Mediaboss Marketing

What next? That is the obvious question in light of the unprecedented success of the Womens March, although it was obvious to march organizers well in advance.

This march is the first step towards unifying our communities, grounded in new relationships, to create change from the grassroots level up, the Womens March mission statement said. And its already doing that. [T]here was no shortage of organizing small-group organizing, large-group organizing, mass organizing taking place on Saturday, and every day following, Adele Stan noted at the Prospect. Connections made between activists from across the country in these spaces are likely to last and flourish, especially in the age of social media.

Onstageat the march, actress America Ferrara concluded her early remarks by saying, This is only day one in our united movement, and asking participants to take out your cellphone and text women to 40649 so that we can continue to work together. The theme was echoed repeatedly by others after her.

But the big question, really, goes well beyond hypothetical solidarity: Howwill all these efforts will come together? It seems certain that there wont be just one single answer. Resistance is crucial, and the Womens March has raised the level of resistance to Nixon-era levels in just a matter of weeks a truly astonishing feat. But the crucial challenge is how to move from resistance to governing power, and thats where things grow far more complicated, as any veteran activist will tell you. But a number of paths forward have already become clear.

First, the Womens March has clearly established mass public resistance as the new normal, which is absolutely vital. When Republicans held their retreat in Philadelphia a few days later, protesters flooded downtowns Thomas Paine Plaza until they packed every inch of concrete, local legend Will Bunch reported on his Attytood blog. He noted a cacophony of hundreds of signs including one saying This Is Not Normal.

Except that slogan is not exactly operative anymore. Actually, less than a week into the terrifyingly frenetic 45thpresidency of Donald Trump, todays wild scene on the streets of Philadelphia of several thousand people marching, chanting and protesting Trumps speech at the Loews Hotel to congressional Republicans has already become practically routine. In terms of numbers, the anti-Trump movement has in mere weeks surpassed a scale that it took the civil rights and anti-war movements of the 1960s years to reach.

Second, mass resistance must become repetitive, building power over time. Along these lines, MoveOn.org, along with Peoples Action and the Working Families Party, has initiated a series of #ResistTrumpTuesdays demonstrations intended to last through Trumps first 100 days. In the first action, over 10,000 people in more than 200 cities rallied outside congressional offices urging senators to Stop Trumps #SwampCabinet.

Targets included Democrats as well as Republicans, in line with Amanda Marcottes argument here that Democrats should unite in opposing all Trump nominations. If every person who marched [in the Womens March]were to visit their Congress members office one time this week on their way to work or after school we would be unstoppable, MoveOn organizing director Victoria Kaplan said, dovetailing with the next point.

Third, resistance must be intensely and intelligently targeted. This is the message of the wildly popular Indivisible Guide downloaded more than a million times that has brought together more than4,500 local groups who have signed up to resist the Trump agenda in almost every congressional district. Initiated by a group of progressive former congressional staffers, the guides strength lies partly in its laser focus on pressuring Congress, based on the example of the Tea Party:

We saw them organize locally and convince their own MoCs [members of Congress] to reject President Obamas agenda. Their ideas were wrong, cruel, and tinged with racism and they won.

If the Tea Party could do that against a popular president with a mandate for change and a supermajority in Congress, then its possible to do the same against Trump. Thats the argument. And the response has been overwhelming. Theyre now in the process of forming a nonprofit to do two big things better: First, to continue demystifying congressional advocacy in an ongoing fashion, and second, to support local groups involved in putting guidance into practice. The response so far is overwhelmingly positive.

But theres a hitch. This argument implicitly assumes some degree of symmetry between the two major political parties, and the philosophies that animate them a problematic assumption at best, as I discussed last August. Democrats arethe party of government in America, responsive to the needs of diverse coalition of groups. They are the ones who believe government can and should work to promote the general welfare, as it says in Constitution, and thus they feel obligated to make it work, even in compromised form. Republicans are the party of obstruction and destruction, and have been so openly since at least the time of Newt Gingrichs speakership. That difference made it much, much easier for Tea Partiers to influence the Republicans to adopt a stance of total resistance than it could be for progressives to get Democrats to do the same.

