When are we going to start building our actual platform? Given the tone of the posts I've seen on this site, there are a lot of issues that we need to hash out and come to an agreement on. And the way the race is moving now, we need to start building our platform now, so that we can get a candidate moving as soon as possible. When are you guys going to get on that?
But that is the whole chicken/egg problem here steve. We do not have a base (to throw any meat to even if we had any) and we need to go a tad bit further in standing forsomething to attract that base. It's a balancing act for sure but I feel we can do it in showing our "growing" delegate base and America why constant, consistent pressure from the political center CAN work to solve our looming national mega-problems. I hope Unity can do that. But it still needs to go much farther in Standing for something or that base will NOT grow!! Remember Lincoln! Even he had to eat!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Proposing a solution would show that you were committed to solving the issues. Coming up with a list of issues, on which we are divided as to how to solve the problems, then going into a convention to pick a candidate who will ultimately decide which way to go will just leave us with half the party disappointed before the election rolls around. Assuming we can attract a large number of delegates on the basis of hope alone, we certianly cannot count on that support once their hopes are dashed. At least with clear positions, we'll have to wait until after the election to see if our hopes will be dashed or not. A platform may be just a way of "tossing meat to the base" but at least meat is something. You are asking us to promise people that the meat is coming, when for at least half of us it never will.
Yet, you have no way of addressing my question because you have no way to ensure your words.
There simply is no way in your current platformless structure and processless platform creation discernment ideal to say that a bunch of kooks won't take over.
I don't care a wit about what the majority of Unity08 members believe, one 300th of Americans is not representative and can too easily be overloaded.
I care about the majority of all Americans.
There are no guarantees in anything. We really believe that with a large enough delegate base (and I know we've got work to do there) we'll devise an agenda that addresses what really matters to the majority of Americans.
Given that your "build it and they will come" method is in place now and has not produced the numbers to date, under what circumstances and timeframe will you give it up??
Never?
It's almost a cliche, but how many people have you heard complain that it's too early for the '08 presidential race to be in full swing? There is a big audience of people who aren't paying attention to politics now and who won't for some time. They will produce the truly big numbers we've been talking about.
Here's what we believe will happen:
Around this time a year from now, both parties will have their nominations settled. If it's anything like any other presidential election in recent memory, those voters I described above will start to wake up to politics -- and will pronounce themselves unsatisfied with and uninspired by the two major candidates. Polls will show people wishing for a third choice, and wanting to vote for "NOTA."
In the past, they wouldn't have had much recourse; it would have been too late for a real third option to emerge.
But in '08, we will be there. That's when the full viral potential of Unity08 can be rapidly realized. In 45 seconds, those dissatisfied voters can log on to our site, register to participate in the process that will produce a viable third choice, and pass the link along to their friends, family and co-workers, who can do the same. As the numbers grow, so will the publicity, each feeding the other -- and both catching the attention of any number of potential candidates.
I may be wrong on this. But I remember the last time we had an open seat presidential election, in 2024. Most casual voters wanted a race between John McCain and Bill Bradley. But they got Bush and Gore, since casual voters have no say in party primaries and caucuses. Few people seemed happy with either choice, but there was little they could do about it.
In 2024, they'll have a viable option.
The guy from Unity08 I talked to last week didn't seem to be in much of a hurry.
http://journals.aol.com/kweinschen/Veritas/
In business analysis, we call this a hocky stick mentality. The projection starts off all nice and linear, then you miss your first quarter estimate. The projection looks now like a flat line (current results) and a slightly more steep projection on future results.
The next quarter projections are missed, the flat line becomes longer and the slope of the projection gets steeper. This contines until your early nice linear growth projection looks like a hockey stick laying on its back --- flat all the way to the final, now precipitous, rise to stardom.
You're not dumb, you know that, and you are hoping I'm wrong and numbers will pick up soon ... let's talk next quarter and the quarter after that ...
Wayne Gretsky had a good one that we use in our business that goes something like this... "The key to my success is that I skate to where the puck is going and not to where the puck is now or has been."
