Our “brand” cant appeal to 20% or less of the electorate. Its just the math. If our messaging does not include all of our working-class brothers and sisters, we cannot win where it counts. Unfortunately, one of the disadvantages we face, is that our side seems to understand nuance and the importance of intellectual integrity. That is why I think we should stick to the basics. We dont need 7 pillars, when 1 pillar will fix it all. If we dont force out the dark money, we are doomed. I know we can develop a strategy around economic justice and corruption that appeals to every American. We just have to want to. We waste a lot of time on things we will never fix, until the money is gone.
1 Like
Have an alliance focused only on working class issues and against pollution (air, water, soil…) -something I have been saying repeatedly on these forums for the past few months. The Duopoly Parties owned by corporations and plutocrats have expressly IGNORED those issues because of profits, and yet it’s the largest voting segment. That has to be claimed; I only see Sanders pulling it off, but all he is doing so far is just speeches. He has to pick a committee to maintain the integrity of such an alliance, it bouncing out members when tthey run on issues counter to that (clearly The Duopoly would want saboteurs to run in such an alliance, to kill it in the crib…)
I think he does not want to be involved with such an enforcement structure because he’s more concerned about being liked by everybody; having to chuck somebody out at some point will lose some popularity, but you have to do it if you get infiltrated by people with selfish agendas that take precedence over those worker and anti-pollution issues…
2 Likes
We need Tim Walz; he could win, and he’s fantastic!
1 Like
There is a small percentage chance that we EVER see meaningful reform, in any area of policy, until we completely cut out the corruption. They have abandoned all pretense of playing by whatever rules there were. We allow legalized bribery all the time. Forget the incestuous circle between politics, finance, weapons, oil, now tech, all of it. If all of us, at once, get together on that, its game over. It is inevitable that we remove them from DC, its just a matter of how bad we let it get, before we try.
1 Like
I couldn’t agree more!
In the shoulda-coulda department: if they had conducted an Open Convention AND he and others had the courage to run, we could have had him.
If the dictatorship does not get pulled off (we’re 10 minutes to midnight right now…), I’d like to see him as an Independent candidate in 2028 -because the corporate owners of the Dem Party would never ever let someone like him run as a presidential candidate, calling shots.
1 Like
If we can’t win elections, we won’t shape policy—no argument there. But winning also means modeling the kind of open dialogue and critical thinking that can build broader support. What are some concrete ways we can create a culture within our movement that encourages genuine engagement, allows for disagreement, and prioritizes learning over rigid conformity? How can we balance maintaining our principles while being open to new ideas and perspectives—especially if our goal is to build the coalitions necessary to win elections and enact real change?
1 Like
If we don’t get money out of politics, nothing will ever change. We have been protesting for and against the same issues, for decades. If anything really changed we would stop protesting, but it doesnt. As for the idea of building a culture and allowing for disagreement, I fully agree that is the goal. I feel like TYT and Operation Hope provide that. We are under siege from Corp. America. We dont have to all agree on everything, but there is one thing we all agree on. It is an existential threat. If we dont put everything we have into getting money out, nothing will ever change.I dont see how an effort to concentrate our resources on removing the actual problem, is wrong. All the issues are important, but they linger because of the money.
1 Like
Yes, I feel the same.
That’s why we have you, our resident genius, when it comes to, well, basically everything, especially regarding systems and process development and improvement. 
(Did I say that right? The part after “regarding.”)
1 Like
I get what you’re saying, and I think it’s all important.
Getting money out of politics is the critical issue—no doubt about it. But what if we think about it this way: diversity of strategy is as important as unity of purpose. Operation Hope can be a space where we’re not just united around removing dark money but also open to experimenting with different approaches—from grassroots organizing and media campaigns to legislative advocacy and coalition building. How do we build a culture that not only makes room for disagreement but actually sees it as a strength?
The more adaptable and open we are, the better our chances of finding what works and building real momentum for change.
2 Likes
Here’s an argument against an Independent Alliance for Congressional and Presidential candidates; I think it’s flawed, but I share to show what it will take.
-
He says there’s no point since the Duopoly Parties at the State level will increase the number of required signatures. But they haven’t yet: so at least TRY to ballot-by-petition, and if they do that, shine a light on it and move on to the next remaining rebellious option (I leave it your imaginations!) But this means you need lots of time to field the petitions. Unfortunately, that should have been started a month ago, and Sanders is not putting forward a trusted committee to adjucate on the integrity of candidates, focused on the issues neglected by the Duopoly of worker rights and pollution (since they are now owned by corporations and that affects their profits…)
-
He points out that an Independent candidate will not be invited to the debates since they are no longer run by the League of Woman Voters, but by a corporation that only expresses the interests of the Duopoly Parties. I would argue after such a piss-poor showing by BOTH of those parties in 2024-2025, them attempting to shut out an alternative from their debate won’t matter. With publicity on the 'net and through Indie media, the word can get out pretty good (if they had or will have good candidates for workers, that might be different -but I assure you they will not let a pro-worker candidate run…)
You need to focus on Reps for 2026 before even thinking about 2028.
PS This is all presuming there is not a dictatorship installed, which is not looking good at the moment. It looks like their attempt will be to change voting rules [at the State level] to disqualify tons of voters…