Unity08. A people's movement to take our country back.

Quite Simply, unity08 does not have enough strength to do anything by itself. If it does develop into a 3rd party, it wont be for 8 - 16 years, depending on how this election goes.

Old icons, icons and more icons all from the same house... the opposite of what the people cry for! - Earn Snyder
Modern Progressive Independent (poor speller:)
For more policies visit www.appyp.com/fix_main.html

This movement is not here to win the election, but be participants in fixing the great system that we already have... We will accomplish this by over representing technology, something the two parties cannot and are not willing to do unless arm twisted behind back... for this reason Unity08 needs a radical and young ticket willing to throw their political career head first into the future at the same time standing up for this Republic and her working class people above all else! You expect to find this with someone versed in the two headed beast? Or someone retired from such a crew of thiefs? I doubt this will draw much more than a giggle from the people... - Earn Snyder
Modern Progressive Independent (poor speller:)
For more policies visit www.appyp.com/fix_main.html

Hey, consider this: What about folks who once belonged to one of the two major parties but have since dropped out of the political scene due to retirement or past defeat?

Dick Gephardt of Missouri and former Senator Gary Hart of Colorado come to mind. So does former State Comptroller of Texas John Sharp and former Senator John Breaux of Louisiana. Sharp and Breaux are Democrats, and I lean Republican, but I'd vote for either of them in a heartbeat.

Comment anyone????

In the long-run, I agree that the current two party system is completely broken. One of the realities of the day is that 99.9% of the vialbe candidates are currently a member of one of them. I believe that finding one from each party to run as a team; we can begin to break the system down. The Unity08 team in my view correctly sees this movement as a one-shot deal, because once you break the duopoly apart, you can BEGIN the process of real political reform. I've said this before in other posts and I'll say it again. I believe that in the long-term we need to utilize Instant Runoff Voting and Proportional Representation in order to have a truly representative democracy.

For information about voting and democracy in the USA see the Center for Voting and Democracy website at
http://www.fairvote.org

Steve, stick around and keep making a case for an independent candidate of your choosing. Ultimately, we are after someone that can work with other with an ultimate to work from the center. Most folks thinks there are a few Rs and Ds that might qualify....but you probably have to look outside the legislators to find them.

Bill"for what we are together"

RET,

If most of the people in the group are in favor of tinkering with the present system then so be it. The philosophy page should state that clearly, then I will wish you luck and be on my way to look for a different group.

But with all due respect if you don't want to leave your party then why don't you just work within the existing party strcture to effect movement toward the center? I think the answer is that you can't do this because the parties are fundamentally broken (see philosophy page). How can it be wise to reproduce these broken systems inside a new movement like U08?

Finally does the leadership of U08 honestly think the parties are going to emphrace this? IMHO there is a snowball's chance in hell that either side will tolerate someone from the "enemy camp" being the veep on their ticket.

Best,

Steve

_______________________________________
Steve in AZ

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to
take it anymore

Steve,

I understand your discomfort with the abiguity.

Though I think reading the FAQ and the "What we believe" section the Founders have communicated that predominately the goal is to move things to the center and in essence put the wheels back on the system NOT some revolutionary shock to the system.

I goodly number of us attracted by the ambiguous marketing would bolt if thing dropped on the revolutionary side. We listened to the "The leaders of both parties are well intentioned..." and "you don't need to leave your Party" and "...but our objective is to fix the old parties." and would feel sorely cheated with a bait and switch.

I don't think Unity08 has to be ambiguos at all in the long run. The pragmatic center of the country can be defined, and can be defined in a viable way push for an agenda and ticket.

Further, Unity08 can very much be about leading not following, not looking for opinion polls (though the founders seem to want to rely on that) but identifying the center and leading people back from the fringes. So regardless of whether the general mood is shifting left or right Unity08 does not have to follow but can anchor itself and the nation in the pragmatic center.

Unity08 calling is to build the center and I believe that will be manifested in the two parties.

vry,

RET

Solomon K. asks why Unity 08 can't be both a movement for something different and a movement to support centrists in the current system. There are at least four reasons.