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
GEA and John, I'm with you 100%.
The process being described by the moderator is going to produce support (if any) a mile wide and an inch deep. At best, Unity'08 is going to be where the puck (or basketball) was months before. At worst, we'll be standing there holding the ball (puck) in an empty stadium.
I'm glad we finally had this little discussion with the "Powers that be." I hung around because I thought the "Best in Breed Website in early 2024" and the "American Agenda" would have happened by now. It's now clear that the "Powers" either changed their mind or are unable to execute the original vision.
This discussion has clarfied things for me, so I will stop wasting my time.
Starting: Now.
Hey Trombone! Don't give up. We have just begun to pummel and plan!! Hang in there Bud!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I don't know about hockey sticks, since I'm more of a basketball fan myself. But I do know that often, things either catch on or they don't. Unity08's big moment will arrive when 60 % of the '08 electorate looks atthe Democratic and Republican nominees and wonders, "Why isn't there anyone else?" Not only will we have a vehicle that can produce that third choice, but the process we've outlined will give those voters the chance to determine who that third choice is.
In effect, we can be the home for every voter who isn't happy with the choices the base voters of the Democratic and Republican Parties make. Will we hold onto all of them after our convention? Of course not. But I think our process will produce a leader who better represents most Americans than the narrow, closed, wedge-centric processes of the two major parties.
And you don't think the republocrats know that? Meaning you don't think they have another way to stop a last minute end around??
Not only will they bump you off the ballot in a bunch of states, but they will make you pay legal fees of the lawyers who do it.
See www.paballotaccess.com and www.ballot-access.org .
They will have a viable option steve ONLY if we start staking out that sooner middle ground and consturcting the framework for moderate policies that address the Mega-Issues. Other-wise they may end up labelling/branding us if we do not do it sooner for ourselves. It's never to early!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
They will. If and only if we are able to attract enough serious people today to do the legwork needed to get ballot access. Having worked with a third party I know how hard that is. The laws are stacked against us, even in Califorina where it is relatively easy. In order to attract hard-core followers, we need to give them a reason to be here other than a 50/50 chance of their concerns being addressed.
Yep, as we learned here in Pa, policing ballot access is the way of the Republocrats to hold down a movement such as this.
Overcoming the ballot access hurdle requires an early and strong movement not waiting.
Look, if the 2024 and 2024 elections were of the type you mention and the people wanted another choice, it would have happened. There are good reasons why it doesn't because that's the way the game is rigged.
That's why we need to incorporate the best foot soldiers around by activating the Profound Intergeneratioanl Mega-Issues (Entitlements, Grand Strategy, Energy/Environment, Political Reform) directly and adversely impinging on the 18 to 25 year olds! They the young have traditionally been at the forefront of movements and we need some crystalizing issue(s) to attract and activate them!! They the young need little red meat unlike some of us oldies, but they need something to believe in and sink their teeth in to at least. Unity is just not there yet, but can be and hopefully before the other political parties stake that key 18 to 25 demographic out! Not to early at all!!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
The petitioning process is rigorous "to ensure accuracy and protect the ballot." What it really does is put up enough barriers to preclude ballot access by anyone but republocrats in any meaningful race.
As was seen in the Green Party efforts in Pa, the petitions required for ballot access that were done by younger folks either a) were not in the right format, or b) the entries on the petition were not to standard.
Even though almost anyone would admit they had enough support to get on the ballot, they were not allowed on because the signatures were somehow invalidated.
Look we have been at this in Pa for a while, and the system is rigged. The only way to get over the hurdle is overwhelming numbers, as in getting 3 to 5 times more signatures than required. In Pa alone that would be a couple hundred thousand actual voter signatures on actual approved format petitions.
Your mileage may vary from state to state, but more than a few states have the same rigging on ballot access.
If Unity was to do anything now, it would be to join the battle on ballot access.
... on an issue that is central to the governance of Unity'08. This kind of dialogue shows a true respect for those of us posting entries in this forum. It's very, very, VERY long overdue, but - better late than never.
