Reply #66: Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I appreciate them.

[cali]

Yes, I do understand the frustration you describe with the two party system and with the convergence of the parties on key issues. I look at the bankruptcy law that so many dems supported as emblematic of that convergence. It goes way beyond war and peach issues to the looming issue of corporate control of our law making bodies. That's why I'm so big on IRV. It really would be a huge step forward in opening up the two party system.

I do have trouble with the "there's no difference between the parties" line, and although I'm sure you're right that it is oft used as a rallying cry, quite often it is used literally; I'm convinced of that. Just as I'm convinced, given the context, that often cries of Dennis is the only real dem, are meant literally as well. And we're not talking about statements in which he is compared to other dems running for president, but statements comparing him to all other dems in the Congress.

You claim that increasing numbers of dems feel disenfranchised, and that may well be true, but whether it's the extremism of the republicans (I tend to think that's it) or some other reason, more, not less people are identifying as dems. Just check the recent enormous Pew poll/report. So although I believe you're probably correct that some long time dems are feeling disenfranchised, the party doesn't seem to have much motivation to be broadly inclusive of those who identify as being on the left. I don't feel particularly disenfranchised; perhaps because I don't identify that strongly with the party, and because in my state there is the opportunity to keep building the Progressive Party.

I think the Dem party has the opportunity to move back toward the left in the coming years. I suspect that's a pendulum that's inexorably swinging, but unless we do something about corporate influence, we won't be able to take advantage of the potential.

cali