1. It's politics as usual. The current political state of the art is to take ambiguous positions on most issues so you can avoid being held responsible for your commitments. Examples: John Kerry votes for the Iraq war even though he is really against it. George Bush attaches statements to bills he signs saying he won't faithfully execute them. I could go on with many, many other examples.
   
2. It's reactive rather than proactive. It's riding the fence until you see which way things are going to break, then following rather than leading.
   
3. It's unfocused. It would be hard enough to do a good job of one or the other, let alone both. These ideas have different "markets" if you will, and success is most likely to come if U08 picks one and concentrates on it.
   
4. Most importantly, it's hard to identify with. Without picking a direction you can't have a clear message that people can buy into and rally around. I, personally, don't really want to be involved with an effort to "fix" the two-party system. So until I see some clarification about what this movement is about, I'm not jumping in. A lot of other people with whom I've shared the link have the same reaction: U08 doesn't know what it wants to be yet, other than "not the status quo."

__________________________________
Steve in AZ

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to
take it anymore

Ruth said:" The "traditional candidates" would be forced to attend to our agenda to receive our votes." This goes right to the strategic election play I expect from Rs and Ds when we feild a formidable ticket. They will both claim they already own the middle in terms of the candidates they offer at the time. Cheney/Rove sold GWB as that bill of goods in case you forgot. Most candidates for president claim a run from the middle. If three candidates say the same thing instead of two, does that make the third true and the others not true.

Unity08 will win with personality and a few highly focused and messaged issues. Everyone will claim they can and will reign in the polarization in the country making it an unfocusable issue in U08's favor. But taking the country back from corporate and special interest ownership will catch Rs and Ds where they can not effectively fight back.

Bill"for what we are together"

Ruth,

Don't you think there are some left wing extremist that need to be removed from office and who have done just as much harm to the constitution we love so much?

vry,

RET

I am new to this forum, but have been thinking about the kinds of things Unity08 seems to be wrestling with for several years. I'd appreciate some feedback on my remarks.... At this moment in our history, I believe that the most crucial political issue we have to face is the dismantling of our Constitution at the highest levels of our government. I believe that our Constitution and our system are terrific; it is the people in charge who are corrupting the system, not the system itself that is the problem. Far right wing fundamentalists of both a religious and political/economic nature have hijacked our system and are literally destroying our country in their quest for power. They are not just Republicans, although, in my opinon, most are. In the short term, we must be sure to be able to remove these people from office and, at the very least, take away from those in office what power we can during a mid-term election year by changing the composition of the Congress. Although intellectually I love the concept of separate candidates, in reality I am afraid that if we actually field Unity08 candidates for President and VP in 2024, the result may well be that the well-organized, far right wing will again be successful in electing their candidate. I personally, would be much more interested in creating, through Unity08, a critical mass of voters of all party affiliations who are committed to voting as a block for the Democratic or Republican candidate for President and VP who most closely reflect the values and positions of the organization. This would involve achieving two things: first, Unity08 needs to mount a convention which would develop a Unity08 platform of issues and positions, and second, we need to grow the membership to the point where enough people agree to act as a unit to attract the established parties' and their candidates' collective attention....sort of a huge special interest group whose special interest is in the preservation of democracy for all Americans. The "traditional candidates" would be forced to attend to our agenda to receive our votes. I see no problem in endorsing candidates from different parties for each position...it could strengthen the race for VP in fact. Ruth Davis in Arizona

Prodigal,

"Oldbim" is precisely a fine example of a certain niche U08 is going to attract for awhile until the centrist and moderate agenda is firmly established and our marketing goes from trying to attract anyone unhappy with the status quo to one target at the alienated center of the political spectrum.

You can tell from the post that he is very interested in radical change and that is all very well and good but not what Unity08 is about.

vry,

RET

I thought the other guys were asking too much, but then you come along and suggest we just totally start over with a constitutional convention. Point out to me a system of government that has proven to stop corruption and I'll show you my pet unicorn. Until angels come down from heaven to take the reigns of government, corruption will always be a problem.