To make a similar strategy work, progressives will have to do more than the Tea Partiers did. They must advance a positive agenda, in addition to calls to resist Trump and the GOP, and they will have to message it effectively in the face of a media that is conditioned not to listen. This brings us to our next point.

Fourth, people have to have a realistic hope of regaining power nationally, which means the 2018 midterms. Its a seemingly unsurmountable task, as explained by former Salon editor David Daleys book, Ratf**ked: The True Story Behind the Secret Plan to Steal Americas Democracy (Salon interview here.) Republicans strategy for hijacking the redistricting process in 2010 has produced entrenched GOP legislative power (both in Congress and state legislatures) which sees itself as largely immune to public opinion and only beholden to the most extreme elements of the Republican base. But Trump, and the unprecedented level of resistance hes generated, may have changed that as well or at least created an opening.

This is where the another new group with an audacious goal comes in. Swing Left appeared virtually out of nowhere, asking people to sign up to focus on winning swing districts in Congress in the 2018 elections, and got 100,000 people to sign up in four days around the time of the Womens March. It has since doubled that number. But there are serious questions about how well a new organization can turn such a fantasy into reality.

One diarist at Daily Kos was profoundly dubious, starting off with a tweet from an old friend, Not impressed with this site. Put in my Seattle zip code, told me two nearest swing districts are in Alaska & Nevada. I can understand how he felt, but if you look at Swing Lefts map, youll understand. Swing districts arent to be found everywhere: There are only a smattering from the Dakotas clear across to the West Coast, and none north of Colorado, Utah and Nevada.

Still, they are close enough to plenty of people who would like to get involved. There are three each within a short drive of Los Angeles, New York, Philadelphia and Minneapolis, and two near Detroit, Boston and Tampa-St. Petersburg. Moreover, every swing district represents an opportunity to build collaborative grassroots power, mobilizing thousands who would otherwise be sideline observers. Swing Lefts organizing model includes roles for people inside districts, near districts and outside districts, so even out-of-state volunteers can play a role. And, of course, where congressional swing districts are rare, theres always state legislatures to consider. After all, those bodies will hold the keys to reversing the GOP gerrymander after the 2020 census.

More serious are questions of how well-conceived the Swing Left approach is, and how well it will mesh or conflict with other efforts. The end goal of Swingleft, and new websites that pop up forprogressives could be to continue the ongoing party polarization by running unverified progressive candidates against registered Democratic candidates in primary races, the Daily Kos diarist wrote. Such intra-party battles are often to thebenefit of conservative candidates and to the RepublicanParty. This seems unduly negative, but the desire for clarity is perfectly sound. So Salon reached out to Swing Left to learn more. Michelle Finocchi responded via email, on behalf of the Swing Left team.

GOP gerrymandering has created high barriers to retaking the House. Your plan is the first one Ive seen that would seem to have a chance. That said, I have to ask how much thought and research you have devoted to this history. Or was it simply a math exercise, OK, heres what looks possible?

Theres no question taking back the House will require a massive effort from progressives all across the country. But the best way we can do it is by mobilizing countless individuals in all districts who have not seriously participated in the democratic process before. We saw the beginnings of that this past weekend when millions of Americans stood up for our values in marches all across the country, and we think at Swing Left that we can be a key part of the continuation of that movement. We now have a lot of volunteers whove made it clear they want to help and get involved in the political process. Our central focus is to organize and to fulfill the promise we made to these people to connect them with actionable opportunities in their closest swing districts, to flip the House, no matter where they live.

An old friend made the point that there were no districts within hundreds and hundreds of miles of him. I can understand why that happened, but I also understand his reaction, and theres an obvious response: to add a focus on state legislative swing districts. Since state legislatures are key to redistricting the House, getting started on this in 2018 and going full bore in 2020 would seem to be a wise strategic addition. Have you thought about doing this?