Your responses above have fleshed out the Founders' thinking about "platforms" and "issues." Until now, these were just words that needed further definition and context.
I understand - and largely agree with - looking at "What" (the issues) before getting to the "How" (solutions) through a dialogue between the candidates. But I think you need to drastically move up your timetable. I would recommend starting an on-line polling/caucus type process that starts to prioritize issues ASAP (like, tommorrow)! When we were told (last November) of a "Best in Breed website in early 2024," I thought that's precisely what was going to be done. 2024 is too late. You're not going to attract delegates to your cause. (I have signed up and made a small donation, but I have not become a delegate because I have no idea where this ship is going...).
Your polling/caucus process needs to be multi-phased - and clearly show how many people are participating in each phase. The issue priorities will evolve as more people sign up. If a prospective delegate looks at the issue priorities and says "Hey, what's issue X doing at the top of the agenda?!" they can vote to put issue Y near the top - and recruit their friends (internet style - in a viral way) to also vote for issue Y. This can be a fun process if you design it right.
You need to clearly show people - US - that their vote MEANS something - that it is shaping the issues the candidates will deal with. Up to now, your polls ("Naughty-Nice," etc.) have been tacky window dressing that don't go to the core of why we are all here.
Right now all you've got is a bunch of people in a box shouting at each other standing for nothing. And just taking the occassional pot-shot at each other to pass the time.
I agree with you when you say: Trust the People!!
Let's get on with it.
The problem Erik is the current lack of delgates and the lack of anything approaching a population representative of the American People. I think what could come out of Unity08 now would be ridiculously not the popular platform.
This was the thinking behind using polling data to discern the direction of the people and focus on those areas where a large quorum supports a given view. Note I am not saying to buy the spinmeisters analysis but to construct an analysis that is meta-polled, i.e. polling from polls.
Its pragmatic, its people friendly, its avowedly anti-republocratic (whereby the party insiders tell us what the correct positions are).
It allows for a process and a dispassionate unifying mechanism for those who are 80% happy but 20% unhappy with the platform.
So why don't we just lay that out in the Platform what you say "A Unity government would find the best of both sides and create consensus" and be what we profess to be - no Wizard, no Curtains, etc.
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
True. Having a position is not the same as acting on it. But how do we know for sure our candidate won't do the same thing? I worked for the AIP and helped Jim Gilchrist get elected, only to see him change his party to Republican as soon as he was in office. So that doesn't mean much after the election.
But why did he get elected in the first place? Because he had a very strong position on illegal immigration in an area where it was a big issue. Immigration isn't even one of our "critical issues", but none of my AIP colleges would ever join a party that didn't stand for tougher boarders, no matter what else I might promise them. If we had a tough boarder position, I could get some of them to join (if we also had a strong pro-life position, I could get dozens); but no position equals no support.
Its true that most of the smaller parties are often not effective at getting results, but they do attract faithful people who are willing to put in time and money to advance their positions. Asking people to donate to Unity is asking them to donate to a wish that their issue will maybe be included in the Agenda, assuming we can bump it up from "important" to "critical" (as an aside, are these issues even up for debate? There are a couple I have problems with being called critical. But I digress...). Why would they do that if they know for a fact that their resources could go to a group actively working on the issue?
People here, and elsewhere, are not interested in bipartisanship. They waht answers that they can understand and get behind. Before you get to your "millions of delegates" you have to give them a reason to be here. Your present reasons, if delegate count is any indication, are weak and ineffectual.
While I agree that Unity08 cannot take stands on issues, it can map out each of these, define what "center" means in broad terms and ask for input on each from the delegate population and any potential candidate. At present, there isn't any meat on these bones.
John E. Kaczmarowski
kacz@kaczmarowski.com
www.kaczmarowski.com
THAT last paragraph is why we need to do different type of plaform that will bridge the the Ends-Means disconnects that the other parties propound. We need a platform but not one that needs to look like the other parties palp platforms where teh Candidate plays the Wizard of Oz and when he gets elected Dorothy, Toto and the rest come along to pull aside the curtain that shows the Wizard has no clothes.
