<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Free Speech Now</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.freespeechnow.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.freespeechnow.org</link>
	<description>A Blog on Politics and Cultural Transformation</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:18:35 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Hijacking the Political Process &#8212; Just for Fun! by Liam</title>
		<link>http://www.freespeechnow.org/2007/04/01/hijacking-the-political-process-just-for-fun/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>Liam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:12:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.freespeechnow.org/2007/04/01/hijacking-the-political-process-just-for-fun/#comment-6</guid>
		<description>One person responded with the concern that re-registering as Green (or whatever, non-Dempublican) would weaken progressive voices in the Democratic Party and prevent voters from influencing who the Democratic candidate is.  Below is my response:

--

The caucuses and primaries don't start until January, 2008.  The "Hyper-Tuesday" which will include California and New York is February 5, 2008.


Today is April 8, 2007. The primary is nearly a year away.


There is plenty of time between now and then to re-register!


If it seems like voting in the Democratic primary makes sense, I have until January 16, 2008 to decide. In fact, I think it probably *will* make sense to vote in the Democratic primary, for the reasons you mention.


Re-registering *now* is more about jerking the Democratic leadership around a bit.  A way of expressing dissatisfaction with their continued funding of the war.


Would people re-register back to Democrat?  I think the kind of person who would be sophisticated enough (or desperate enough) to adopt this strategy in the first place would still be wise enough in 2008 to re-register.


Polling in January --
&lt;blockquote&gt;
The Post-ABC poll found that 53 percent of Americans favored setting a deadline for troop withdrawals. Among those who favored a deadline, 24 percent said they would like to see U.S. forces out within six months and 21 percent called for the withdrawals to be completed within a year. The rest of those who supported a timetable said they do not support withdrawing all troops until at least a year from now.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

And that's *all* Americans, not just Democrats!  In California the numbers are even more striking.


The point is that in continuing funding of the war(s), the Democrats are pursuing a strategy that is strongly opposed by a majority of Americans, an even greater majority of Democrats, and a massive majority of Democrats in California and New York, and other high population, liberal states.  But because there is no viable political choice, Dems can get away with that.


A significant exodus from the Democratic party *right now* might have several consequences --
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Strengthen more progressive Democratic voices and candidates like Kucinich.
&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Pull regressive ones more to the left.
&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Strengthen influence of whatever party re-registrants choose, e.g. Green.
&lt;/li&gt;&lt;li&gt;Persuade Dems to take a tougher stance toward Bush and the war.
&lt;/li&gt;&lt;/ul&gt;

How would the DLC react if they lost even, say, 10% of registered Democrats? I'm not sure. They might be sanguine in the belief that those voters would come back by the primary, or the general election.  Or, they might panic.  Or, they might adjust their behavior to better reflect the wishes of their constituencies.  I don't know.  I would be curious to see, though, wouldn't you?


I don't see much of a down side to this strategy, frankly.  And there are several possible positive outcomes... including the edification of creating a little political drama.


The situation in the Middle East will not improve in the next year, from a U.S. elite point of view. It is likely to get worse.  Maybe much worse.  Popular dissatisfaction with both parties can be predicted to grow commensurately.


Voters will come to see the Dems as partially responsible for starting and continuing the war.  This may be wishful thinking on my part.  However, it happens to be true.  Currently the Dems are playing as if they only have to be &lt;strong&gt;less to blame than Bush&lt;/strong&gt;.  It's worth remembering that as bad as Bush's approval rating is, Congress is right down there with him.


Also, I think it's a strategy that has a chance of working.  We live in a connected age.  Suppose we were to put our collective will into this?  Persuading friends to switch parties until the primaries.  Discussing it on the *radio*, writing about it on our blogs, on other people's blogs, in letters to the editor.  Making Youtube shorts about it. Being persistent.  Look how fast things happen on the net!