We completely agree this is an incredibly important goal. However, as we just launched a week ago, were remaining focused on our strategy of helping to take back the House in 2018 so we can help build a better country on areas ranging from climate change to income inequality to civil rights and so much more.

Your initial outreach says little about the sort of politics you are trying to promote. Is it just taking back the House for the Democratic Party? Theres a lot grassroots energy out there looking to support people on a more principled basis, even in seemingly challenging districts. Ive written about Doug Applegate, the progressive who came close to beating Darrell Issa, and think of him as a good example of the latter. Have you given any thought about how youll approach such questions?

We will be supporting all candidates who share the values of tolerance, democracy and equality and are committed to halting the radical Republican agenda in 2018. If a candidate in a swing district satisfies those qualifications, then well be behind them in the general election.

Ive encountered some concern along the lines of Who are these people? Do they have any clear idea what theyre doing? This could be a huge diversion of energy, etc. How would you respond to these sorts of concerns?

To take back the House, we need an all-hands-on-deck approach from progressives all across the country, targeted to the swing districts that need help the most and thats what were working to help build. We dont view that as a goal that takes anything away from other causes or organizations.

Whats the biggest challenge you see for yourselves at this point, and what are you doing to meet it?

The response to Swing Lefts launch and the explosion of growth weve experienced in the last week has been beyond our wildest expectations, and we have been racing all out since then to keep that momentum going. Its been exhausting, but incredibly exciting and were powering on! In our first week, weve had over 200,000 people sign up to support their closest swing district and over 10,000 volunteers offer their time and professional skills to help build Swing Left through a form on the site.

Whats the most important thing you want people to know about Swing Left?

Our mission is to take back the House in 2018 and, whether you vote in a swing district or not, you can play a huge role in that effort. No matter how much or how little time you have, you can make a real impact.

None of the above locks anyone into concrete specifics on issues, strategy or ideology. There is plenty of breathing room for a bottom-up rearticulation of vision and values that grows out of local experience. It would all sound like a pipe dream, frankly, if not for the success of the Womens March, which has dramatically energized progressive activists, veterans and newcomers alike. One thing is for certain, moving forward: the Womens March example of inclusivity, engagement and dialogue holds the key to how progressives as a whole can bring together all these different forms of resistance.

In the Guardian, Micah White, a co-creator of Occupy Wall Street and author of The End of Protest: A New Playbook for Revolution, argues: Without a clear path from march to power, the protest is destined to be an ineffective feelgood spectacle adorned with pink pussy hats, citing his own Occupy experience as a warning and contrasting that with the crucial roles womens mass actions played at key points in the French and Russian revolutions. The womens march on Versailles was the definitive point of no return for the French Revolution, he notes, and the Russian Revolution of 1917 was alsoinitially sparked, as Leon Trotsky recalls in his definitive history, by a defiant womens protest, which began on Womens Day.

But those are rare exceptions, and I dont imagine White would argue that the revolutionary regimes that ultimately resulted were what the marching women whose actions made them possible really wanted. Hence the real difficulty of the question of whats next? Whats happening on the ground right now points toward a much broader range of possibilities. There is no one answer to the question of what happens now rather, there are many, struggling to harmonize. These are only a few broad outlines of how things may unfold in practice. Its only just begun.

More:
Turning resistance into power: What's next for progressives after the Women's March? - Salon

WASHINGTON

In the days after she and some 150 Kenyon College students went to Washington for the Womens March on Washington, Emily Carter became a whirling dervish of activism.

She had newsletters to send out. Senators to call. Action networks to create. I am literally staying up at night, like, what can I do next? said the 22-year-old Kenyon senior.

