• unsettlinglymoist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I was at the rally! I was one of the last people let inside before they closed the gate, and thousands of people that didn’t get inside watched and listened from outside of the fencing, so the actual number was more than 34,000.

    Here’s a photo I took…

    And here’s Bernie…

  • Charlatan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Honestly, I’m not impressed. This is in DENVER. Take it to a blood red district and show me the numbers. This is not where Dems need to spend their time.

    • JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I agree and disagree. They need to pick up a bit of momentum, and “yes men” can help peer pressure the less dogmatic red-teamers to start thinking about their message. Then, once they hit those red states the no-men might show up a bit too and we start getting momentum through them as well

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I can really see AOC as president. She’s already at the minimum age, but I would like to see her take another 5-10 years to learn how to broaden her appeal.

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        So do I, but I wouldn’t expect her to win right now. Americans are too lazy to want change but they’ll want to be rescued from collapse. Things have to get a lot worse before enough fence-sitters will listen to her.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I’m pretty excited by this AOC/Sanders team up. I’m sure neither are perfect, and will have ideas that I disagree with. But they both have a strong reputation for sticking up for ordinary people rather than the rich and powerful. And no reputation (that I’m aware of!) for bullying, blathering, giving in to the rich, sexual abuse, or miscellaneous awful behaviour.

      And a team up between old and young is a powerful thing. Age brings wisdom, to spot things a young person might miss; and youth brings energy, understanding, and new ideas.

      AOC for 2028? Judging by other comments, it seems unlikely. But AOC later? If they stay uncompromised, stick to the values that America wants without getting bogged down in things that divide the country, and gather support organically across the country rather than relying on traditional rich-people-funding, this could be an amazing victory!

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      As to her age, if she can learn to trust wise people around her, she can do much better than an old person with experience who only sees things their own way! For that reason it might be better to run soon if possible, to have the wisdom of Sanders with her. Hopefully there’s other wise people she trusts to mentior/advise her as well.

    • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      As far as I know, they are social-democrats, full-left would be anti-capitalist or anarchist, which they are not.

    • kerrigan778@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Lol they aren’t even full left, at all. We’ve deluded ourselves into thinking common sense and not being bought by the billionaires and corporate lobbies is “full left”

  • PurpleSkull@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Trump and gang is trying to have AOC charged for terrorism, so it seems to be working. She should either get DNC leadership now or finally form her own party.

    • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Please don’t let her form a new party. As much as people say they hate the 2-party system, fragmenting the Democratic Party would be a yuge mistake at this point. We need to let the Trumpublican Party eat itself when he keels over from dementia or his final Big Mac Attack. The MAGA opportunists who rode in on his coattails will tear each other to pieces as they claw for position like rats.

      • stickly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        The maga problem isn’t just Trump. This is the culmination of decades of work by christo-fascist conservatives. They’re not resting on their laurels and lining their pockets like a normal regressive administration. Every effort is being taken to solidify their power and deconstruct any threat that might rise up post-trump. Even if they did eat themselves there won’t be a government to rebuild.

        We’re passing an inflection point in American politics. People want change and polls indicate they don’t care what side it comes from. The Democratic party has never polled lower. Being the milquetoast neoliberal corporate party is objectively the worst anchor to tie around your neck.

        AOC and Bernie’s message isn’t wildly popular on accident. That energy needs to be captured and amplified, Democratic party or not. What’s the worst that happens from a split ticket? More people stay home?

        Edit: you don’t even have to run against them to capture the Democratic party. Just have headliner progressives threaten it with a broad show of support and you force them to open up the primaries. Their policies have no support, they have no chips to call the bluff.

      • DrDeadCrash@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        The Democratic party’s plans, laid bare: Do nothing and wait for everyone to notice how awesome they are.

    • Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yup. Ideally she takes over and redirects and repairs the burning husk that is the dems. It they don’t give her leadership splintering with bernie would be a godsend

  • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    91
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    19 hours ago

    They need to organized this momentum into a proper party, maybe call it the labor party or the progress party. But most importantly they need to not be scared to use actural leftist rhetoric and appeal to class conscious workers.

    • Trees@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Onward Together Party

      EverForward Party

      Inspired Collaboration Party

      Positive Frontier Party

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Disagree. There are a huge number of republican working class that need representation, and who are not the enemy.

      The anti-1% party is a much more viable proposition than going left vs right.

          • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            14 hours ago

            You don’t have to be the 1% to vote for them.

            Leftism literally originates from replacing monarchy and aristocracy with democracy, fighting the 1% is leftism.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Like Democrats, many Republicans are just voting for the “lesser evil” and aren’t really loyal to their party. They just hate Democrats.

