Prediction

[inthecorneroverhere]

Within the next ten years, the Democratic Party will become a regional party associated with the New England states of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, and to a lesser extent, New Hampshire.

Centrist former Dems in regions outside of New England will leave the Democratic Party, but will not join the Republicans. In California, there will remain a significant Dem presence, but there will be a strong electoral force in a Progressive Party that is populist in economics and socially liberal. The Progressive Party will incorporate elements of the Greens, as well as many former Dems.

Border state progressives and Independents may form a large third party within the next five years. The name of that future party and the personnel involved are unknown at this time, but the new party will be centrist on many issues and protectionist on trade and labor issues. The new party will be populist in economics and socially moderate, but not particularly liberal. It will be associated with more regions than just the South. The religious right will stay with the Republicans but many blue-collar workers as well as people like teachers and office workers will gravitate to the new party. The Democrats will become a small party in the entire border Midwest, border state, and Southern region. This third party will also enjoy support in some of the Mountain states. Presidential elections in the South and Mountain states will involve 2 major parties: the Repukes and the new third party. The Dem's will run third, with Progressives or Greens in a distant fourth place.

The residents of Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and New York will divide out. While some will remain with the Dems, large numbers will join the California Progressives and the new third party associated with the border states and South. Presidential elections in these states may involve 4 or 5 major parties, rather than 2. All four major parties - the Dems, Repukes, Progressives, and the yet unnamed border state party, will run competitively.

The reason for my prediction is the self-aggrandizing bashing of Southerners and border state residents by many active New England Dems. This active dislike and discounting of the votes of people in the border states and South has occurred for at least twenty years, and is highly evident on this board. It is highly divisive and is not merely caused by Republican disruptors, although they support it. It comes from Northern Dem's themselves. It already has driven many Southern moderates away from the Dem party.

Some of these Southern moderates are increasingly unhappy with *shrub and this terrible economy. They are becoming disenchanted with the Repukes. But, there is a hardly a home for them in a party that bashes their entire geographical region. Thus, the viability of a third, populist party that is economically liberal but more moderate on social issues than the Greens.

[paulsbc]

1. i'd love to see a third party

especially if it combined small government / small defense philosophies with liberal ideals such as health care coverage, worker protection, abortion rights and other social programs of the left...

i'm thinking of running in Texas for the 3rd congressional seat, but the Dems have huge bad press in this region and am thinking of running as an Independent...

[TennesseeWalker]

2. Plausible Scenario

and not entirely unhealthy for the country. However, in the 2004 election, I feel that everyone must unite against Shrub by supporting the Democratic nominee, whomever that may be.

The concept of multiple parties is very interesting to me. I think the two party system is corrupt and awash in corporate cash, which allows for the corporations to take over the country and brainwash the American people. Multiple VIABLE parties would allow the people to exert more control over the policies issued, as the big 2 would not be able to say "who else are you going to vote for"?

I do feel that the South bashing has gotten out of hand. There are many progressive individuals in the south, including our Tennessee Governor, Phil Bredesen. He is restoring honor to the office of Governor, and making a good name for the Democrats in the South. His wife even uses her MAIDEN name, Andre Conte, once UNTHINKABLE down here. He is reforming our corrupt Department of Transporation, once headed only by the powerful roadbuilding lobby.

I think the anti-south people here are writing off a potential emerging base. Gun control is a big issue down here, with many refusing to vote for the Dems simply because of that attitude.

I welcome the new parties to the table AFTER this coming election. I think that Dems have a very good chance to surprise in the South, although they won't roll up the entire region.

[inthecorneroverhere]

5. Thank you for your insight!

Your insight is very interesting. I appreciate the wisdom regarding 2004.

I absolutely agree that a new Border State-Southern third party would have to take an anti-gun control position as one of its platform points. I would hope that its major platform points would include, among others:

*trade restrictions and penalties against export of U.S. jobs to low wage countries overseas
*support for significant health care reform, either strict anti-trust and price controls for health care and pharmaceutical companies, or a national health care system.
*balanced budget amendment (Repukes are obviously the main violates of this one since Reagan Administration)
*Protect U.S. territory and borders first. Rational, sound strong defense with much much less foreign intervention
*reduction in foreign aid, especially to undemocratic states]
*fair taxation and reduction in corporate subsidies (corporate welfare). Incentives for small businesses under 50 employees and generous incentives for very small businesses with 10 employees or less
*anti-trust enforcement
*conservation of forests and parks.
*support of public power entities such as the TVA. Support for non-fossil fuel modalities of power generation

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The need to stick together, until 2004 is over, is one reason I have been so adamant about this South-bashing thing.