Across the state, in Bluffton, Ohio, Wendy Chappell-Dick, 48, launched a new phrase in the days after the march: political hygiene. Each morning, she said, she got up, brushed her teeth, washed her hair and called her congressman.

One week ago, both women joined the crowds in Washington, protesting Donald Trumps new presidency. Now, the buses have returned home, the bags are unpacked, and many wonder: Whats next?

American history is littered with political movements that have seen varying degrees of success. The Civil Rights Movement, led by Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., resulted in federal law protecting civil rights. The Tea Party Movement led to lawmakers such as Rep Jim Jordan realizing increased power in Congress, as well as a drive right within the party. The Occupy Movements results remain largely unseen.

But the sheer breadth of Saturday more than a million protested in cities across the country and even around the world has been motivating for the same left-leaning activists who lamented the November election results.

This is where emotion and motion meet, said Mary Ann Marsh, a Democratic political consultant based in Massachusetts. You cant invent that. You cant organize that. You can have all the data that you want in the world and you cant make that many people show up on the same day for the same reason unless everyone feels the same way.

Since the march, said Chappell-Dick, we have this kind of energy and this kind of network thats ready to mobilize and fired up about how we are going to use each other to magnify our causes.

But what those causes are arent easy to summarize. During more than four hours of speeches at the march, protestors touched topics including immigration, health care, reproductive rights, Native American rights, gun violence, black lives matter, Muslim rights, LGBTQ rights and even whether tampons should be taxed when Rogaine and Viagra are not.

It was a kitchen sinks worth of liberal causes, and its unclear yet whether the wide range of rallying cries will ultimately keep those who gathered from coalescing.

Sometimes when you go to a protest and its about stopping the war and you see people holding signs for other causes, you see it as a disarray and a lack of focus, said Becky bond, author of Rules for Revolutionaries: How Big Organizing Can Change Everything. But the array of issues at the womens march, she said, is a strength.

Its going to take all of us working together to oppose the worst abuses of the Trump administration and also have different electoral results in 2018 and 2010, she said.

But Tom Zawistowski, a Tea Party leader in northeast Ohio, said the Tea Party succeeded because their grievances were straightforward: They wanted Obamacare repealed and spending tightened. He said the grievances of those who marched last weekend are not targeted enough.

If youre going to have a movement, message is very important, he said.

The group may also need a leader. While Martin Luther King Jr. became the de facto leader of the civil rights movement, the group that organized Saturdays march numbered nearly a half dozen. Theres no clear face to the movement, and in listening to Saturdays speeches, no consensus on whether the Democratic old guard or a new generation of Democrats is better suited to keep the momentum going. The Democratic National Committee itself is in a state of flux: Theyre in the middle of electing their next chair, and as of yet no clear Democratic leader has emerged to replace 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, though Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Cory Booker of New Jersey and even Sherrod Brown of Ohio have been mentioned as possible 2020 names.

But Chappell-Dick said there doesnt need to be one leader when social media can be used to mobilize people with the touch of a button. At the march, organizers asked people attending to text their information to a number. Now, she said, hundreds of thousands of people sympathetic to the march can be reached and mobilized via smartphone.

This has definitely ginned up people who have never been excited about politics before, said Bethany Lesser, a Bexley native former spokeswoman for Democratic senators including Brown and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. Maybe the best outcome of this is that people who never cared about these before, who have been casual voters or maybe not even voters are suddenly waking up and realizing they have to be part of the process.

But Zawistowski said he doubts that the march will translate that into actual change.

He said the protestors have an electoral disadvantage that is hard to overcome. Democrats hold the minority in Congress and congressional districts are drawn to protect Republicans. The Tea Party, he said, found success by running more conservative Republicans in districts already held by the GOP.

The November elections, he said, were a seminal defeat for them. This was their Waterloo, and they lost. And its really, really impossible for them to recover.

Follow this link:
Will progressives learn lessons from the tea party to fight Trump? - MyDaytonDailyNews

By Moira Walsh on January 28, 2017

The war on drugs has always been a war on people. Mostly poor people of color, like many of my constituents.

