Home | About | Donate

'Next Generation of Leaders': Our Revolution Boosts Seven Progressive Women


'Next Generation of Leaders': Our Revolution Boosts Seven Progressive Women

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

Hoping to capitalize on the grassroots energy inspired by Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign, the Our Revolution organization is fundraising for seven progressive female candidates who seek to ignite nationwide change from the ground up.


Are they all running as Democrats? The party affiliation of all these 'progressives' is mysteriously absent in this article, no doubt to conceal Bernie's Our Revolution organization is an extension of the rabidly pro-capitalist Democratic Party machine. When it starts supporting Green Party Candidates, or Socialist Workers Party candidates for that matter, then I'll believe it has 'progressive' chops. Until then it's a Democratic Party poodle.


It's not exactly plastered around on their web sites. One has to really hunt to find out, but yes, they are all Democrats. Easier just to plug their names into the search engine of choice and get a straight answer right away.
Reading the various position statements, it's clear to see that these are all well vetted, not too likely to rock the boat 'progressives'---hardly the stuff of any kind of authentic 'revolution'. I propose we retire that word, 'revolution', as it has now become sufficiently tainted and wrung out of meaning though over-use, over-exposure, and undue exploitation this campaign cycle.


A truly progressive candidate would be Janet Garrett running for Congress in Ohio's 4th Distirct against incumbent Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus. Janet speaks openly and forcefully about her top two priorities: climate change and income inequality. Our Revolution needs people like Janet.


Unfortunately it did not turn out so well for the good man Canova, he lost to Debbie W. Schultz -- no matter how disgraced the former DNC chair she still won in Florida. - Source:

Problem is: wealthy interests pour millions of funding to support their candidate of choice. Then pour millions into funding propaganda to dupe the electorate. Therefore, you cannot reform a Party that is so hopelessly entrenched and part of the oligarchy class.

The are other disturbing issues that remain part of the Democratic Party's ideology such as,

Neoconservatives (imperialist, interventionist) who have no shame in wasting taxpayers money on injudicious wars. Obama failed miserably for example - Source:

I explained in more detail about the two-party duopoly here:

Edited Post for clarification.


When you work in the organization, you'll be in a position to propose what to call it. How about some specific evidence on the candidates instead of dismissal by association? Zephyr Teachout, for one, has already been a troublemaker for the Democrats (ask Gov. Cuomo) as well as her Republican opponent.


Where are you running?


What you consistently fail to grasp is the money pulling the strings will not allow deviation beyond the status quo. The Democratic Party structure defies innovation beneficial to all but the .001%.---your dutiful apologetics not withstanding.


Ask Teachout. And how far did Bernie get? What does Warren do?

I act out of hope and commitment to work where I am, not out of duty to anyone. But thanks for the reminder that I need to send in my form to change my registration back to unaffiliated. I knew there was something else that needed mailed.


So I guess that you think that Jeremy Corbyn is a fool too, for being a member of the UK Labour Party, You know, the Blairist/neoliberal one? Or at least it used to be Blarist and neoliberal, until Jeremy and his booming new membership took the leadership?

How far would his movement gotten had he quit Labour and formed his own Tin Foil Hat Party in a cloistered corner of the internet like - say, this comment section?


The negativity of this fucking comment section is disgusting!


If you believe that all is is utterly hopeless and moneyed interests will pull the strings forever, then why don't you put yourself out of your misery right now.

Or, maybe, you can get the fuck up from your keyboard and join an organization and do something.


No - moneyed interests will pull the strings forever - in the DP. If we want to free ourselves of moneyed interests we gotta vote Green - sorry, man, but that's the way it is ...


Teachout has been a problem for Cuomo? In the same way Sanders was a problem for Clinton? or Obama?


"Reading the various position statements, it's clear to see that these are all well vetted, not too likely to rock the boat 'progressives'---"

Just like Sanders ...

It is interesting - Sanders said his efforts would be to get "progressives" elected - but it seems rather clear that he meant "prog" Dems, so i wonder, where, e.g., a Dem is running for Senate in MD against the Green, Margaret Flowers - will OR or Sanders support Flowers? She is clearly the most progressive candidate and could use the help, but why do i doubt she will get any from Sanders (she is running against a Dem, Van Hollen, who beat Donna Edwards for the Dem nomination, if that gives one a clue .... (smile) )


Is she a Dem?


The "negativity" in this comment section is mostly fueled by those of us who have figured out the game a long time ago but still held a sliver of hope that somebody, somewhere, would be able to rally the people to turn things around. We found that in Sanders and then he stabbed us in the back after he got DWS and HRC to remove the daggers out of his own back.

Bernie Sanders was our last, best hope for turning things around in this country and now that hope is dead. Bernie is a walking, talking zombie of his former self. It's no wonder that the millions of young people don't want to listen to what he says. They might not know much, but they know a phony when they see him.

My vote and my support goes to Jill Stein and the Greens, but I'm under no illusion that they have a ghost of a chance of even putting a dent in our fraudulent and corrupt electoral system. If Bernie had joined them, they would've had a chance. I'm sure they would've been able to break that 15% ceiling and been included in the debates, although I'm just as sure they would have found some loophole somewhere to exclude him, too. There's still a good chance that the election fraud machine would have still denied him a win at the polls in November, but the fact that he didn't even try speaks volumes of the futility of resistance within the halls of power.

The planet is dying, unarmed citizens are being killed in the streets, war is showing no signs of ever going away, and Wall Street criminals have all of us in a headlock.

Does pointing that out make me "negative" or simply heartbroken?


Look! We pretty much know what were getting from the Dem Party generally - pretty mainstream business as usual. However, there are afair number of progressives who goe elected as Dems. So I'm not going to discount these women simply for that.

My hope is that though Dems won't themselves take revolutulionary action, they will at least leave the door open for those who will. Repubs won't, except for rightwing reactionaries. Repubs are actively working to shut doors. If you live in a red state, like me, you'll know what I mean. That is a difference.




Pretty easy for you to find that out, and if OR isn't onto your candidate yet, to make them aware. Of course, that might require letting your cynical disdain drop for a minute and joining forces instead of sniping from the sidelines.

Keep in mind, folks, this is just the current round, working with the folks already on ballots. The real revolution is going to be in building future ballots.

Can we talk about these "Seven Progressive Women"?