So, Yang, among others, have put forward an op-ed called "Most third parties have failed. Here's why ours won't." This is essentially the announcement of the new forward party. And, given my association with the first Forward party and disappointment with this new move, I feel like I need to react to this in detail.
David Jolly is a former Republican congressman from Florida and is executive chairman of the Serve America Movement. Christine Todd Whitman is a former Republican governor of New Jersey and co-founder of the Renew America Movement. Andrew Yang is a former Democratic presidential candidate and is co-chair of the Forward Party.
Okay, so, here's why I'm leery of merging with former republican third party movements. These guys are probably like the "lincoln project". You know, fiscal conservatives from the "moderate" wing of the party who got displaced by Trump. They might not be as insane as the rest of the GOP, but many will still hold very conservative views. While I have no issue with Yang trying to bring them into his movement on his own terms, merging with them and weakening his own platform as a result is a very bad sign.
Conservatives post 1980 are generally anti UBI. This isn't the Eisenhower-Nixon party any more and it hasn't been for a long time. Reagan was an extremist at his time, but now he's a "moderate." Even George W. Bush is a "moderate". You know? While I have nothing against these guys joining forward, it has to be on our terms, not theirs. Merging is like a marriage it's 50-50, and involves a lot of compromise. And when that compromise involves UBI and human centered capitalism, that's a hard no for me.
Political extremism is ripping our nation apart, and the two major parties have failed to remedy the crisis. Last week, the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack at the Capitol led us to relive one of the darkest days in U.S. history. The chilling culmination of an attempted electoral coup in the United States was the strongest evidence yet that we are facing the potential demise of our democracy.
Sure, sure, I agree.
Polarization is fueling a spike in political intimidation. In the past two years, we’ve seen death threats and assassination plots against members of Congress, governors, Supreme Court justices and even the vice president of the United States.
I mean, in a way. While I wasn't really big on this angle at first with Yang's original movement, I have warmed up to it. Given the extremeness of the right and left, Yang's movement was a breath of fresh air for me.
If nothing is done, the United States will not reach its 300th birthday this century in recognizable form. That’s why we are coming together — Democrats, Republicans and independents — to build a new, unifying political party for the majority of Americans who want to move past divisiveness and reject extremism.
Yeah, i'm worried about that too. But here's the thing. We need a platform to unite Americans behind a new paradigm. A centrist party with no platform isn't going to solve anything, it's a circlejerk.
Americans have lost faith in government. Nearly 8 in 10 say the country is headed in the wrong direction, according to a recent survey, and two-thirds of voters think neither the Democrats nor the Republicans have the right priorities.
They don't, but Forward doesn't either at this point.
Shockingly, roughly 30 million Americans believe violence against the current government is justified. The same number want to forcibly return former president Donald Trump to the White House. This is what happens when democracies fail: People feel their voices are not heard and radicalize to take up arms, leading to mainstream talk about “civil war.”
To be fair, 30 million isn't that much. That's 10%. What's scarier is how much larger fractions of the GOP are still on the trump train to varying degrees.
How do you remedy such a crisis? In a system torn apart by two increasingly divided extremes, you must reintroduce choice and competition.
...and I agree. BUT...you must also fix the material conditions that are leading to this polarization. You know why this happened, Andrew. In 2016, voting for Trump was a rejection of the status quo and a cry for help. People wanted a fix to the economy. Trump promised to bring back jobs lost. Hillary told us we'd get nothing. Bernie had a good platform but was screwed by the dems.
I mean, the problems with the parties are a problem but they're only half the problem. We need to fight not just for voter reform, but also for your original platform. You nailed it with the war on normal people. UBI, M4A, human centered capitalism. I would add a couple things to that like free college/student debt forgiveness, climate change legislation, etc., but in line with my purity testing those are my tier 2 "nice to haves", so I'm not gonna be that picky.
But yeah. We do need to break the duopoly. But, we need a platform that wins people over the fixes the material conditions. The left has some nice solutions, but they're also misguided and obsessed with jobs. The right has no solutions at all.
If I had ranked choice voting, I would vote this way:
1) Yang/Human centered capitalism (original vision)
2) The progressive left
3) The democrats
4) Anyone else but the republicans
5) The republicans
I mean, here's the thing. The actual threat to our democracy comes from ONE SIDE. The republicans. The democrats arent taking up arms against the government. They've tried this enlightened centrist schtick to try to "save the democracy." THEYRE FAILING. People are screaming about gas prices, covid regulations, etc. And while yes, the left sometimes goes a bit crazy on the culture war nonsense, the actual democratic party is doing the centrist circlejerk thing. IT ISNT WORKING. The problem with Biden is he's too milquetoast. And now forward is going even more moderate than that?