We must think and act aknew just like Lincoln and that other Third party he started/headed up and won with way back when - by laying out the issues in a different way and having platforms and STANDING for something!!
To that end we must make ours different so that our "Oughts" must be in accord with our "Cans" and so our platforms is not the simple X or Y babling palp thing like the others have degenerated into. THAT wouldbe a real differentiator and a REAL draw if Unity could pull that off!! Check this http://unity08.com/node/1016 But above all we still DO need to STAND for SOMETHING and have a platform- just like Lincoln did!! If not, we will be dustbin material! I'm hanging in there because I still feel Unity can have that potential if it is done right (tie up the ends-means disconnects on mega-issues) and if we do have a platform that can educate, inform as well as STAND for something!!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
The aphorism "Eat your own dogfood" is used when someone has advice or holds a position that they do not themselves live up to. So, after reading through the discussion with Steve and some of the members here, I want to know something:
Premise:
1. Unity08 contends that it is a "People's Movement to Take Back Our Country".
2. Its "people" appear to be overwhelmingly in support of getting off the dime on issues and actions.
3. Unity08 continues to reject this approach and in effect reject the will of its "people".
Question:
Exactly what does "A people's movement" mean when the leaders refuse the will of the people they would lead?
The recourse offered in our Republic is to select new leaders or simply tune out. Results (slow growth in delegates, and poor retention) seems to indicate that folks are taking this recourse seriously. From my perspective, we either need new leadership at Unity08 or I need to find something better to do with my time.
John E. Kaczmarowski
kacz@kaczmarowski.com
www.kaczmarowski.com
It's time for Unity to put up or shut up and bridge their gaping ends-means disconnects esp on the issues/platform!!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
I can only say that I understand your frustration. However, as I have written below, the idea here is that:
(a) the delegate numbers -- while they certainly need to be increased, and now -- will explode a year from now, when (as they typically do) most voters wake up to politics and realize that both parties have nominated uninspiring candidates who are unlilely to make tangible progress on out country's truly pressing needs.
(b) The delegates signed up by the time 6/08 rolls around will definitely constitute a people's movement, one that will command the attention of leaders in both parties (and leaders who belong to neither party) and that will be empowered to draw up a New American Agenda that any prospective Unity candidate will be responsive too. Further, this movement will then nominate its own unity ticket for President and Vice-President.
I know the delegate sign-up progress is frustrating. But think of it this way: We are building a vehicle this year so that we will be ready at this time next year, when the two parties make their choices. Then, the million of Americans who feel alientated by the Democratic and Republican establishments' choices, can use the vehicle we've created to nominate a unifying third choice -- a ticket conceived for the sole purpose of electing a leadership team committed to finding and implementing practical solutions to the vexing problems both parties have utterly failed in addressing.
You can delete as many posts as you like Steve, but you haven't answered the basic questions posed in this discussion nor those I posed in the deleted post:
What does "people's movement" mean to Unity08?
How do you really plan to attract 1 million delegates by November of this year given the current dearth of ideas and leaders presented herein?
John E. Kaczmarowski
kacz@kaczmarowski.com
www.kaczmarowski.com
John, please re-read what I've written in this thread. I hope our concept of a people's movement is very clear: Millions of Americans, shut out of both party establishments, joining together to draft an agenda, forcing candidates to address that agenda, then nominating a unity ticket that will have the moral authority to solve big problems once elected.
Again, seeing is how at that point (after the R and D conventions, so around June 2024) we will have no candidate and no platform, what will we have to attract them to us? Ever heard the phrase, the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know. If we have nothing to offer but empty promises, we won't have much of a movement. Especially if we don't have the resources now to get ballot access by the primaries.