        A new party sidesteps and allows those “lesser evil” Republican working class voters to jump ship. They will not ever vote for a Democrat, so stop being Democrats.

        • Zink@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          This idea is so simple, and the idea of it changing the course of history would be such a dumb-timeline thing, that I am 100% convinced it would work.

          It would give them the ability to talk some harsh shit on Democrats, which could work on some Republicans. But I’d still worry that the effectiveness of their propaganda machine and the tendency of conservatives to fall in line and do as they’re told would spoil it.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Show me the conservative critique of billionaires. I know how that works on the left, but the right is about preserving power structures

          • zbyte64@awful.systems
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            17 hours ago

            Unless one of your values is to take wealth from those that don’t share your values, this is not a critique that will lead to meaningful corrections. I guess that could be a conservative value, but now you’re just doing identity politics.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          There are a few Republican representatives that claim to be pro-union, which has gotten them into office. I don’t know how much they can do when both parties have been generally anti-union.

      • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        16 hours ago

        The Democrats tried that, they tried appealing to the mythical “centrist conservative” and look where that got them, it has been proven to be a failing strategy. We dont need another “bipartisan” Democrat-like party, we need a workers party.

        • I mean, I would love that, but if we start running a third party in national elections against the Democrats and Republicans from the left, the Republicans will win even more. If we can’t get FPTP changed I’m afraid the only option I can see is to destroy and rebuild the Democrats.

          Well I guess there’s a possibility that when Trump dies the Republicans implode. I’d love to see it but their voters always toe the line. I think this time it will be whoever right wing media decides are the new bosses.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Bernie is already third party

      Why does nobody know anything about American Politics, including the Americans…

  • kingofras@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    224
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Form a new party!!! Don’t call it Labor or Labour. Don’t call it Green. Don’t call it progressive. Don’t call it socialist or liberal.

    Just give it a name that people understand and don’t have preexisting bias against. “For The People”

    Take on BOTH the democrats and GOP. Become popular overnight. Keep hammering home it is not about skin colour, race or country of origin, but about the billionaires that aren’t happy with paying no tax and having billions. Make it about the 99%.

    It is the only way you’ll get your country back without excessive violence. The two status quo parties are hollowed out from the inside. And both are infiltrated by foreign interests.

    • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      In U.S. you would still have to participate in Democratic primaries so this would come down to creating a new wing inside democratic party. This was done before and didn’t change much. The geriatric party leaders would still control everything.

    • Notyou@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      10 hours ago

      The Bull Moose Party. It will call back to Teddy Roosevelt and the first time we used progressive policies to take back from the robber barons.

    • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      104
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      That’s what Bernie is saying. He’s calling all progressives to run as Independent, aka No Party Preference, down ballot so we can shove the Corporate DNC into the GOP where they so desperately want to be anyway.

    • Doctor_Satan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      The 99% Party. It’s a slick way of calling it a worker’s party without sounding like a communist party.

    • someguy3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      Don’t don’t don’t split the vote. Not even Trump was that stupid.

      • untorquer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        It’s already split. If Democratic party runs another centrist/neoliberal candidate it will continue to be split. There is no indication that they’ll run anyone left of kamala.

        Now’s the time.

    • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      The thing is, you can “not call it socialism” all you like. The fact is that it is socialism, you have to respect people’s intelligence enough to know that they will figure that out (or be easily convinced of it, if you really need an argument that doesn’t respect their intelligence). When this happens, and even moreso when you inevitably reveal yourself to be socialist, it will make you look deeply insincere and subversive, because you yourself will have fed into this taboo and not done the work of separating the term from its negative stigma or generating positive media for it.

      Socialism is simply the fact of the matter and being socialist means caring about material reality enough to not just lie and gaslight as a means of convincing people. When you get attacked for being socialist, you will not be able to backpedal without sabotaging your own movement, because there will be a litany of evidence that you are socialist. As there should be, or you would not have the support of actual ideological socialists (remember that whole material reality thing I just mentioned).

      The material reason why socialism is a “no-no” word is because when the right attacks it, the liberal establishment does what they always do; they backpedal. Not only does this make the right’s criticism look reasonable, because it confirms there is real reason to fear being associated with socialism; but it ensures that the people only ever hear the arguments against socialism, never the arguments for it. All of the arguments which are intrinsically associated with socialism; which you have done all this work to propagate; are never connected to it optically, and the people never learn what it actually is, leaving all of your policy open to attack.

      What you are suggesting here is not the solution but exactly the issue that has brought us to this point.

