checking it out and actually trying to come out and vote for him whenever they could and that was with the DNC actively working to make sure as few people saw him as possible. He proved that was wrong.

You want the people to vote, give them something to vote for. Just because you are better than the other guy doesn't mean they want to bother coming to vote for you. Much easier to vote for someone you want than to come out and vote just to be against someone worse than you.

[Glorious Leader]

Exactly, people kept trying to say the young were just not interested in politics and didn't care. Then Sanders came along and actually started talking to their issues and they were interested and checking it out and actually trying to come out and vote for him whenever they could and that was with the DNC actively working to make sure as few people saw him as possible. He proved that was wrong.

You want the people to vote, give them something to vote for. Just because you are better than the other guy doesn't mean they want to bother coming to vote for you. Much easier to vote for someone you want than to come out and vote just to be against someone worse than you.

And they stayed at home during the general. People forget sanders won the primary in michigan due largely to the youth vote. Then clinton went and lost michigan.

The dems need young people. Bernie is awesome, hes fired up as hell and ready to fucking take some names but hes an old guy. Gerry brown in california is the same story. We need young politicians fired up and ready to push genuine working class values. We need young new deal democrats.

[Puremallace]

Just going to sit back and see how the protectionism thing works out. Something tells me multi lateral trade deals are dead and that is something Bill Clinton championed in this party. My feeling is this is going to backfire in a pretty horrible way in the form off a deep recession.

[Nadiru]

Just going to sit back and see how the protectionism thing works out. Something tells me multi lateral trade deals are dead and that is something Bill Clinton championed in this party. My feeling is this is going to backfire in a pretty horrible way in the form off a deep recession.

We're already at the end of the business cycle, a recession is due for the US in any case. Don't get all self-fulfilling prophecy on us, now.

[LaserSharkDFB]

All well and good, but could they possibly have chosen a less stupid name? 'Justice Democrats'. Good grief.

[Deleted]

The next democratic president candidate has to be someone who isnt establishment.

No Obama. No Clinton. No Bank manager. No billionaire.

It must be a guy who is entirely working on behalf of the people, and not for big companies and money bags.