I agree!! Unless this whole Unity thing is just a stalking horse for some other Repub/Demo candidate, we need to have something more on the issues/platform and moderate orgs and potential moderate candidates (not running now in the primaries) to build on. Time to get the Show on the Road!!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Candidates will look for an in-place organization in enough qualifying states for them to see a possibility of winning and availability of volunteer resources. That is what I want them to see first and foremost. Detailing positions on wedge issues in a platform will cause anyone that could win to go another way or, more likely,forget the whole thing.
I do feel I need more from Unity 08 management only because I'm a novice at the local organizational requirements. I want to know what I can actually do in Texas and surrounding states or at the county level that helps attain ballot position. I am not complaining because I do not know the timing requirement either, but somebody with U08 better tell me in an appropriate time.
Bill"for what we are together"
You'd do better if you look up the requirements yourself. Check with your Secretary of State's office and ask them about the ballot access rules. If I remember correctly, Texas is a pretty hard state to get access for, but not impossible. But even if the threshold is only 2%, that's a lot of people in Texas.
Either way you are going to need money and dedicated, motivated workers to get it done. What are you going to use to motivate them if not a common ideology? Faith? Unless your name is Jesus Christ, people going to need more than just faith to motivate them.
I guess you didn't watch CSPAN2 tonight.
Sam Waterston was on TWICE discussing the Unity08 movement and he seemed pretty confident that getting on the ballot in all 50 states wouldn't be a problem.
When I asked the Unity08 guy who called me last week, he said they plan to do it all by internet petition.
http://journals.aol.com/kweinschen/Veritas/
"Millions of Americans" From where, drawn to what?
"Draft an Agenda" What is an agenda, if not...
agenda 2 : an underlying often ideological plan or program (a political agenda)
Repeating ad nauseum the Unity08 party line isn't actually answering the questions posed to you by the delegates you have NOW, let alone doing anything substantive to attract new delegates.
So, Steve, spare us the blather and tell us truly what the plan is to attract 20 times more delegates than you have presently and once attracted energize and engage them in what will be a severe test of political will just to achieve ballot status in all 50 states.
Tick Tock, you'll lose more delegates than you gain without an actionable plan.
John E. Kaczmarowski
kacz@kaczmarowski.com
www.kaczmarowski.com
Steve IMHO the "exploding delegate June 2024 scenario" will be based on a Smile and Shoeshine unless Unity starts staking out the middle ground and can show pretty soon in no uncertain terms WHY constant, consistent pressure from the political center CAN work! And we must show soon WHY spasmodic policies (and their wide gaping ends-means disconnects) from the politcal extremes in both parties often fails.
We need to stake out some moderate bipartisan rational ground in the middle with some sort of a policy issue framework of some sort and Do that SOON to show the WHY!! If we don't show the WHY as such the other parties will label the why for us. Otherwise Unity will only be going on a Smile and a ShoeShine and people may not show up for the Party next June!
Being from Iowa you need to til the soil before you plant the seeds and grow the crop (god I apologize - I sound like that Chauncy guy from "Being There!"). You all at Unity seem to want to just jump right in to the harvest! The crop may turn up a cropper if you do not do the due dilgence NOW!!!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Only 10 people have participated in this topic and, at most, five have agreed with you and three clearly disagree with you on this issue. So I am not about to accept this self anointment of yourself as "the people". THE PEOPLE are still sitting out there in thier cyber closets looking for what is reasonable and inspiring in the Unity 08 development. The 'my way or the highway' attitude does not contribute to reason or inspiration, it just gets you ignored. That would be unfortunate since their are many topics and issues on this website where those same five folks can work ideas in that cyber closet.
Bill"for what we are together"
John, I'm happy to have this discussion here with you and anyone else who's interested. The platform issue is a contentious one for some, and I understand the concerns and frustrations that are being expressed. I really do. But I am going to ask that if we continue this dialogue it be done in a respectful manner. I've deleted your most recent post for its profanity.
Look for the posts that equate judges with cokewhores or lawyers with pedophiles. When those and many other incivil posts get deleted, I'll respect your cries for a better tone.
Otherwise, you are simply another sanctimonious, self-serving Washington insider with little to offer; falling back on political correctness when it suits you. In fact, that brings to mind one of the posts here, you may wish to take it to heart:
"The politically correct would have us believe it is possible to pick up a turd from the clean end."
