"Our Revolution Los Angeles" Berners declare DemExit, joining People's Party

Jerry Russell

Staff member
By a vote of 72%, Bernie Sanders campaign organizers in Los Angeles have decided to bolt the Democratic Party and join the Movement for a Peoples' Party.

Press release:

Los Angeles, CA -- Our Revolution Los Angeles announced today that an overwhelming majority of its members have voted to form a major new party and it is joining the Movement for a People’s Party. The chapter represents more than 10,000 people in Los Angeles. They are asking other Our Revolution chapters and progressive groups to join MPP and the fight for a people’s party alongside them.
Former Bernie 2020 Co-Chair and Our Revolution President Sen. Nina Turner also showed her support for the Movement for a People’s Party in a series of tweets last week, including retweeting, “Our future is in a #PeoplesParty” and MPP’s website. Turner is joining MPP on an upcoming national call. Prominent Sanders surrogates RoseAnn DeMoro and John Cusack shared their support for a new party as well.
Jerry Perez from the group appeared on Jimmy Dore today, saying that he believes the grassroots organizers have finally had enough with DNC betrayals.

Last edited:
Demexit at last!!!

Did I hear him say he thinks Bernie would come along? I don't think I could trust him after what he did.

I wonder how much they can suck out of Trump's vote, but can they get a candidate in the general election in any case?
I wonder how much they can suck out of Trump's vote, but can they get a candidate in the general election in any case?

Perhaps high-level talks are going on behind the scenes to negotiate a merger with the Green Party. The MPP group needs to have some idea how they are going to do better than the Greens have in the past, and they also need to justify why they don't just subordinate themselves to the exisisting Green organization. The Greens are likely to qualify to appear on the ballot in most states.

The biggest group of voters is "Did Not Vote". As shown in the map below, in 2016 "Did Not Vote" would have won 471 votes out of 538 at the Electoral College, an overwhelming landslide victory. People's Party needs to appeal to non-voters and independents first of all: give them a reason to vote. Next, they need to appeal to Trump's disenfranchised populist base, but without making any overtures to white nationalism or Christian fundamentalism. The "Blue No Matter Who" voters will come around if they see that the MPP is bringing home the non-voters and the reasonable Republicans left behind by Trump.

The Movement for People's Party also needs to avoid the appearance of spoiling the election and handing it to Trump. If polls show they've got no chance to win, they need to throw their support to Biden. But they should wait until the last possible moment, and ask for concessions from the Democrats without conceding any long-term goals or aspirations.


Noting the massive DNV majority above...
Demexit at last!!!

Did I hear him say he thinks Bernie would come along? I don't think I could trust him after what he did.

I wonder how much they can suck out of Trump's vote, but can they get a candidate in the general election in any case?
...and that Jerry Perez and others, apparently of his ethnic background, are leaving the Democrits to start their own party, are you actually telling me Richard, that by "DeMex-it" - 'it' meaning the Democrats - you actually mean to say that Latinos are leaving the Democrats to start their own party?

Or do you just mean Dem-exit? Given the wonderful video you've just posted for us on vaccines causing autism, a breakup of the USA on ethnic lines seems to be growing - though very likely I'm mistaken as I'm just a hick-Aussie :confused: taken in by superficial appearances in the USA.

Yours faithfully
I have long been part of the DNV, seeing a non-vote as a more effective vote than a vote. In any case, Demexit is supposed to be a general exit from the corrupt Dem party. Separatist Mexicans have long had an alternative for their Mexexit, the Reconquista.
The following is an excellent discussion of what happened with Bernie ... and the importance of understanding "who the enemy is". This is important for a new breakaway left party to understand fully, and thus that there can be no accommodation with either the corporate left or right, unless the new kids on the block are getting the best part of a deal.

The New Deal came about because FDR's political hand was forced, not because he wanted to go there. Instead such as he are lionized, and now we have ended up with Let Them Eat Cake Pelosi and Schumer playing Who Wants to be a Trillionaire with Trump.