As Richard Nixons aide John Ehrlichman admitted, the war on drugs was originally launched to target anti-war leftists and black communities. The disproportionate enforcement of drug laws against poor communities of color continues today. Plenty of my constituents are held back by a minor marijuana offense on their record. And the data backs this up. The ACLU reports that people of color in Rhode Island are almost three times more likely to be arrested for drugs.

With the opportunity to legalize marijuana this year, Rhode Island stands on the verge of knocking down one of the central pillars of the war on drugs in our state. But well need progressives to fight for it in order to win. Some assume that marijuana will legalize itself, because its inevitable. Im here to tell you, its not inevitable. Just like every other important political issue, we have to fight for it.

We need progressives in the trenches this year not only to ensure the legislation is passed, but also to make sure its done the right way. Marijuana in the underground market is a vital source of income for some people, mostly people who are young and poor with few other economic opportunities. Its up to progressives to ensure that we end the war on marijuana in a way that doesnt leave those vulnerable communities behind.

Fortunately, the primary sponsors of the legislation seem to understand this. Although there are some ways to strengthen the legislation in its current form, the bill proposed by Rep. Slater and Sen. Miller contains provisions that seek to promote diversity and inclusion of people of color within the legal marijuana economy.

But when the bill moves forward, there will be an amendment process. This will present an opportunity to propose even more progressive provisions, but it is also a chance for opponents to eliminate the good ones already there. Progressives need to get behind the bill to ensure the final product is just and fair. If we sit on the sidelines, either the bill will not pass and the war on marijuana will continue or the bill may pass in a way that prevents people of color from participating in the newly formed marijuana economy.

Legalizing marijuana is clearly a winning issue for progressives. What is risky is allowing low-hanging fruit to go unpicked. Its very clear that in this moment of resistance our constituents want their elected leaders to stand up and fight for issues they care about. Failing to support an issue that is so commonsense and so popular will only reinforce the idea that Democrats are weak and spineless.

So this is a call to my fellow Democrats and progressives: join me and fight to end the war on marijuana in Rhode Island this year. Help me ensure that we undo a major piece of the war on drugs, and help me do it in a way that does not reproduce racial discrimination in the legal marijuana market. Be part of the process to ensure that justice is achieved. We can do this together.

VN:R_U [1.9.20_1166]

Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)

Posted in Featured, Marijuana, State House | Tagged cannabis, marijuana |

Read more:
Progressives must mobilize to end the war on cannabis - RI Future

Imagine if President Trump announced that he wanted to oust California from the United States. If it weren't for us, after all, Trump would have won the popular vote he so lusts after by 1.4 million. Blue America would lose its biggest source of electoral votes in all future elections. The Senate would have two fewer Democrats. The House of Representatives would lose 38 Democrats and just 14 Republicans. The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, among the most liberal in the nation, would be changed irrevocably. And the U.S. as a whole would suddenly be a lot less ethnically diverse than it is today.

For those reasons, Trump, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, Republicans with White House ambitions, opponents of legalizing marijuana, advocates of criminalizing abortion and various white nationalist groups might all conclude for different reasons that they would benefit politically from a separation, even as liberals and progressives across America would correctly see it as a catastrophe.

So it makes sense that the leader of the Yes California Independence Campaign, Marcus Ruiz Evans, was contrary to popular assumptions a registered Republican when he formed the separatist group two years ago, according to the San Jose Mercury News. He briefly hosted conservative talk radio shows in Fresno, and would not tell the newspaper if he voted for Trump.

And yet hes pitching independence to Golden State progressives. In a Mercury News op-ed article, Evans announced that his organization will soon start circulating a petition for a Calexit vote and thus begin the long, multi-step process for withdrawal from the United States. Californians are better educated, wealthier, more liberal, and value healthcare and education more than the rest of the country, he argued. Our views on education, science, immigration, taxation and healthcare are different.