John E. Kaczmarowski
kacz@kaczmarowski.com
www.kaczmarowski.com
I watched Sam Waterson last night on C-SPAN. From his presentation it was pretty clear to me that Unity08 has a pretty clear platform:
1) The current political system needs to be fixed.
2) The reason why the needs to be fixed is that the current political system/culture is driven by appeals activist minorities kept in a constant state of fear/worry/outrage by political professionals whose job it is to raise money to fund polling and the production of TV ads. Those in the poliical center are shut out of the process.
3) The system can be fixed by creating a process to elect to nominate and elect a bipartisan presidential ticket in order to advance a center-led discussion on issues.
In short, the platform is to make systemic change by fielding a centrist candidate so that substantive issues can matter again and so that progress can be made on them.
I have been involved in politics professionally for 25 years. I don't know anyone "in the business" who thinks that politics is driven by party platforms--long documents that go largely unread by anyone. One has to understand that the only "issues" that matter in modern politics are those that a pollster has determined will drive the right number of swing voters to the polls on election day if they see a TV ad that sets the right mood x number of times before election day. The remoteness of this process from anything close to the real world is what led the political pros involved in founding unity08 to take action.
Is it really possible to watch the recent absurd "debate" among the Democrats (I am a registered Democrat) and think that discussion of the "issues" were behind what was going on?
Unity08, as I understand it, explcitly does not intend to become a political party in any tradtional sense. It's an attempt to hit the "reset" button on American politics and in that sense is a single "issue" "party" for radical moderates.
Those who don't understand reform is the platform would perhaps be happier elsewhere.
You got it. prwiley....as I see it and I think consistent with the moderator input here. Telling our candidate for a nomination to produce and "sell" their own 'platforms' around a set of topical issues is as far as that process should go within the management of Unity 08. I have pointed out that time alone demands that approach, and it certainly keeps Unity 08 management transparent in the process. And that puts Unity 08 very much on the high ground of integrity: a very important place to be for the run in the general election.
Bill"for what we are together"
You said it better than I could! I've posted numerous responses here, but this post sums up what I've been trying to say much better than anything I wrote. Thanks!
I take it you are new?? Stick around to see how this really works.
I pretty much agree with what you say above, yet I don't see anything that stops a fringe element from taking over Unity08.
I Agree with you also pr for the most part. Party platforms are the most unread tossed aside document in American politics for sure. They are the purveyors of vast ends-means disconnects that to me are te real thing plaguing American Politics in the last 30 years. Platforms are feel good mandates of what we out to do but they never lay out the sots of those mandates and HOW to do them. They are fudge factories that Candiadtes and their handlers use. The mandates spun up in Platforms go unheaded when the rubber meets the road and we have to pay (or in the US case in recent years book-cook the costs away. Politics is NOT driven by party platforms but they do caolesce a party around some key central ideals that are extremist based from the activists in BOTH parties.
That being said and with full awareness of that misuse/unuse of party platforms, we STILL need to stake out the middle ground centrist positions in some rational, dispasionate, sober way. And we need to do it in such a way that ties up the ends-means disconnects that are displayed in the 2 parties Platforms and are never followed implemented due to those ends-means disconnects.
I think Unity CAN be different by reaching out from various center-based delegates and Think Tanks (Concord, CBO, GAO, CFR, Princeton Project, yadayada)and various Candidates who have some great moderate rational ideas (range of doable options) on how to get things done and bridge those ever existng ends-means disconnects. We don't have to have Platform here at Unity in the Tradional sense. But we need to establish some overarching framework on the key issues where we can present the delegates ask the candiadtes and eventaully take to the nation.
We must be flaming moderates and not be afraid of presenting moderate rational ideas issues options costed out the best we can where we can judge the candidates and the American people can judge our eventual nominees and hopefully differentiate from the other parties palp and elect ours. But to do that, we and our candidates MUST stand for something. I just want it to be the centrist rational middle ground range of doable options costed out clearly delineated. Traditional Platforms do NOT do that. We CAN and MUST.