This is just the wrong kind of movement for the time at hand.
If we're really that concerned about the future of the country, where we're concerned about the political violence of the right, we should just vote democrat at this point.
The point of forward was to reject both the right AND the democrats. The democrats are complicit because of the following:
1) They don't do anything to make peoples' lives better
2) They hold the system hostage and tell us to support them or else
You see how AT BEST this is just a marginal improvement, and if the risk of the right is as serious as you think, we better all vote for our lives and throw our lot in with the democrats to avoid the crazies from taking power again?
This party is going to DO NOTHING, Andrew.
Without your original 2020 platform, YOU HAVE NOTHING.
The United States badly needs a new political party — one that reflects the moderate, common-sense majority. Today’s outdated parties have failed by catering to the fringes. As a result, most Americans feel they aren’t represented.
The dems cater to the center. THe dems are catering to the same set of republicans you are.
Yes, some democratic VOTERS are extreme. SOMETIMES I don't blame them. The reason I was on "the left" through 2020 was because I realize that we actually need to DO SOMETHING to actually solve problems. We NEED a UBI. We NEED medicare for all. We NEED free college and student debt forgiveness. We NEED an entire paradigm shift along the lines of human centered capitalism.
Before YOU came along the left was the best we had. BECAUSE AT LEAST THEY WANTED TO DO SOMETHING.
Now, I'm gonna be honest, the postmodernist left, yes, I'll agree with you on those guys. They pick weird culture war spats that just enrage the right. We should move to the center on SOCIAL ISSUES.
But on economics, just keep doing what you WERE doing.
Like really, when you called the past forward party centrist, i thought that the thing was, it was pretty far left on economics but on social issues it mostly remained on the sidelines and didn't pick those fights often.
Most third parties in U.S. history failed to take off, either because they were ideologically too narrow or the population was uninterested. But voters are calling for a new party now more than ever.
Actually most failed to take off because:
1) most third parties end up being single issue parties with no cohesive platform to get people interested
2) they overlap too much with existing parties
3) most people claim they want a third party but just vote blue no matter who anyway
Honestly, I don't even think forward CAN "succeed" electorally. I acknowledge that. I mean, to me, I dont even care if I lose, because the thing is, I'd rather vote for what i want and not get it, than vote for what I don't want and get it. I dont really vote strategically outside of narrow circumstances where the compromise isn't major. The reason I was attracted to forward was because it literally appealed to my ideology.
Honestly, third parties are normally, at best, public pressure campaigns centered around specific issues. They are largely ignored until we enter a realignment period, in which case the parties start shifting to appeal to disaffected voters displaced by the previous alignment.
And given we ARE in a realignment cycle IMO, right now is the perfect time to push for what we want. We should use forward as a public pressure campaign to advocate for UBI AND RCV. We should do BOTH.
Like, I'm gonna be honest, I dont really think forward will succeed either way. I mean, most voters, for as much grumbling as they do, will continue to vote democrat or republican. The goal of a third party is just to get enough voters to pressure the parties to support your cause. Unless either the dems or republicans just completely collapse, we're NOT going to see one party REPLACE another.
And while forward was working on ballot initiatives to work on RCV (and should keep doing that), the fact is, it's not going to win most elections.
All I know is this. While this might gain some new supporters, it's also a slap in the face and the betrayal of the existing movement.
And I get it. You're a businessman. Your approach to politics is like running a business. Voters are customers. And if you can trade in your old supporters for newer ones who are more wealthy then you're gonna do it. If UBI holds you back, maybe you'll give up UBI and rebrand yourself.
But you're gonna lose the original customer base that got you where you are. And I'm not going to stand by and accept this.
For the first time in modern history, roughly half of Americans consider themselves “independents,” and two-thirds say a new party is needed (and would vote for it). Surprisingly, a majority of Democrats and Republicans say they want another option, too.
As I said, Americans complain but then vote for the duopoly anyway.
As leaders and former elected officials, we’re tired of just talking about a third way. So this month, we’re merging our three national organizations — which represent the left, right, and center of the political spectrum — to build the launchpad for a new political party called Forward.
Third way. Hmm. Where does that sound familiar. Oh wait.
