Comments on: Working Families Party Has Candidates in Four States

By: Eugene Platt

Eugene Platt — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 01:51:50 +0000

Thursday (9:38 p.m., EDT), September 25

Richard, because you are right much more often than you are wrong, I hestitated to send this; nevertheless, your third paragraph above may be misleading. I live in Charleston, South Carolina and received the WFP nomination for State House Seat 115—with Democratic Party encouragement. Indeed, the Chairman of the Charleston County Democratic Party drove me to the WFP convention in Columbia where I received their nomination May 3!
Also at that WFP convention, Mike Cone was nominated for the U.S. Senate. On June 10 Mike, I, and other WFP nominees were unsuccessful in the Democratic primary. Later, the WFP decided not to certify any of its candidates to the State Election Commission. I cannot speak of Mike but am under the impression that he—like I—would have been happy to run as on the WFP ballot line in November.

By: Green in Brooklyn

Green in Brooklyn — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 15:39:44 +0000

How many candidates do the WFP have that aren’t Democrats? fusion dems do not count as WFP candidates from my point of view – they are just Dems after all.

By: billvanallen

billvanallen — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:33:21 +0000

more of an enforcement (tactical) arm of labor — especially NYSUT and sister education based unions.

By: David Gaines

David Gaines — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 05:03:39 +0000

What interest does the Democratic Party have in getting its nominees not to accept the nomination of another party in a fusion state? Am I missing something, or does the contradict common sense? Doesn’t it help increase the candidates’ vote totals? I don’t recall ever hearing about Democrats in New York State forcing its nominees to refuse the Liberal Party nomination. In fact, I believe the American Labor Party was created (in New York) specifically to help FDR’s vote total there and reduce support for the Socialist Party, was it not?

By: Scott West

Scott West — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:38:02 +0000

The WFP was set up in NY first by ACORN and some large union organizations (like the Communication Workers District 1, various Teamster and SEIU locals) who wanted to replace the Liberal Party (a patronage engine taking up space on the ballot) and didn’t like the anti-Democrat stance of the Labor Party (the currently existing one founded in Cleveland around 1996). CWA had participated in the founding of the Labor Party, but evidently weren’t committed independent politics.

After the Labor Party set itself up in SC, the WFP did the same. The SC AFL-CIO isn’t that big. I’d be interested in learning whether this is just a tactical split, or a sign of a real difference in opinion.

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:22:48 +0000

Frank MacKay has no connection with the Working Families Party. If anyone is the national head of the Working Families Party, it is Dan Cantor. But there is no true national structure, just associated state parties.

By: Laine

Laine — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 03:12:30 +0000

If Democrats won’t accept the fusion nomination of the Working Families Party then, they should nominate their own candidates independent from the Democrats.

By: Alex Englemann

Alex Englemann — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 02:35:35 +0000

Is Frank MacKay the Chairman of this political party in addition to the other 2 or 3 parties he claims to be Chairman of???