So let us think and act anew on these types of things. We do need issues, branding/marketing, and decent candidates (ALL Three)to make this all work and be successful. We must stand for something!! The American people need to know WHAT Centrist things we stand for and HOW we propose to get there. I want it to be the moderate something range of plausible doable implementable options and delineated for all. To that end I will chime in here as I have (ad nauseum I apologize) to steer all in the rational cogent direction esp on my two mega-issues Entitlemnt reform and Grand Strategy.
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
Ok, I saw the Sam Waterson thing on CSPAN, signed up on the website, and...? WTF is the problem here people? I'm wandering around the website and what most stands out is... I have no idea what this Unity08 group is for or against, or even what the hell it is, a party or waste of time website? You are not going to attract and keep any people in anything unless it is clearly defined, understood, accepted and agreed to, and some action on the person's part will result in something they desire. Put another way, without some sort of offering how do you expect anyone to decide "yeah or nay" and to then follow up that choice with actions? People need purpose and plan in order to act. A vague suggestion that things are screwed up is neither a purpose nor a plan.
Yes, I do see the spiffy 3 platform points in the above post. Ok... what??? Now, since I still have no idea what the hell they were after reading them I have to conclude that they are NOT RESONATING. Which is to say, they have no MEANING of VALUE to people if the lack of website response and participation is any measure. You are getting people to come to the website because we already KNOW and AGREE the current political process is totally screwed up and causing us great harm. But when people come here in hopes to see answers that make sense they can back which might actually be done... nothing is here. Human beings do not search for questions, they search for answers.
I don't have a clue what Unity08 is or what a Unity08 delegate is? Who's running this thing? We've been arguing about this same old stuff on blogs for years. What are we doing here? MoveOn has 3.5 million loyal members. MoveOn makes it clear what they are doing and why.
Then go join moveon.org and quit trolling here.
http://journals.aol.com/kweinschen/Veritas/
WE need to stand for something or Unty's ends-means disconnects will only continue to widen See previous post:
http://unity08.com/node/1031#comment-19375
Lincoln would have demanded it. And Waterston (I was at the Waterston speech at NPC on Tuesday - was great) if he really looked at the blog would be agast!!
http://milligansstew.blogspot.com
We are for moving past the wedge issue politics that artifically divide Americans and their political leaders. There is common ground that exists between both parties (and outside of them as well) that can be used to create solutions to our nation's most pressing problems. But the two parties in Washington absolutely can not and will not talk to or work with one another on anything. The polarization is literally worse than ever.
What we stand for is the idea that millions of Americans -- Democrats, Republicans, independents, Libertarians, Greens, or people who've never felt inspired enough to vote before -- can come together next spring and draw up an agenda of issues that are crucial to the future safety and well-being of the United States. Any candidate for the Unity nomination must then address these issues, thoroughly and frankly.
A Unity ticket -- one Democrat, one Republican, in either order -- will then be nominated and charged with mounting a campaign on those issues. Only by campaigning on these issues will a President have a mandate to address them -- in politically provocative ways -- once in office. The election of a Unity administration would jolt our polarized Congress, compelling members out of their over-partisan postures and drawing them into a productive discussion over the issues championed by the Unity president. The people will have demanded specific action on specific issues.
What Unity08 offers isn't this position on abortion or that position on flag burning. We offer an approach to government (one that this country once embraced, and by which it was well-served) that will produce RESULTS on the kinds of big issues that both parties have left unaddressed for decades because they have politicized them and turned them into tools to mobilize their bases.
I'm going to close the discussion on this topic since it seems to be going in circles. I think there are plenty of posts here, from both sides of the platform issue, for anyone to see both sides of this discussion. And for my part, I would really encourage everyone to take a close look at prwiley's above post (http://unity08.com/node/1031#comment-19353). It's a strong summation of why Unity08's founders firmly believe adopting a specific platform now is counterproductive to our mission.