If we don't like the politics of either party, re-registering Green is a way of voting None of the Above -- symbolically -- and we can do it now, we don't have to wait for 2008.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One person responded with the concern that re-registering as Green (or whatever, non-Dempublican) would weaken progressive voices in the Democratic Party and prevent voters from influencing who the Democratic candidate is.  Below is my response:</p>
<p>&#8211;</p>
<p>The caucuses and primaries don&#8217;t start until January, 2008.  The &#8220;Hyper-Tuesday&#8221; which will include California and New York is February 5, 2008.</p>
<p>Today is April 8, 2007. The primary is nearly a year away.</p>
<p>There is plenty of time between now and then to re-register!</p>
<p>If it seems like voting in the Democratic primary makes sense, I have until January 16, 2008 to decide. In fact, I think it probably *will* make sense to vote in the Democratic primary, for the reasons you mention.</p>
<p>Re-registering *now* is more about jerking the Democratic leadership around a bit.  A way of expressing dissatisfaction with their continued funding of the war.</p>
<p>Would people re-register back to Democrat?  I think the kind of person who would be sophisticated enough (or desperate enough) to adopt this strategy in the first place would still be wise enough in 2008 to re-register.</p>
<p>Polling in January &#8211;</p>
<blockquote><p>
The Post-ABC poll found that 53 percent of Americans favored setting a deadline for troop withdrawals. Among those who favored a deadline, 24 percent said they would like to see U.S. forces out within six months and 21 percent called for the withdrawals to be completed within a year. The rest of those who supported a timetable said they do not support withdrawing all troops until at least a year from now.
</p></blockquote>
<p>And that&#8217;s *all* Americans, not just Democrats!  In California the numbers are even more striking.</p>
<p>The point is that in continuing funding of the war(s), the Democrats are pursuing a strategy that is strongly opposed by a majority of Americans, an even greater majority of Democrats, and a massive majority of Democrats in California and New York, and other high population, liberal states.  But because there is no viable political choice, Dems can get away with that.</p>
<p>A significant exodus from the Democratic party *right now* might have several consequences &#8211;</p>
<ul>
<li>Strengthen more progressive Democratic voices and candidates like Kucinich.
</li>
<li>Pull regressive ones more to the left.
</li>
<li>Strengthen influence of whatever party re-registrants choose, e.g. Green.
</li>
<li>Persuade Dems to take a tougher stance toward Bush and the war.
</li>
</ul>
<p>How would the DLC react if they lost even, say, 10% of registered Democrats? I&#8217;m not sure. They might be sanguine in the belief that those voters would come back by the primary, or the general election.  Or, they might panic.  Or, they might adjust their behavior to better reflect the wishes of their constituencies.  I don&#8217;t know.  I would be curious to see, though, wouldn&#8217;t you?</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see much of a down side to this strategy, frankly.  And there are several possible positive outcomes&#8230; including the edification of creating a little political drama.</p>
<p>The situation in the Middle East will not improve in the next year, from a U.S. elite point of view. It is likely to get worse.  Maybe much worse.  Popular dissatisfaction with both parties can be predicted to grow commensurately.</p>
<p>Voters will come to see the Dems as partially responsible for starting and continuing the war.  This may be wishful thinking on my part.  However, it happens to be true.  Currently the Dems are playing as if they only have to be <strong>less to blame than Bush</strong>.  It&#8217;s worth remembering that as bad as Bush&#8217;s approval rating is, Congress is right down there with him.</p>
<p>Also, I think it&#8217;s a strategy that has a chance of working.  We live in a connected age.  Suppose we were to put our collective will into this?  Persuading friends to switch parties until the primaries.  Discussing it on the *radio*, writing about it on our blogs, on other people&#8217;s blogs, in letters to the editor.  Making Youtube shorts about it. Being persistent.  Look how fast things happen on the net!</p>
<p>If we don&#8217;t like the politics of either party, re-registering Green is a way of voting None of the Above &#8212; symbolically &#8212; and we can do it now, we don&#8217;t have to wait for 2008.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Hijacking the Political Process &#8212; Just for Fun! by Liam</title>
		<link>http://www.freespeechnow.org/2007/04/01/hijacking-the-political-process-just-for-fun/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>Liam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:07:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.freespeechnow.org/2007/04/01/hijacking-the-political-process-just-for-fun/#comment-5</guid>
		<description>Also, see this article by David Lindorff:
http://counterpunch.com/lindorff04032007.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, see this article by David Lindorff:<br />
<a href="http://counterpunch.com/lindorff04032007.html" rel="nofollow">http://counterpunch.com/lindorff04032007.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 300 and Others by Liam</title>
		<link>http://www.freespeechnow.org/2007/03/27/300-and-others/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Liam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 18:58:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.freespeechnow.org/2007/03/27/300-and-others/#comment-4</guid>
		<description>An interesting article and collation of responses from around the world regarding 300 can be found here:
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/03/281/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An interesting article and collation of responses from around the world regarding 300 can be found here:<br />
<a href="http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/03/281/" rel="nofollow">http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/03/281/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