Congratulations, you just reinvented the democratic party as it's existed since 1992. The same democratic party that is responsible for our democracy falling apart due to its mismanagement since 2016.
The two major parties have hollowed out the sensible center of our political system — even though that’s where most voters want to see them move. A new party must stake out the space in between. On every issue facing this nation — from the controversial to the mundane — we can find a reasonable approach most Americans agree on.
On economics at least, America's political spectrum is so far right, any sane option would be to their left. Including you.
On cultural issues, I'd cede the point, but forward seemed to have it right.
On guns, for instance, most Americans don’t agree with calls from the far left to confiscate all guns and repeal the Second Amendment, but they’re also rightfully worried by the far right’s insistence on eliminating gun laws.
Again, cultural issues. And I agree. I don't agree with banning assault weapons or limiting mag sizes, etc. I just want to have slightly stricter gun laws in terms of loopholes, and keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the dangerously mentally ill.
On climate change, most Americans don’t agree with calls from the far left to completely upend our economy and way of life, but they also reject the far right’s denial that there is even a problem.
Cool. I agree. I think the far left when they romanticize the green new deal and redoing our entire infrastructure over again around public transportation most americans buy cars specifically to avoid. At the same time the far right is literally in lalaland because they think the earth is 6000 years old.
Honestly, build back better HAD a moderate framework. The democrats had a moderate framework.
And honestly? I read Yang's 2020 platform on climate change back in the day. I actually thought it was one of the most progressive ones out there and given I reject the GND outright, I think it was the best one in 2020 in retrospect.
But...again. You're just reinventing...the democratic party.
On abortion, most Americans don’t agree with the far left’s extreme views on late-term abortions, but they also are alarmed by the far right’s quest to make a woman’s choice a criminal offense.
THEN FREAKING SUPPORT THE DEMOCRATS.
Seriously, late term abortions were NEVER protected under Roe and Casey. Roe and Casey allowed elective abortions up to 20 weeks or so. Most states had laws banning late term abortion, and late term abortion were only a small minority.
Hell, the only reason, I support late term abortion is because republican crazies want to ban abortions for people who actually NEED THEM. You know, people with medical issues who will DIE if they don't get abortions. Crap like that.
Also, if you dont wanna make it a criminal offense, then congrats, even if you are morally opposed to abortion, you're pro choice. What do you think you're doing when you ban it? You're making it a criminal offense and holding someone criminally liable if they break the law.
Like...do you realize that's what prohibitions are?
Seriously, the democrats HAD THIS RIGHT.
All this new "centrist" forward party is doing is reinventing the centrist faction of the democratic party.
Now, with forward 1.0, I wasn't necessarily against this. Given how insane some of the dem voter base is, I feel like a moderate rebranding is how we can push democratic policies while claiming they're moderate and getting former conservative types on board. BUT....again. Unless you do something DIFFERENT than the democrats, this party is useless.
To succeed, a new party must break down the barriers that stand between voters and more political choices. Accordingly, we will passionately advocate electoral changes such as ranked-choice voting and open primaries; for the end of gerrymandering; and for the nationwide protection of voting rights and a push to make voting remarkably easy for anyone and incredibly secure for everyone.
And again, I don't oppose those things, but honestly, it doesn't make for a compelling argument.
All this is doing is making me want to vote democrat. That's how bad this pitch is failing.
Political polarization and violence? Yeah, vote democrat, dont vote for those crazy repubs.
Have sane centrist positions on issues? Gee, it's almost as if that's what the dems have done all along, minus the crazy postmodernists with their culture war nonsense.
Without such systemic changes, Americans will be left with a closed system and fewer options on the ballot. These reforms go hand in hand with a new party.
Again, you also need to materially improve peoples' lives. Something the dems and all of their "centrism" have failed to do, and something forward will fail to do if it abandons its original principles.
Some call third parties “spoilers,” but the system is already spoiled. There are more than 500,000 elected positions in the United States, but a recent study found more than 70 percent of races on ballots in 2020 were unopposed or uncontested. A tiny sliver of U.S. congressional seats will have close races this November. The two major parties have shut out competition, and America is suffering as a result.
yeah it sucks, but when they call them spoilers, it's because it causes the other side to win by splitting the vote of the existing side.
I fail to see what this platform even offers compared to the dems.
Like again, no one actually wants more centrism. We dont want more wishy washiness. We want solutions.