[TennesseeWalker]

8. Nice thinking.

Support for TVA is essential. Conservatives despise TVA, because we nearly always have power, and it's CHEAP, and it's an example of how government can be MORE efficient than the free market. I also think that TVA is much more sensitive to public perception BECAUSE it's government operated.

I often make these points to my good friends here in the Republican-infested area of the Southern Appalachians. Without the government, Tennessee might not even be here. Once times get hard, people will see the light (pardon the unintentional pun). I just hate to have to hit the hard times before people wake up.

[inthecorneroverhere]

10. FDR

My favorite President was Franklin Delano Roosevelt. I think he is the President who did the most to build up this country's infrastructure. He left his mark everywhere from the TVA to parks to post offices to buildings that are of very solid construction.

He courageously prosecuted WWII as well.

I believe that Dems should emulate Roosevelt. Roosevelt was economically quite far to the left, but was socially moderate-to-even-conservative. Such a strategy would gain a lot of support in the Midwest and South.

[bicentennial_baby]

3. Again

The person that started that shit yesterday is a native Texan living in Miami. He's not a New Englander, ok?

[inthecorneroverhere]

6. my point is -

My point is not to point fingers at any particular individual. It is against the rules of this board to 'stalk' or mention individuals across threads.

The point is that in my experience there are a great number of New Englanders who bash the South. I haven't met nearly as many Pennsylvanians or Midwesterners who do this.

[never cry wolf]

4. could be but...

i don't see the dem machine leaving chicago anytime soon.

[inthecorneroverhere]

7. but...rural Illinoisians might....

....but I'd be willing to guess that the rural Illinoisians who aren't freeper types or religious rightists would be likely to join the new 'populist' party. Just guessing - using a bit of history of parties such as the Minnesota DFL, which had a very strong rural platform and rural support.

[Wwagsthedog]

9. Where is Ross Perot When We Need Him?

n/t

[HawkerHurricane]

11. Great...(rant warning)

Fragment the Democratic Party, and watch the Replutocans run things for the next 50 years or so until a new progressive party can finally unite and start picking up the peices.

I was born in the South. Selma Alabama, to be exact. My Mother's side of the family is still living there. My Aunts, Uncles and cousins are some of the most reactionary people I've ever met.

My Father's family is from NYC. They vary from far left to middle right.

I have been stationed in the South. Orlando Florida is one of the most libertarian areas I've ever seen. Norfolk Virginia is so pro Replutocan it makes me ill.

But I do not know the South. I only know these little peices of it.

I am from California. Southern California. I will match racism stories about the South with ones about San Diego (in particular, the community of Santee, called Klantee with good reason) and Orange County (So Reich Wing, they were shocked when they found out the 'serving class' not only had the right to vote, but dared to vote against Bob Dornan).

No one area has a lock on anything.

Southern Liberals are always welcome with me. Southern Reactionaries will only get the time of day if they are related.

Northern NeoCons will always get the back of my hand. Northern Liberals will get a helping hand.

United, we can take back our country.

Divided, and I'll move to someplace safer. Like Northern Ireland.

[Ardee]

12. Interesting thread

But ,Hawker, it is not those who posit such change that assume responsibility for the fragmenting of the democrats, it is the leadership of that party who must shoulder that blame. I will not dispute your truths re the finding of right wingers or racists everywhere within this nation though I must add that it is more a matter of there being a majority of them in some places and not in others.

I do not totally agree with the assesment of the thread starter but do share the view that the two party system is in its death throes.It has been a charade for a while now and that fact is sinking in faster each day.I think that liberal democrats and their counterparts in the GOP find more in common with each other than with the leadership of their party there will emerge a coalition of the left. Perhaps this will result in a breakaway from both dinosaurs and the emergenceof another party, perhaps they will find common cause within the Green Party, I do not know..........

[HawkerHurricane]

13. I fear the two party system is with us for a while yet

There have been several attempts to make it into a three party system, but it always goes back to two. Although not always the same two!