Republicans Rejoice
Once again, moderates are under attack. No more big tent, no more diversity of opinion, no more socially liberal but fiscally conservative (or visa versa).
It seems as if Montana democrats will have a choice, to either be a progressive democrat or something else. According to the new Progressive Democrats of Montana (PDooM), progressives are the only true democrats
The fact is that most active Democrats are "truly progressive," believing in fair taxes, public education, human rights, economic justice and a clean environment
Here we go again. Lets see if I have this right. They won't come right out and say it, but it is basically if your not a progressive you are 1) not a true democrat or 2) you must be a republican. Its PDooM or "tweedle dee and tweedledum"
Comparing the current two-party political system to Tweedledee and Tweedledum
But we want to work together, unless you court the "imagined moderate center"
"Maybe if we put together a diversity of voices, maybe we can strengthen our own voices as well as the party's."
"We are frustrated with our friends in the Democratic Party courting some imagined 'moderate center'
PDooM members and supporters include:
Among those participating in the new group are Public Service commissioners Ken Toole, D-Helena, and Bob Raney, D-Livingston; labor leader Gene Fenderson of Helena; actress Margot Kidder of Livingston; and six Democratic legislators, Sens. Greg Lind of Missoula, Christine Kaufmann of Helena, and Dan Harrington of Butte, and Reps. Diane Sands of Missoula, and Dave Gallik and Mary Caferro of Helena.
The list of the Progressive Democrats of Montana's supporters includes the three losing candidates for state party chairman's race in 2005 - Pete Talbot of Missoula, Tracy Velazquez of Bozeman and Fenderson
PDooM does embrace democratic principles however
Memberships are $30 apiece, but people are accepted for membership only with the blessing of two-thirds of its board of directors
Can we give the GOP any larger of a platter?
Jeff Mangan
7 Comments
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (7)
I'm also curious what in this list -- "fair taxes, public education, human rights, economic justice and a clean environment" -- you would say you don't support.
In other words, does it not imply that only the "truly progressive" believe in "fair taxes, public education, human rights, economic justice and a clean environment?" I believe in those things, too, Mr. Singer, and I am a conservative/libertarian.
Of course, language is loaded, pretty much inherently.
As usual, the "big tent" is mentioned, but just how big of a tent are we going to be? Does it include anti-choice, pro-war or anti-environmental candidates? Let's have some guidelines here. The electorate doesn't want a party with no principles.
Finally, we're not third-party spoilers. We want to be involved within the framework of the Democratic Party. We want to create energy and excitement, like the kind generated by the Jon Tester campaign. Unlike Mangan's quote: "Can we give the GOP any larger of a platter?" I suggest that progressives will give the Democratic Party more people, energy and options to defeat the Republicans.
Robyn Hamilton votes to cut wages for the lowest paid service sector employees and he's a "democrat" from Missoula? His excuse is that he is a restaurant owner. Who cares, why would you, as a democrat vote to cuts low income folks wages. I hope he has a primary.
How about Hawks and Hansen voting to deny unemployment benefits to a limited amount of school employees in classified positions who typically make less than poverty level wages with no benefits - THEY ARE DEMO's???
The party stands for nothing and falls for everything. Then progressive dem's will got he way pf the New Party or any number of other attempts to progressivise the demo's. Fusion must get passed first so we can sustain a progressive movement and not consume our own.
Shame on you. At what point did the Democratic party abandon your ideals? Democrats nationwide and here in Montana are standing up for the ideals stated as this groups' main concerns. Shame on your divisiveness, shame on your misunderstanding "messaging," shame on your inability to speak to a very REAL moderate elecorate, shame on your attacks on the very people who are, for the first time in more than a decade, representing Democratic ideals. Shame on your unyeilding idealism. Democrats in Montana are stronger than they've been this quarter of a century. Shame on you for buying into Tracy's sour grapes and her wild eyed, foaming mouth agenda. Shame on you for further dividing our party.
If the big concern here is dividing the party, is publicly saying, "Shame on you" to fellow party members and writing giant tirades on a group of people in the party the move that is most likely to bring them back into the fold.
Honestly, if you think my idealism is unyielding, let's have a real conversation some time. My email address is pretty readily available.
I'm a progressive and a Democrat. I make no bones about that. And I do fight for an ideology, but not for no reason. I do it because I think the fights make a difference in real people's lives. If you don't get that policy matters beyond political impacts, well, shame on you.