Skip to main content

View Diary: What is your party affiliation? (72 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So use the primary process (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane, MKSinSA

    If you don't think that either party serves the public (and personally, I agree with you), then the thing to do is to start building an alternative.

    Short run, the way to do that is to start setting up local party machines that can beat bad Democrats in the primaries.

    If you can do that, you will be in a position to either supplant the Democrats, or to be an effective second party in that district.

    It took about 8 years for the GOP to supplant the Whigs.  The GOP is bad off right now that if we started at the level of state legislature and US Congressional districts, we could force the GOP out of existence in large parts of the country, as corporate money went to the Democrats, and labor and small donations went to the Progressive Democrats or whatever you want to call them.

    "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

    by mbayrob on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 12:17:20 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Why? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MKSinSA, Situational Lefty

      Why set up a local party machine that can beat bad Democrats in the primaries instead of setting up a local party machine that can beat bad Democrats and bad Republicans in the primaries?  It is easier for a third-party or independent candidate to win a general election than to successfully primary an incumbent.

      •  You want to start with people who know how to win (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MKSinSA

        The problem with most US third party efforts is that you get people into the bad habit of losing elections.  I did some works for the Green Party of Canada, which is a lot more centrist than the US version of the same, and they still don't get this: you need to teach people how to win elections.

        So in practice, it makes sense to start by winning primaries, which is much easier to do than winning a third party run.

        Once you've built an organization that can win elections, you can split and have a hope of winning.

        Historically, successful third parties are effectively split off one of the two main parties.  I think this is why.

        "If another country builds a better car, we buy it. If they make a better wine, we drink it. If they have better healthcare . . . what's our problem? "

        by mbayrob on Sun Jul 12, 2009 at 12:40:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, but... (0+ / 0-)

          ...you are not starting with people who don't know how to win. If you are starting to "set up a local party machine," you are starting from scratch. You can cherrypick whomever.

          it makes sense to start by winning primaries, which is much easier to do than winning a third party run

          No. It is much easier to win open primaries than to win a third-party run. It is not easier to beat an incumbent in a primary than to win a third-party run.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site