Forward Party (USA)?

[nguyenivy]

Has anyone heard of this one?
FAQ

[pbrower2a]

It's trying to create a compromise between Democrats and old-school Republicans.

It has yet to establish itself as a viable entity, but should the GOP collapse, it might take a role similar to that of Lincoln's original Republican Party.

The GOP as a collection oif Trump kiss-ups deserves to go into oblivion.

[Eric the Green]

One thing I thought I would like about concentrating people of the same persuasion within the two parties, is that the people could choose to defeat the Republicans if they get too extreme. That might be a good idea now, since they DID get that way. But the danger of them winning makes this more dangerous.

Middle of the road doesn't really get us very far. Right now, the Forward Party hopes to take some moderate voters away from the extreme Republican Party, but who don't want to be Democrats; along with some moderate Democrats some of whom may have already left the Republican Party some time ago. But the Forward Party is misnamed, because only a Left party can move us "Forward." It's what the Left does. A moderate party just sort of ambles along and refuses to face up to what's truly needed. Is that goal what they hope will get the most voters? I don't know. I think the main thrust of the Democratic Party is what is needed now. Real concerns need to be addressed, and moderates usually just dawdle and approve half-measures that don't do the job.

And the extremist Republicans don't want to dawdle either. They want to take us backward in huge steps. How many Republicans would really switch to the moderate party, and how many also don't like regressive half-measures?

I think the moderates who don't like the extremist and personality-cultist Republican Party need to realize that their other Republican ideas ALSO need to be junked and opposed. Gov. Hogan, a moderate Republican from Maryland who worked well with Democrats, nevertheless referred to a would-be restored "moderate" Republican Party as "Reaganesque." But that just ignores how far right the Republicans have gone. Reagan was also an extremist, and he paved the way for all the extremist views the Party holds today, including its racism. And who needs them? Who needs "moderate former Republicans" who still hold to free-market neoliberal trickle-down Reaganomics? That is the biggest scam of them all.

No, the people just need to join the real center-left party, the Democrats, which is already moderate by the standards of better days and places than the 21st century USA. We already have a "Forward Party," and it already uses that description for itself.

[David Horn]

I think Jamielle Bouie (NY Times ccolumnist and visiting scholar at UVA) hit it on the nose. Third parties rarely succeed as more than cautionary tales by moving one or both major parties in one direction or another. The Forward Party is trying to be the new GOP, replacing the old GOP in the same manner the GOP replaced the Whigs. Sorry, but that doesn't happen by being a compromiser. There has to be a core issue (or two) that moves people toward the party. So far, it the Forward Party looks like warm milk and cookies -- tasty but, ultimately, too bland to be effective on any level.

[pbrower2a]

Do we have much of a center-right in American politics? It seems to be vastly under-represented in American politics even if it has largely disappeared during the last forty years.

Ideally, most of the political contest in America is between the center-left and the center-right. The center-right seems to be the last people to seek to keep government activity from bloating. It is best that people exist who can say NO to excess spending instead of deciding that their pet spending is preferable to that of the other side.

Remember well: fascists are just as much for Big Government as the equivalents of social democrats. The difference is that the fascists want Big Government to serve such questionable ends as offering sweetheart deals involving public assets and enforcing the will of Big Business at its harshest. Trump, who is closer to being an overt fascist than any prior President, is as much a supporter of big spending as Obama.

[JasonBlack]

(07-31-2022, 05:09 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Do we have much of a center-right in American politics?  It seems to be vastly under-represented in American politics even if it has largely disappeared during the last forty years.

Ideally, most of the political contest in America is between the center-left and the center-right. The center-right seems to be the last people to seek to keep government activity from bloating. It is best that people exist who can say NO to excess spending instead of deciding that their pet spending is preferable to that of the other side.

Remember well: fascists are just as much for Big Government as the equivalents of social democrats. The difference is that the fascists want Big Government to serve such questionable ends as offering sweetheart deals involving public assets and enforcing the will of Big Business at its harshest. Trump, who is closer to being an overt fascist than any prior President, is as much a supporter of big spending as Obama.

[Anthony '58]

(07-31-2022, 05:09 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Do we have much of a center-right in American politics?  It seems to be vastly under-represented in American politics even if it has largely disappeared during the last forty years.

Ideally, most of the political contest in America is between the center-left and the center-right. The center-right seems to be the last people to seek to keep government activity from bloating. It is best that people exist who can say NO to excess spending instead of deciding that their pet spending is preferable to that of the other side.

Remember well: fascists are just as much for Big Government as the equivalents of social democrats. The difference is that the fascists want Big Government to serve such questionable ends as offering sweetheart deals involving public assets and enforcing the will of Big Business at its harshest. Trump, who is closer to being an overt fascist than any prior President, is as much a supporter of big spending as Obama.

It is actually the center-left that has been vastly under-represented in American politics during the last forty years: Its last remnants are Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Henry Cuellar, and Jon Bel Edwards.