      The only way that you will ever launder the term “socialism” is by openly advocating for socialism and calling it what it is when you do. You just aren’t going to beat the establishment at their own game; rather, we must show the people what it is to be respected and hear policy based in material reality that will actually address their needs, and you will win support from across the spectrum.

      • yesoutwater@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I disagree. And I don’t mean to preach, but there is a power in words and using them (or not using them). The fight over the word and meaning of socialism is not what “the people” need right now, that can come later. This has been happening in the US closing in on a century. It’s not those tolerant of material reality (as you say) you need to convince, it’s those that would benefit from “the peoples” agenda that don’t acknowledge material reality. Ride the wave of making billionaires pay.

        Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.

        Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called social security.

        Socialism is what they called farm price supports.

        Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.

        Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.

        Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.

        When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan “Down With Socialism” on the banner of his “great crusade,” that is really not what he means at all.

        What he really means is “Down with Progress–down with Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal,” and “down with Harry Truman’s fair Deal.” That’s all he means.

        • Harry Truman

        Don’t swim against this right now. These programs from the new deal and fair deal are not even called socialist by American standards anymore.

        • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          This quote is an example of what I am talking about though. Roosevelt had to take great strides to ease the great depression, because of mass protest movements at the time openly led by socialist/communist parties, but he could not go so far as to address the economic system that created the great depression. Nor could the capitalist class allow these policies to be associated with the socialists that visibly fought for them. Doing so would threaten the power of capital; this is not long after the bolshevik revolution that created the USSR, so there was major fears of similar movements taking root in the US.

          This is not Truman defending the new deal, this is him distancing the new deal from socialism.

          The new deal was not socialist, which is by design, but it was made up of things that socialists would have certainly fought for and taken even further if their effort was sincerely meant to achieve socialism.

          It’s time to stop letting socialism be used as a scare word. Sure, the loudest ones will continue to bury their heads in the sand, but those people weren’t going to be won over anyways. Furthermore, you aren’t going to win people over by talking down to them, and you cannot address their needs in a sincere manner if your base assumption is that they aren’t intelligent enough to understand their own lives.

          edit: I’m also not suggesting that we should be fighting over “the word and meaning of socialism”; precisely the opposite, in fact. I’m saying that we should be living examples of what a socialist is and what socialists advocate for. We should be seen in our communities doing the ground work of organizing and being role models for what we believe in.

          The difference between what we are accused of and what we are actually doing is stark, which can’t be pointed out if we’re constantly distancing ourselves from anyone that calls themselves socialist simply because we’re afraid of the word. There is so much present day and past evidence; from the rich history that was erased in the red scare and all of this anti-socialist sentiment; for us to draw on instead of trying to distance ourselves from the reality that what we advocate for is anti-capitalist in nature.

      • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Buddy half of American voters voted for trump. We are well past “insulting their intelligence”. The reality is that the majority of American voters are stupid, lazy, or both.

        Separately I don’t think you know what socialism is if you think progressive policies are socialist. Just because “social programs” and socialism share a common word doesn’t mean they are the same thing.

        • Match!!@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          17 hours ago

          the defining trait of the Trump voters is that they’re so scared that they will vote for whoever makes them feel safe while asking absolutely nothing of them except cowed obedience

        • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          Buddy half of American voters voted for trump.

          Incorrect. Only 63.7% of eligible voters turned out to vote in the 2024 US General Election.

          That comes out to around 155 million voters, of which around 77 million voted for Trump or ~49.8%. Democrats on the other hand got around 75 million or ~48.3%. of the vote.

          This comes out to ~31.7% of eligible voters voting Republican with ~30.8% voting Democrat.

          Less than a third of Americans wanted Trump in office, not half. Let’s get the facts straight.

          The reality is that the majority of American voters

          ~31.7% of Americans is not a majority, according to the American Heritage Dictionary.

          are stupid, lazy, or both.

          Have you considered that the actions of Republicans gerrymandering voting districts to hell and passing anti-voting laws and policies, that the actions of Democrats failing to represent their constituents by veering more and more Right, and that the pressures of capitalism, rising inflation, stagnating wages, and a lack of a national holiday where people take off work to go exercise their civic duties are reasons for why more people don’t go out and vote?

          Noooooooo, that can’t be. Voters are stupid. Voters are racist. Voters are lazy. And it isn’t the system that has stripped away their material needs that is the problem.

          • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            I find these types of comments funny because it shows how far in denial some people are. You arguing semantics with a random person on the internet doesn’t change reality. Trump won. Fair and square. Stop making excuses for people. No one works a 24 shift for 2 weeks straight. Considering the bullshit Trump is putting us through I think it’s safe to say that missing an hour or 2 from work every 4 years to make sure a piece of shit like him never holds office is worth the $30-$60 dollars you’ll lose for the day.