The Yes California Independence website, moreover, is clearly addressed to Trump-haters, some of whom tweeted out support for a Calexit after election day. If Trumps enemies go down this road, he doesnt need friends.

At a moment of great urgency, as a subset of those who govern us veer toward authoritarianism, Yes California Independence is sucking up attention on a gambit that is highly unlikely to succeed, and that existentially threatens Democrats if it does. The 2018 midterms could change the course of U.S. history. They will determine whether Trump will continue to govern without meaningful restraint from congressional Republicans who've abandoned conservative principles to exploit his populism or face a newly invigorated opposition party willing to investigate his conflicts of interest.

Theres a huge downside to the Calexit movement, and no real upside.

For decades California has exerted more influence on American politics and culture than vice versa. Secession would not improve our values. But it would practically ensure that the rest of the U.S. would drift farther away from our laid-back tolerance and easygoing diversity. And they'd still be our neighbors, geographic reality unchanged by political independence.

It reminds me of the old joke about a libertarian complaining to a conservative about civil liberties violations in America. "Bah! Love it or leave it," the conservative scolds. "What," the libertarian retorts, "and subject myself to its abusive foreign policy?"

Many of the arguments offered by the Yes California Independence Committee dont even pass a sniff test. "California has some of the best universities," one talking point begins, "but in various ways, our schools are among the worst in the country." If most other states are outperforming us in education, why would secession be necessary for improvement?

"California is a global leader on environmental issues," another item begins. "However, as long as the other states continue debating whether or not climate change is real, they will continue holding up real efforts to reduce carbon emissions." But if the United States minus California continues to do little or nothing nothing to combat climate change, Californians along with the rest of the world will suffer.

Evans acknowledged some of the dangers that secession invites in his newspaper op-ed article, though he naively dismissed all of them. "No one is going to pull money out of California if it secedes," he wrote, apparently oblivious to the fact that several major companies have already pulled out of the state and moved to cheaper ones even without the costs secession would impose.

"If the banks are too big to fail," he declared, "then a top 10 economy is too." But the banks did fail! And the odds of a Washington bailout would be rather slim once we cut ties. We'd be more like Greece to its Germany nicer weather, sure, but that ain't everything.

And did I mention Colorado River water?

The main benefit of a California exit would be psychic. There is a subset of people here, mostly from the privileged classes, who feel sullied by their political affiliation with Red America. Secession would boost their sense of personal virtue.

The Calexit movement is trying to exploit that.

But satisfying the urge for ideological purity would come at a very dear cost: a worse life for many millions of Californians and tens of millions of Americans.

Conor Friedersdorf is a contributing writer to Opinion, a staff writer at the Atlantic and founding editor of the Best of Journalism, a newsletter that curates exceptional nonfiction.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter@latimesopinionorFacebook

MORE FROM OPINION

What happens to democracy when the experts cant be both factual and balanced?

See the rest here:
'Calexit' would be a disaster for progressive values - Los Angeles Times

Whenever someones candidate does not win an election, theres a period of disappointment that follows, which turns into acceptance before everyone, for the most part, moves on.

Stories of people waking up the day after the November election with feelings of distress and despair were not uncommon for chunks of communities across the United States. But as that despair turned, progressives found a way, a means to channel their energy and theyre taking the example of an unlikely group that did a similar effort years ago, the Tea Party.

At first, those now involved in these efforts deal with thoughts and emotions stemming from the results of the election.

After the election, we were all in the doldrums and bummed out, said Mike Balay of Newtown Square. He turned off the news, focused on family during the holidays and then, on Jan. 4, he saw a segment on Rachel Maddow that resonated with him.

Advertisement

It was the first time he heard of the Indivisible Guide, a website and document written by former congressional staffers that analyzed the tactics that were effectively used by the Tea Party and could be used in deflecting policies in this administration.

Balay said he recalled thinking, I can deal with this. This makes sense to me.