[David Horn]

(08-31-2022, 11:12 AM)Anthony Wrote:

(07-31-2022, 05:09 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Do we have much of a center-right in American politics?  It seems to be vastly under-represented in American politics even if it has largely disappeared during the last forty years.

Ideally, most of the political contest in America is between the center-left and the center-right. The center-right seems to be the last people to seek to keep government activity from bloating. It is best that people exist who can say NO to excess spending instead of deciding that their pet spending is preferable to that of the other side.

Remember well: fascists are just as much for Big Government as the equivalents of social democrats. The difference is that the fascists want Big Government to serve such questionable ends as offering sweetheart deals involving public assets and enforcing the will of Big Business at its harshest. Trump, who is closer to being an overt fascist than any prior President, is as much a supporter of big spending as Obama.

It is actually the center-left that has been vastly under-represented in American politics during the last forty years: Its last remnants are Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Henry Cuellar, and Jon Bel Edwards.

If we exerecise a bit of historical benchmarking, these may be Democrats but center-left they are not.  If you wish to argue for center-right, I'm with you.

[Eric the Green]

(09-02-2022, 12:19 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(08-31-2022, 11:12 AM)Anthony Wrote:

(07-31-2022, 05:09 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: Do we have much of a center-right in American politics?  It seems to be vastly under-represented in American politics even if it has largely disappeared during the last forty years.

Ideally, most of the political contest in America is between the center-left and the center-right. The center-right seems to be the last people to seek to keep government activity from bloating. It is best that people exist who can say NO to excess spending instead of deciding that their pet spending is preferable to that of the other side.

Remember well: fascists are just as much for Big Government as the equivalents of social democrats. The difference is that the fascists want Big Government to serve such questionable ends as offering sweetheart deals involving public assets and enforcing the will of Big Business at its harshest. Trump, who is closer to being an overt fascist than any prior President, is as much a supporter of big spending as Obama.

It is actually the center-left that has been vastly under-represented in American politics during the last forty years: Its last remnants are Joe Manchin, Kyrsten Sinema, Henry Cuellar, and Jon Bel Edwards.

If we exerecise a bit of historical benchmarking, these may be Democrats but center-left they are not.  If you wish to argue for center-right, I'm with you.

That's right. What we have now is center-left versus extreme right. The center-right is barely visible now, except for a few Republicans and a couple of Democratic senators and a few Democratic representatives. Most of the right-wing now is extreme right. Most of the left is center-left. Both are over-represented. We need more of the extreme Left to have any balance.

[pbrower2a]

In practice the Hard Left provokes the Hard Right into brutal reaction that contributes to further polarization of political life. The Hard Left is thus no counterbalance to the Hard Right. Street fights are not political debate.

It is telling that the American Left was completely absent from the scene on January 6, 2021. It is just as well. It could have done nothing except to become victims and create confusion. All the disgusting stuff was by the fascistic Right (and don't fool yourself: the attempt to keep Donald Trump as President through unconstitutional means is fascistic).

[Eric the Green]

(09-03-2022, 05:06 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: In practice the Hard Left provokes the Hard Right into brutal reaction that contributes to further polarization of political life. The Hard Left is thus no counterbalance to the Hard Right. Street fights are not political debate.

It is telling that the American Left was completely absent from the scene on January 6, 2021. It is just as well. It could have done nothing except to become victims and create confusion. All the disgusting stuff was by the fascistic Right (and don't fool yourself: the attempt to keep Donald Trump as President through unconstitutional means is fascistic).

The far Left can't be identified with "street fights"

It is just the cutting edge of progressive political opinion. Right now it is focused around 5 House members called "The Squad" led by Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. Such figures as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are representative. The recently-deceased author you posted about Barbara Erinreich would be another example. There are many others, but my point is they don't dominate the Democratic Party in the way that the extreme right dominates the Republican Party. So there is certainly an imbalance there.

Here's another member of "the Left" in the US congress:
https://jayapal.house.gov/about-me/

However, most Democrats in congress and presidential candidates these days are willing to support the steps needed to move the country forward, including President Biden.

There was an extreme Left which offered violence as a solution back in the late sixties. In 1963 Lee Harvey Oswald was such a person. These days, those on the Left who are violent are limited to some young thugs upset over police violence who break some windows and set some fires and burned down a police station in Kenosha WI during otherwise peaceful demonstrations organized by the Black Lives Matter group or antifa. The extreme right seizes on these and calls the whole movement violent, but it's not true, and a lot of those thugs have been provocateurs. Such angry young folks acting out can hardly be called a political Left.

Right now, the extreme Right in our country is violent, but the extreme Left is not. I'm not saying there should be a balance in the amount of violence on each side. But if the Left does go in this direction, I don't think they realize that it takes much more organization than hoping for street riots.