            People need to wake the fuck up and stop expecting the world to work around their needs. Once every 4 years they have to vote. That is the bare minimum and people like you want to blame it on not having a voting holiday or some other excuse. In my eyes I can’t afford NOT to vote on this year shows why.

            • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 hours ago

              I find your comment funny because the person you’re responding to is not the one in denial. They gave you the statistical facts of the situation. I know you want to cynically point the finger at everyone around you being dumber and lazier than you, that you have it as hard as anyone could possibly have it and you managed to do it so why don’t they. I know you want to believe America is a democracy just because we hold elections and the votes that come in are counted.

              When you have a third of the population that doesn’t vote for one reason or another, when you have some voters with several times the voting power of others, and the two candidates we get to vote for are donald fucking trump or the person that somehow lost to D.F.T.; it’s time to start thinking about the systems that produced those results instead of passing the blame off on bootstraps and personal responsibility. This is the classic reactionary rhetoric that never leads to anything being fixed, because it exists so you have something to be angry at without challenging anything fundamental to the system. Because you can change systems, you cannot change people except by giving them what they need to change themselves.

              The good thing is that human behavior at that scale is actually reasonably predictable, again, given the material conditions that those people are subjected to. Which is why systems are so important.

              A system does what it is designed to do, and benefits who it is designed to benefit. Everything else is just noise. Stop pointing the finger at everyone around you and start pointing it up at the people who actually have a direct hand in those systems and profound power to change them. Elected or otherwise. That is the only way that change has ever been wrought in this country, even in the most dire of circumstances.

        • meowMix2525@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          17 hours ago

          Simultaneously, American voters are “stupid, lazy, or both”, but intelligent and well-read enough to understand what you mean when you explain the difference between social welfare and outright socialism as you are backpedaling on being a socialist.

          That being said; I’m not talking about progressive policies, I’m talking about socialism. There might be plenty of progressive policies between here and socialism, but the end of that side of the spectrum is socialism.

          • FearMeAndDecay@literature.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            15 hours ago

            The problem is that some of them are in a cult that tells them everyone is a filthy lying criminal that wants you dead. The ones that aren’t cultists are usually just looking for the easy solution. Personal responsibility and grassroots efforts are difficult. Being angry at boogeymen and believing that one day you’ll be a billionaire or even just a millionaire is a lot easier. So believing the lies the GOP tells them, which often validate preexisting beliefs, is a lot easier and more convenient. Plus, many republicans think of the left as stuck up “intellectuals,” college educated people that get paid to do nothing but look down on them, the real working class

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              14 hours ago

              Plus, many republicans think of the left as stuck up “intellectuals,” college educated people that get paid to do nothing but look down on them, the real working class.

              I believe this perception has the possibility to be altered.

              • FearMeAndDecay@literature.cafe
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                14 hours ago

                Oh it definitely can be. I was just pointing out that it’s an additional hurdle to either tricking or actually changing the minds of Americans that are dumb enough to vote against their own interests

      • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Socialism? Americans would be happy to have health care, better workers‘ rights, affordable education. Just like most other advanced economies in Europe, Australia, South Korea, Japan, and so on. That’s not socialism, that’s capitalism with regulations and social programs. Nobody really wants socialism, which was as utter failure everywhere it was tried.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 hours ago

      give it a name that people understand and don’t have preexisting bias against. “For The People”

      I’m pretty sure that name (or similar) has been used in ways that… don’t sit very well with people!

    • Breakrod729@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      That’s not the party name, but you’re right on with the type of message or slogan it should have. The party of the true Americans. More flags. Reclaim patriotism. “We the people”, “We are America”. Something that explicitly makes everyone feel like they can belong to it.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Absolutely not, patriotism is just fancy nationalist cancer and “True American” messaging is a whisper away from anti-immigrant xenophobia.

        • Breakrod729@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          I agree that it currently is that way, but I don’t think I do that it has to be. Hence why reclaiming is necessary. The meaning and symbolism of what it means is a powerful tool.

          If an actually inclusive bunch of people start waving the flag and call themselves Americans they can redefine it.

    • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      16 hours ago

      Don’t worry about getting it right 100% perfect in the planning phase, the important thing is to just get fucking moving. If either trying to shake up the democrats or forming a third party end up being wrong, then learn from it and keep moving. We can’t afford to miss the launch window because we couldn’t agree that the plan was perfect.

        • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Yeah, I’ve noticed that about the left in general, that the perfect is always the enemy of the good. Meanwhile the right’s out there like “yeah, a lot of you are going to die, but that’s a sacrifice I’m willing to make”.

    • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Ones I like after going on a Thesaurus and US Declaration of Independence wiki hole. The ones further below are just ones I thought were okay as they came to me.

      ===========

      People’s Voice Party

      American Party

      Workers Party

      Freedom Party

      Citizens Party

      Peoples Party

      Revolutionary Party

      Common Party

      United Party

      ==============

      Workers Party

      Blue Collar Party

      Trades Party

      Skilled Party

      Collar Party

      Rust Party

      American Party

      Freedom Party

      Citizen’s Party

      Liberty Party

      People’s Party

      Civil Party

      Center Party

      Working Party

      99 Party

      99% Party

      Luigi Party

      Rights Party

      Blue Party

      United Party

      Sovereign Party

      Human Party

      Marching Party

      US Party

      Founding Party

      Founders Party

      National Party

      Revolutionary Party

      Colonial Party

      Fundamental Party

      Common Sense Party

      People’s Choice Party

      People’s Voice Party

      Laws of Nature Party

      Nature Party

      Equal Party

      Pursuit of Happiness Party

      Standing Party

      Family Party

      Native Party

      Great Party

      Fighting Party

      • SabinStargem@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I think “Roosevelt Party” has potential. You can make two mascots for the ads, one being Theodore and the Franklin, each designed to appeal to the right or left among Americans. Theodore, for example, using guns to hunt down moose, advocating for national parks and peace with Canada.

        Also, someone can commission an Epic Rap Battle between the two, who then dunk on Trump and Elon.

    • Trees@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      EverForward Party

      Onward Together Party

      Inspired Collaboration Party

      Positive Frontier Party

    • naught101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Not very practical while the US voting system is still first-post-the-post. Y’all need to fix that first.

      • melpomenesclevage@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        lets just suck off the people currently in charge until they give up the thing that keeps them in power, then. yeah. that will work.

        • naught101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I also don’t believe that voting is the answer to meaningful social change (though maybe it can be part of it in some contexts). But I was responding to a question that seems to.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Now is the perfect time. Breaking with the Democrats mean they have to play ball now or get electorally buried.

      • crusa187@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Unless it really works like it has the potential to. Then the repugs and dems would be totally cooked.

    • Match!!@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      yeah! keep running away and ceding terms to the billionaire media! surely if we come up with the right new magic word then everyone will understand and agree, and if fox starts demonizing “99-percenters” or whatever then we’ll just, change the name again,

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Off topic but I’ve been workshopping this idea to spoil conservatives in Red States where a candidate is anti-abortion and anti-immigration but completely socialist and accountability on every other issue. I think Hallowed Party might actually be perfect for it.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Check out the Working Families party. They’re not in every state, but they’re a start.

      • Fuhgeddaboutit@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        14 hours ago

        Sadly, sound bites and marketing matter more than substance for many voters. People vote off feels.

        More and more people aren’t having kids. The name alienates them, divorced dads, and 20-somethings. It makes me think of trad wifery.

      • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 hours ago

        The Freedom party

        I thought the Republicans were already the “freedom” party (even though they take all of your freedoms).

        Also in the Netherlands the PVV (“party for freedom”) is far right so I don’t think that name reflects the right idea.

        The Justice Party

        Justice is pretty subjective and might not reflect the right idea either.

    • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Workers Party

      Blue Collar Party

      Trades Party

      Skilled Party

      Collar Party

      Rust Party

      American Party

      Freedom Party

      Citizen’s Party

      Liberty Party

      People’s Party

      Civil Party

      Center Party

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      28
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Bernie is already third party, doofus. And if you want to fix anything you have to vote DNC.

  • Sibshops@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    105
    ·
    22 hours ago

    The worst part is that Republicans unironically believe that these are all paid actors.

    • IndiBrony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Digging into who is actually paying them is a fun road to go down as well. They can’t answer. When the democrats were in charge, they’d be paid for by the government!

      Now that Trump is in charge, they can’t say that anymore! So they’ll move onto another scapegoat such as Bill Gates, or NASA (and ignore that NASA gets funds from the government).

      • Sibshops@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I don’t think facts or lack of evidence has ever gotten in their way before. They will just say it’s George Soros. Or they will point to fake craigslist posts which can be created by anyone.

        • Katana314@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Even then, I feel like you could just say “Oh, great, so now that Trump’s in charge, he can investigate George Soros’ finances, right?”

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        They can say George Soros or Bill Gates, pretty common namedrops on conservative media.