You have solutions for the two party system, but if you dont otherwise meaningfully offer anything different than what the two parties offer to begin with on OTHER ISSUES, theres NO REASON to vote for you.
That’s why we’re proposing the first “open” party. Americans of all stripes — Democrats, Republicans and independents — are invited to be a part of the process, without abandoning their existing political affiliations, by joining us to discuss building an optimistic and inclusive home for the politically homeless majority
Another "big tent" party, gee, much like the democrats.
Also, the reason i was on board with the first party was yang's original platform.
Without that, there's no reason to leave the dems to support this stuff.
Our merged organizations are just the starting point, the launchpad for this movement. We are planning liftoff at a national convention next summer and will soon seek state-by-state ballot access to run candidates in 2024 and beyond. We are actively recruiting former U.S. representatives, governors, entrepreneurs, top political operatives and community leaders to make it happen.
I would be excited if UBI were still on the ballot but with this...no.
America’s founders warned about the dangers of a two-party system. Today, we’re living with the dire consequences. Giving Americans more choices is important not just for restoring civility. Our lives, our livelihoods and our way of life depend on it.
Choice is good, but what's the point if you're just more or less copying the democrats' failed electoral strategy anyway?
Anyway, there was a quote I thought that was in here that isn't. Perhaps it's in another article. But it mentioned something about how funding won't be a problem and they got a lot of financial donors and backers supporting this.
Which...isn't necessarily a good thing. Again, this might help the party grow, but if it comes at the expense of its soul, well, this is basically a deal made with the devil.
The fact is, I'm out.
All this really makes me wanna do is vote democrat, something I've seriously considered doing because again, I see the modern GOP has a serious threat to democracy.
BUT....I stuck with forward because I decided that I couldn't abandon my advocacy for UBI and RCV. Forward 1.0 was like, more or less my dream political party. It wasn't perfect, but it aligned with me to an insane degree and heavily reflected my political ideology in the post 2020 environment.
And given my conviction on these issues and how passionate I am for issues like UBI, I just couldn't back away from the movement. I mean, what the rest of the country does is up to them, but advocating for UBI is basically my life purpose as I see it (see, you CAN have a sense of purpose without working a BS job), and yeah. I just can't back away from that.
But if FORWARD backs away from it...well....that just tells me to abandon forward. I no longer have any reason to back this movement if the original vision is gone. Again, all this does is make me want to support the democrats. Because honestly, given the threats pointed out in this article, the democrats are a better solution for now. And given the position on social issues like abortion, again, might as well vote democrat.
Like...seriously, they just rediscovered the enlightened centrism of the democratic party.
The problem is we dont have a functioning left. Because the dems are TOO centrist already (on economics).
What we need is a more left vision on economics, but a more centrist vision on cultural issues. Yes, break the two party duopoly and go to the center on cultural issues. The right are a bunch of crazy fundies, and the left are a bunch of crazy postmodernist. We need a sane centrist humanist alternative here. Something that basically is nominally left but without the ideological baggage.
On economic issues...well...the problem is we have two right wing parties. We need a new left.
Right now we have the third way centrists who are already too moderate. The progressives who are stuck in 1960s labor politics, or alternatively marxism, and are too dogmatic to compromise with where they crap on yang's, quite frankly, superior vision. And yang just...has the evolution the 21st century left needs.
That's the thing. The left NEEDS yang. The ONLY reason Yang is a "centrist" on economics is because the left is too dogmatic in what it is, and claims that yang is more moderate based on ideological circlejerking. I dont even think UBI is more right wing than most of what the left offers. As an ex conservative, I would've seen UBI as akin to communism. Now we got communists calling it a right wing plot or something. it's freaking crazy.
But yeah. Honestly....the only reason Im a moderate at all is because the progressive left, which, btw holds no actual power they just talk a lot of crap, calls me one for not agreeing with their tribalism.
The actual democratic party with power is basically as moderate and useless as this new forward party is.
So for me, yang was always about offering another vision of "left".
But to actually go all "the democrats are too extreme and we need something even centrister" is just...no. No, no.
Again, crap on the far left all you want on cultural issues.
but on economics, we do need a vision that is more...left wing than what we have. It doesnt need to be marxism, if anything I like the humanist approach yang basically has. It just has to be more compelling than what the dems offer.
Honestly, this party is a mistake. This merger is a mistake. This is literally the worst thing yang could've done to forward. This is a nightmare. And I can't support it.
Unless yang explains himself, I'm done. He's lost a supporter.
No comments:
Post a Comment