[pbrower2a]

(09-03-2022, 01:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(09-03-2022, 05:06 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: In practice the Hard Left provokes the Hard Right into brutal reaction that contributes to further polarization of political life. The Hard Left is thus no counterbalance to the Hard Right. Street fights are not political debate.

It is telling that the American Left was completely absent from the scene on January 6, 2021. It is just as well. It could have done nothing except to become victims and create confusion. All the disgusting stuff was by the fascistic Right (and don't fool yourself: the attempt to keep Donald Trump as President through unconstitutional means is fascistic).

The far Left can't be identified with "street fights".

Even the Communist Party of the USA deprecates street fights. At the least they are ineffective in achieving anything other than to fit the narrative of fascist pigs who deserve to remain ignored for their politics. The fascistic Right never succeeds except when it seems needed for protecting class privilege and some majority culture. I have seen the claims of the Klan types proposing to protect "white culture" only to demonstrate how impoverished their narrow idea of what "white culture" is -- something joyless, mindless, and loveless, which is crazy.

It is also worth remembering that the Armed Services deprecate street fights.

Quote:It is just the cutting edge of progressive political opinion. Right now it is focused around 5 House members called "The Squad" led by Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. Such figures as Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are representative. The recently-deceased author you posted about Barbara Erinreich would be another example. There are many others, but my point is they don't dominate the Democratic Party in the way that the extreme right dominates the Republican Party. So there is certainly an imbalance there.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seeks to pull America in her direction. People who expose the seamy side of American life instead of acquiescing with it because of some convenience (like cheap restaurant meals or low prices in grocery stores) seek to remove the burden from those who suffer to make such convenience possible. If it takes high prices to ensure that people who do the work get to participate fully in American economic life as they contribute to it, then so be it.

That people deserve to be paid well enough to participate in the economic order whose travails make such possible is far from an extreme position. 

The Left is generally not hostile to science and academia. The Hard Right, whether MAGA or "believe-it-or-burn-in-Hell" fundamentalists often reject rational science because it violates class interest or some superstition. 

Quote:Here's another member of "the Left" in the US congress:
https://jayapal.house.gov/about-me/

However, most Democrats in congress and presidential candidates these days are willing to support the steps needed to move the country forward, including President Biden.

The MAGA cult has corrupted the Republican Party. The GOP would be wise to wash its hands of this, but it may be too late for its increasingly-elderly constituency and the political figures who have chosen to ride the tiger. One has more to fear from MAGA so far if one is a Republican. People who shout "Hang Mike Pence!" deserve widespread disgrace. I might not like him, but he has done nothing to deserve any legal consequences -- let alone a lynching that is the antithesis of both law and order and the rule of law necessary for human rights and for the functioning of democracy. 

Quote:There was an extreme Left which offered violence as a solution back in the late sixties. In 1963 Lee Harvey Oswald was such a person. These days, those on the Left who are violent are limited to some young thugs upset over police violence who break some windows and set some fires and burned down a police station in Kenosha WI during otherwise peaceful demonstrations organized by the Black Lives Matter group or antifa. The extreme right seizes on these and calls the whole movement violent, but it's not true, and a lot of those thugs have been provocateurs. Such angry young folks acting out can hardly be called a political Left.

Yes -- and the violent extremists of the Left are no longer relevant. Violent thugs exploiting the Black Lives Matters protests? They would exploit a World Series championship, too, or even just the desire for some swag. Black Lives Matters and Antifa, through their silence, seem to accept that those who hijack their protests deserve the harsh consequences that the legal system metes out to criminal perpetrators. I could make the case that those who take cameras to document police brutality that might arise make such rallies the worst possible circumstances in which to commit serious crimes. Those who bring cameras often take photos of overt crime not part of the protest, and turn their stills or video to police and prosecutors.        

Quote:Right now, the extreme Right in our country is violent, but the extreme Left is not. I'm not saying there should be a balance in the amount of violence on each side. But if the Left does go in this direction, I don't think they realize that it takes much more organization than hoping for street riots.

The extreme Right has generally had a split between Bircher types who want government to become nothing more than an enforcer of the will of economic elites and clerical types who want an America that believes in the Bible (including young-earth creationism and a worldwide Flood) at the expense of science. They want a Junker-style America in which people live in abject fear of lender, landlord, and employer but with minimal violence, and a populace that knows and believes only what those elites want them to know and believe. Ideologically this is Pinochet. The other part of the extreme Right wanted at worst some "Racial Holy War (RAHOWA)" in which white Christians would annihilate, expel, or enslave the rest. MAGA is new, showing a pervasive contempt for institutions other than profit-seeking enterprise. Thus Wal*Mart and Lockheed are wonderful and well-renowned colleges are suspect. As with many fascist causes, the Hard Right sees great cities as Sodom and Gomorrah for having people unlike them in ethnicity, religion, and economic activity. 

MAGA may have melded the Bircher types and the KKK types with those who have much resentment over people outdoing them economically despite being either non-white, non-straight, or non-Christian.

[/quote]