Here are some highlights of the People's Party convention.


Jimmy Dore:

Ron Placone:

In the 5-hour convention video linked at the top, the talks by Cornel West, Nick Brana and Nina Turner are also well worth watching. Marianne Williamson, author of "A Course in Miracles" appeared and didn't sound the least bit spooky or woo-woo. All of this is cued up after 3:38:00. Or watch the whole thing.
From the FAQ page, the People's Party explains why they will succeed where so many aspiring third parties have failed.

  • MPP’s mission is different from existing independent parties. We’re building a coalition of community organizations, student groups, unions, progressive groups, and others that can unite for a major new party. Polls consistently show that a majority of Americans want a major new party but are not enthused by existing independent parties.
  • More than a hundred years of social science show that when progress stalls, it takes new parties and movements to shake things up and win. Left parties have existed for several decades in Europe and Latin America, but it wasn’t until a new generation of left parties came about in the last five years that they broke-through. The same happened in our country’s history. Abolitionist parties like the Free Soil Party and Liberty Party had existed for many years before the Republican Party, but it took a new party to finally breakthrough.
  • It might seem intuitive to think that small parties that have been around for decades could grow and be more successful, but history indicates that it takes fresh new parties to captivate public imagination and succeed. New parties innovate, are more in sync with the historical moment, are technologically savvy, and inspire a sense of great possibility. They also come about at the right political moment, when the public is ready for a mass break with the establishment. They are free of the baggage of longstanding smaller parties, which come to be viewed as marginal and stale. Historically, longstanding small parties serve the role of inspiring and paving the way for new larger break-through parties.
  • We bring professional political and organizational knowledge and skills from having worked on Democratic Party campaigns before setting out to build a major new people’s party. We also have the networks to bring over others who remain in the establishment parties. The early Republican Party succeeded because it drew over a large number of former Whig voters, elected officials, party officials. Having recently come from the Democratic Party helps us understand, communicate, and bring over other people and groups from the Democratic Party. It also gives us the personal connections to bring over elected officials and professional campaigners to help set up the party and run winning campaigns.

  • Disenfranchised Americans are not voting. Millions of Americans choose to stay home, completely uninspired. They realize the corrupt, corporate, billionaire-approved candidates will never represent them. Only a new party built on the progressive views of the majority can inspire the turnout necessary to defeat the plutocrats’ agenda.
  • Affiliation with the major parties has been declining for a decade. There are now far more Independents than Democrats or Republicans. If even half of progressives still tolerating the Democratic party and only half of Independents were to join the new party, it would be the largest party in America. What remained of the Democrats would become the spoiler!
Also from the FAQ:

A party’s name is its first impression and identity. It can lead people to see themselves reflected in the party and invite them to learn more, or it can convey that it is not for them. For an independent party to become a major party, people from all walks of life must be able to see themselves belonging to it from the start. That takes a party name and character that encompasses and invites everyone. “The People’s Party” is a statement in itself, that a political party must belong to the people, and that all are welcome. It also leads people to ask, “Who do the major parties belong to?”
But wait... is the name "People's Party" really new? What about the Peoples' Republics of China and North Korea? Doesn't that parallel immediately come to mind, at least subliminally? I know it did for me, though I immediately dismissed it.
In an editorial posted yesterday morning (Sept. 7), the WSWS made it clear that their Trotskyite party will not be joining the People's Party coalition. They complain that the MPP is a hodgepodge of individuals with very wide ranging viewpoints, ranging from the Libertarian militarism of Jesse Ventura to Green New Deal Democrats like Marianne Williamson. They are concerned that the appeal to "people" is so diverse that it could include the billionaire elite.

...To the extent that there is a theory behind the MPP, it is that a political movement is built on the lowest common denominator. No differences can be discussed, and any examination of the political role and record of the individuals involved must be avoided at all costs. There is a semi-conscious recognition that if they discussed anything seriously, the smiles would disappear and the whole operation would blow apart.