Home | About | Donate

 The Working Families Party Gives an Eyes-Wide-Open Endorsement to Hillary Clinton


 The Working Families Party Gives an Eyes-Wide-Open Endorsement to Hillary Clinton

John Nichols

The critical decision for the Working Families Party during the 2016 presidential election cycle was to endorse Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination. As a progressive political organization that works to move the politics of the Democratic Party and the nation to the left, the WFP recognized last fall that it needed to be on board with the progressive-populist bid that Sanders was mounting.


Uh oh. More sell out Wall Street shills.


After Obama's first 4 years I woke up and realized I'd been duped. (I had misgivings about voting for him the first time after his FISA vote but went ahead). A friend said we should vote for him then "hold him accountable." Do people honestly believe that these politicians worry about being "held accountable" by ordinary citizens with no money? What, exactly, does it mean to hold them accountable? Refuse to vote for them again?


Candidate "A" makes a promise to potential voters: "If you vote for me, I will do such-and-such once in office." Is that not a VERBAL CONTRACT made with thousands of voters before thousands of witnesses? When Candidate "A" suddenly ignores that promise (which got him/her elected) after entering office, how can that not be BREACH OF CONTRACT? Why are our courts not jammed-to-paralysis with class-action suits against such liars, brought by citizen groups enraged by being conned? When liar Hillary or liar Donald says "I will do this, this, and not do that" get it signed in blood, and then sue for default if necessary. Why just GIVE control of our country over to liars?


With Clinton having a 25 point lead in NY I doubt if getting the WPF line in NY will matter much in that state. Since the WPF endorsed Clinton in 2000 and 2006 I believe and Clinton has since moved further left this endorsement makes sense and certainly would be expected. What seems most interesting is that almost 70% of the party members voted to endorse her. That shows that many people who belong to the WPF are not buying the attacks on her and realize for the most part they lack any basis.


That's an excellent point. But you probably cannot guess the real explanation (hint, it is not money in politics). To find our why this is so true I would suggest reading a new book called "Democracy for realists. Why elections do not produce responsive government" by Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels. It turns out based on scientific surveys political scientists have known the explanation for years yet despite all the information they have found out virtually none of it has affected the views of voters or the press.


this is yet one more betrayal of membership.
WFP knows full well the time for "holding accountable" is prior to the endorsement or awarding of votes, not afterward.
The single least credible argument to vote for someone is, "we'll hold them accountable". No, you won't, because you won't have a single mechanism with which to do this. And the one you had, you just gave away.


Work inside or outside the system does it matter? All representatives get offers they can't refuse.

Direct Democracy NOW!


• OH YEAH ...
Like the WFP could EVER hold anyone "accountable"!
... what a flimsy excuse for cowardice when at LAST they had a chance to support a popular movement with the Greens this year.
— They are selling out with the flimsiest of excuses to a corporate shill party.


This doesn't wash:

1) Defeat Trump - a plan, but not an argument.
2) Elect progressives. Elected Democrats have lined up behind Clinton. There are zero or near-zero progressives left within the party.
3) Hold Clinton accountable. How? When? Clinton has actually pre-failed these promises, which makes this a pre-failed promise as well.
4) Obviously, "Working Families" has nothing to do with the next generation of progressives, sadly, except by virtue of abandoning them.

This is bitter, and embittering.


Is anyone surprised? The Working Families Party is the Democratic Party under a different label to prevent people from voting for the Green Party or any other real left third party. Clinton promised to support working families as she always has -- well that's a relief! Give me a break. Nichols is making something out of nothing but enough people get the Working Families gimmick, a new label for the unpopular Democratic Party.


Too bad you just did not tell people what the book claims.


I respect John Nichols and his ability to articulate and think. But John knows that there have been groups (like PDA) that have working outside (and inside too) for years...striving to make the Democratic Party more democratic...and it hasn't worked. Au contraire...it has become increasingly a party of Wall Street and Big Corporate Money...neoliberal. Many at the grassroots bottom still work their little hearts out to elect better people ...but somehow...either they don't make it to the top or they evolve into that top. And to think that they can influence her after the election flies in face of precedent.


"...hold her accountable."

Otherwise they'll withhold all those millions of Working Family Party votes.

No Democrats
No Republicans
No More


Let's seewhata year from now looks like???...I'm giving BERNIE Sanders s "Our Revolution" a chance ...so we will see what the first 100days looks likeandat any point Hillary starts cavingwe should organize a million person margin on. DC in support of the issues that BERNIE Sanders put forward during the campaign. The broadest coalition possible is absolutely critical... I. Have no illusions. About the right wing of the Dems....I'm trusting that BERNIE. Can mobilise through "Our. Revolution" the March on DC when Hillary ttys to sell us out. I would hope the Greens join the March too!


Geeze I need to work on my typos!


It IS indeed quite sickening to see WFP endorsing fracking, the TPP, union bashing and foreign military adventurism. I'm just not seeing how that's going to help a single working family. I can however see how it will destroy thousands of working families.


Makes it sound like a pro-child labor lobbying group doesn't it? And now I'm not so sure but what it might be just that.


I now suspect that their idea of accountability will be to tell all of us what a great choice Clinton made when she nominates an anti-labor, anti-family, pro-Wall Street, pro-corporations Supreme Court nominee.


I noticed that too!