That weekend, he was gathering with friends at Lisa Goldsteins home in Radnor as part of a reunion for those who worked to get out the vote for Hillary Clinton in the Marple/Newtown area.

Despite the snow, 40 people attended.

At that meeting, 15 or 20 people signed up to actively volunteer, Goldstein said.

That initial gathering has become what is now the Indivisible Main Line South group, covering Newtown, Marple, Edgmont and parts of Radnor. Dozens of others have sprouted up throughout the Delaware Valley region.

The thing that really appealed to me about this approach to things is this notion of a community of people with common values and common interests, Balay said. Its not political, per se. Its not about party politics. Its about a local community working together very inclusive, very diverse and basically focusing on issues. The concept of Indivisible is to bring us all together.

Goldstein agreed.

Indivisible captured in its very name that we needed to not be divided, we needed to be united in our resistance, she said.

That is being energized by the actions of the president.

The back-handed benefit of what Donald Trump has done is hes created kind of a lightning rod to drum energy into this community of people who say Ive got to do something, Balay said.

When she was participating in the Womens March on Washington, Goldstein saw the words of Martin Luther King Jr. on signs and they reverberated with her. One was, Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.

And, she also thought of Elie Wiesel when he said, We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.

Balay and Goldstein explained how it works.

He said his group has a leadership team of himself, Abu Rahman, Ed Goss and Sarah Dunn with about 120 people, broken into areas of interest. Their main focus at this time is engaging their federal legislators, U.S. Sens. Robert Casey, D-Pa., and Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., and U.S. Rep. Patrick Meehan, R-7, of Chadds Ford.

Its our job to hold them accountable and to be representative of all their constituents, whatever their political leanings are, they still have a responsibility to represent all of their constituents, Balay said. Were basically holding their feet to the fire literally every day somebodys calling, somebodys logging onto the website, somebody is showing up at their office or were demonstrating.

Goldstein said, We believe in talking the talk and walking the walk. Its making a phone call to your rep. Show up at their office. Show up at an event.

Balay added, It really is to resist the parts of the Trump and Republican agenda that are racist, they are non-democratic and impinge upon equal rights for all communities. Things that impact, in my own view, and undermine the pillars of our democracy.

Both said interest continues to grow, and Balay said he receives two or three requests every day from those wanting to get involved.

Goldstein said, I talk about it in the supermarket, I talk about it everywhere I go.

Balay said it doesnt take much.

It doesnt have to be a full-time job, he said. It shouldnt be a full-time job. If you think you can commit a few hours a week or a few hours every couple weeks, you could constructively be part of this group.

Much of this approach was taken from the example of the Tea Party, although the Indivisibles say there are differences.

I dont agree with what the Tea Party stood for or many of their tactics, but they were effective, Goldstein said. They were effective. Look where we are eight years later. It worked.

However, Balay said, The one thing were not like the Tea Party is were respectful to our representatives, were respectful to the supporters of our representatives, even the Trumpers. Were respectful and when we bring issues to our representatives and to the public, its based on facts.

Goldstein agreed, saying, I dont want to get out there and scream and yell. I want to do something that works.

And, she continued she wants to build community and have a mechanism by which Americans can learn to have varying perspectives in a respectful way.

Somewhere along the way, the principles our democracy have been founded on have been lost on being able to disagree and get along with each other, she said.

And, they hope it expands in its inclusiveness and encourages civic engagement in civil ways.

The Tea Party was very effective with a small number of people, Balay said. But if we can keep focused then the group is going to grow a lot bigger and its going to last a long time. As long as we can stay focused, I think were going to be far more powerful than the Tea Party.

To get involved with the Indivisible Main Line South group, email mb@indivisiblemls7thpa.org. For more information on any of the groups, visit indivisibleguide.com.

See original here:
Alt-Left? Progressives in Delco & across U.S. mobilize, taking page ... - The Delaware County Daily Times