And the two major parties are decidedly different on most policy issues. I'm not sure why stating the obvious that they are both corrupt somehow makes them into the same party?

I worry when I see the use of "centrist" (center? you have got to be kidding - I cant run fast enough to the right to even see the center) and "moderate" (now there is a donut hole of zero value, imo) from the Founders. you want change? dont even entertain the concept of using the existing (so-called) two party system - we all know it is ONE PARTY, the corporate party. tackle the real issue: is our form of capitalism corrupted beyond repair? If so, no major party "moderate" or "centrist" will help us in any way to restructure our nation.

can we please start with a constitutional convention - we are lost in the twisted mess of greed and corruption and we must design this nation from scratch.

thank you,
j

WARNING: Due to Presidential Executive Orders,
the National Security Agency may have read this
email without warning, warrant or notice. The agency
may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight.

I'm not sure why we can't, at least in the beginning, both try throwing our support towards independent, moderate and centrist types within the parties while building towards more fundamental change in the long run?

You are right that we don't need the equivalent of "deBaathification." After all, look how well that has worked for Iraq! My point has more to do with the framing of what you're doing that with excluding current politicians.

Is this to be movement for fundamental change, or a vehicle to empower centrists in the existing parties? On the page about your philosophy, the "We Believe" section makes you sound like the former, while the "Our Goals" section makes you sound like the latter. If you are the former (my hope), then your goal should not be to get people from the existing parties into your movement, but to get people *out of* the existing parties and into your movement. It would be more consistent with this goal to say:

Goal One is the election of a Unity Ticket for President and Vice-President of the United States in 2024 -– headed by a an independent or former member of a major party -- that represents the mainstream political spectrum of the United States.

_______________________________________
Steve in AZ

I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to
take it anymore

This is a good question and one that we get asked sometimes. They say, "If both parties are so bad, why would you choose candidates from either party?"

There is both a practical and political dimension to this question.

To begin with, there are some very fine people in both parties who are moderates, are not owned by the special interest groups and extreme elements. These people, by definition, will never win the nomination of their party. Why should we not try to attract some of these highly qualified people - and there are a handful in each party, NOT dozens - who we feel could represent the core goals of Unity08 and be attractive candidates and effective in office?.

Secondly, a more practical concern, we are challenging the current political process which we believe is flawed and not working properly. Our huge advantage is that we are right and most people know it. Our greatest downside is that many people believe what we are attempting to do is impossible - they are wrong.

But, we would tend to be taken more seriously - we think - if we had a ticket that reached across this enormous breech that exists in our system and had a highly qualified and experienced person from each party on our ticket.

BUT, that is just my personal view. We are a grass-roots organization, and we will have a Rules Committee and other mechanisms where persons like yourself can challenge and change some of our initial assumptions.

So, what I have written here is NOT the final word, but my personal opinion at the current time. I certainly am open to listening to counter arguments and possibly changing my mind..

I personallyalso believe that all of the talents and smarts in our country reside in 535 members of Congress and in the 50 statehouses. I think that there are people in the private sector who have the interest, knowledge, skill set and ability to lead our country.

Thanks for good question.

Steve, While I agree with your (and unity08's) assessment of the current state of the two parties, I do feel that there are intelligent, rational, and pragmatic people who are members of each of the main parties. Due to the current state of politics, asking someone to leave their party to run for the unity08 nomination would be akin to asking them to commit political suicide. Sure if they left their party and then got elected as a unity party they would potentially go down in history as a hero, but pragmatically speaking, we will have much more interested from "larger name" politicians if we don't require them to leave their party.

Not to mention, that unity08 is just as open to independents..so if the politicans themselves make the effort to leave their party, then they may do so. And if that's what you're looking for, you can reward them with your vote in the online convention.

I'm in no way involved with the founders, so this is all just my opinion. I'm sure we'll hear from one of the founders on this matter in due time.