Home | About | Donate

From Resisting Trump To What?


From Resisting Trump To What?

Les Leopold

Resistance is breaking out all over: the women’s marches, the immigration airport protests and the defiant Sally Yates, the State Department mass dissents, the battle for the Supreme Court, with much more to come.

But where are we going? Are we simply calling for a return to the pre-Trump status quo of runaway inequality, the largest prison population in the world, inadequate and costly health care, unjust immigration policies and accelerating climate change? Or do we have a new vision for America? If so, what is it and how do we fight for it?


Thank you Les. Been saying this for some time. The power of our individual organizations will explode if we can all come together under one movement. We can take back this country, we just have to get closer together as a protest and a voting bloc. It's time to put differences aside and get organized to push this fascist pig out and rebuild our government as a true democracy.


I propose we found a new political party called the "Independent Voter Party," as we will begin with more voters than either of the two corporate political parties. To eliminate the influence of $ on successful candidates, while still remaining competitive, the amount of all political donations will be anonymous; thus, the name.


Les Leopold is one smart cookie, and raises really important questions here. It's well worth reading Goodwyn on the Populist Movement as a primer for building one. We the People have a huge technological twist in our favor, one we all get the basics down. Of particular interest to me was the way the populists used independent media and cross cultural persuasion.


Mr. Leopold's assessment of the situation is depressingly spot-on, and his points about the need to organize, organize, organize are spot-on. But one gripe:

"Unions that represent workers in manufacturing have found that up to 50 percent of their members (who voted) voted for Trump"

What exactly does "up to" mean? Why not report the average percentage? I suspect it is lower. And I'd also like to see some hard data supporting his assertions of large numbers of Sanders primary-voters who voted for Trump. Sure, some did this. But was it "millions"?

Any organizing of a new political formation needs accurate data before they waste their resources trying to convert the majority of Trump voters who have always been loyal Republicans rather than the far more fertile ground of the greater numbers who did not vote at all, and those who voted (mostly very unenthusiastically) for Clinton. This includes a majority of those with household incomes less than $50k.


People are dreaming if they think that the Democratic Party will save us.
The Democratic Party is selling us all out right and left.
(Or should I say that they are selling us out left and left?)

The Democratic Party is the reason we are in the pickle that we are in now.


The people leading the Democratic Party are selling us out - not the physical desks, office space, PC's, clerical staff, mail and e-mail lists, and funds in the bank. Organizations can and do change - and changing an organization is a lot easier than starting from scratch. It is up to us.


You lost your country in 1963.

Until this is not only universally acknowledged, but the cover-up and those involved unmasked - things will only get worse.

"There's nothing wrong with ships - it's the men in them."
- unknown


We need to start now in order to get progressives into office at all levels of government in 2018.
The third party approach is not the answer because the system is rigged, especially the primary process as we saw with the DNC and Bernie’s campaign. The best route may be to take over the DNC and confront the corporate/sold out establishment democrats head on in the primary process.
The new group “justicedemocrats.com” have a way to nullify the DNC which is not progressive and is able to derail third party efforts that threaten them. They, in fact, are the reason we are now stuck with Trump as the DNC undermined Bernie’s primary campaign in their quest to ram HRC down our throats.
The answer is to take the corporate money out and replace it with $27 donations from the people. Anyone can take the pledge; incumbents or those who want to run as a Progressive. No money goes to the DNC, the party or the establishment democrats that remain bought by Wall Street and corporations, money goes to Progressives who run **_
_** the likes of Booker, Heitkamp, Warner, Murray, etc. There is one essential question to ask all politicians or aspiring politicians: Who owns you? The Justicedemocrats strategy allows them to answer that question.
Check the site "justicedemocrats.com", look at their platform and donate if you can. There are 435 house, 33 senate and 14 governorships up for grabs in 2018. JD has only been active for a little over a week now and they already have 100,000 who signed on and almost 2,000 who want to run as a Progressive at some level.


the word 'AGAINST' was dropped from my post. The whole idea is run against the establishment democrats


I went over to the justice democrats site. The platform is quite good; even mentions the wars, which Bernie gave short shrift to. I see the donations are collected by Act Blue. Hmm. What guarantee is there that this "justice democrats" donation doesn't go into regular Democratic coffers? Who is in charge of this money; who determines how it is spent.

Far as I could tell, the website is silent about these questions.

One thing I don't want to do is benefit Democrats, period.


It's a great piece, asking questions and brainstorming strategies about next steps. This is good.

I notice that Leopold does not mention the wars and huge defense expenditures.

Bernie gave the wars pretty short shrift as well (as do all Dems), and I can't understand why.

My reasoning: the money that goes to war can't go somewhere productive. Until we slay that dragon, very little of a progressive wish list can go into effect.


Wars and defense expenditures have absolutely nothing to do with organizing. This article was about organizing. We need to do that first - meetings, by-laws and statements of principles, member lists, agendas, dues and fundraising, offices, then drawing up specific platforms and running candidates - first local, then state, then national - losing, losing, losing, then finally winning. Way down the road, once we have succeeded at that, we will have the power to do away with militarism.

Sorry; there no shortcuts, and the most important work is pretty boring.


The entire rationale and purpose is to OPPOSE the establishment democrats at the primary level. This is designed to be a hostile takeover of the DNC and establishment democrats. But, your question is a good one, I'll look into it to see how they are handling this issue.


Oh, and it also occurred to me that you are conflating federal government expenditures with money for political party organizing. The two have nothing to do with each other.


Well, a variety of topics have been offered by diverse participants as a motive for and for organizing. What I observe is that the wars and Pentagon expenditures are infrequently (if ever) referred to as a motivator. We don't have to agree that the wars are a key, a central piece of the puzzle. But sooner or later, the diverse, and sometimes single issue constituencies will need to find a way to articulate a vision that is coherent and tied together. There shouldn't be any elephants in the room.


Yes, the old "Power to the People" can become a true People Power,...Rise Together! Everybody is welcome.


America needs a courageous new leader. Someone who perhaps is happy with his hard earned modest personal fortune and has no further craving for more. Someone who truly feels the pain of the underprivilaged; someone who understands the plight of the medically uninsured; someone who has read and comprehends the words of the Gospels of Jesus. Someone who's love of greater humanity, though it be so often thankless, he will attempt to comfort in the face of and at the expense of insatiable greed.


Common Dreams is so mired in the usual type of thinking, the thinking that we've always had, two party system, Wall Street, taxes. So old hat. So 19th century. We need other ways of living not forced to live in this ridiculous hierarchy of force and misery. How about something that runs on inspiration? Surely your imagination can reach beyond the two-party system and the same old same old? What about a cannabis economy? One built on a cannabis currency? What about a currency based on carbon sequestration? What about a stock exchange based on cannabis? We can restore the earth and make it remunerative by designing systems that incentivize the right behavior. Surely you can think outside this stupid box and expand your mind! It's not that if you want the two-party system you can't have it, no. You can have it, but don't be putting that rubbish on everyone. That box is too small for all of us now. Some of us will move on.


There's more to it than the middle class perspective. A good many knew that the years of the Obama administration represented our last chance to turn things around. Liberals spent these years maintaining a pep rally for the middle class (and to hell with the poor). We talked about gay marriage as a "human right," after stripping the US poor of their most basic human rights (UN's UDHR) of food and shelter. BLM! was quickly accompanied with "...and white ones don't." (note: The majority of victims of police violence have been poor and white.)

We're more split apart by class and race than we were a decade ago. Divide and conquer. The hard right won.