and done that; but, I understand it!

- to sponsor an activist arm separate from but liase with the business arm to engage in protests and other forms of activism? This, of course would require some publicity in order to recruit activists and some little effort to get things organized and up and running. In turn this activist arm could liase with other independent resistance and activist organizations, but would reap benefits of positive imaging for the Democratic Party to have a consistent presence at protest and other events.

Our local party is trying to organize a rapid response team, but the word needs to get out quick. (Drafting emails takes time..LOL)

That's where other groups come in. Effective protests need to consist of large groups. More than those who are just active with the party. They need to consist of a variety of people from numerous walks of life.

There are groups organizing protests here and the party works with them to promote events. The more groups, the better! [/b]There are also protesters, for some reason, who do not want to be affiliated with a political party.

There are also non-partisan protests. There is a great group here: Texans for Public Education. They're well organized and they are totally non-partisan. They organize with numerous groups and have been effective at blocking legislation. They are also focused on one thing too. (Public education in Texas)

Many groups that are rooted in protest such as NAACP and LULAC are non-partisan (they're legally non-partisan by law). They are issue oriented, not party oriented. Same with unions. They maybe affiliated with values of the Democratic Party, but they are non-partisan.

So what are they doing in those meetings? Would their presence even be missed in most of them? Sorry, they can’t both claim they’re too busy working and they have no power to get anything accomplished.

making a unified visible statement of opposition on the day when the US alienates EVERY ally it ever had, would do the trick.

I know many here think I'm awful for suggesting such a thing. So be it.

I see posts about how they need to be "in the streets". Protesting and going to marches is lot of work. Sure attending an important, well organized one here and there is great, but "being in the streets" (going to every protest when you have a job to do) is counter productive.

but failed. Sounds like a protest to me even if they were there more briefly to speak 😁

I also think the late great John Lewis would disagree with you.

There's a difference. Yes attending major organized rallies can have an impact.

I'm talking congress. Even for peons like me, we've gotta vote!! We've gotta prepare for elections. That's main reason the party exists. If we don't vote, we lose! We have to keep our eye on the prize. Trust me, I'm a peon and just one step up from protester.

I know they're congress, they have different jobs than the party, but they have business they need to do.

Of course well organized protests here and there are great, but I don't expect them to stand on a street corner with a knee jerk reaction, every time Trump does something unethical(which is every day)

My dad taught me quite a bit about over-reacting. I don't believe I ever saw John Lewis over-react.

for the opposition party to present targeted, unified, visible statements of opposition as our Democracy dies.

On Friday, our government alienated every ally we have ever had. Our government changed our fundamental purpose in the world. It took us from being an opponent to fascism to being its greatest proponent.

On such an occasion, there should have been more opposition from our leaders than a series of tweets.

It doesn't need to take away from the daily work. It can be organized by a single member and executed by a PR firm so the members only need to show up on the Capitol steps on an afternoon, or to a TV talk show on a Sunday morning.

But being the voice of opposition IS part of their jobs.

The former did, of course, inform him in elected office. I think his actions differed as Congressman. His activism meant that even putting out a statement agreeing with the position of the protestors was important. However, even more important was his work in Congress, his credibility speaking out, and his mentoring of people like Senator Warnock.

I suspect that he would agree with the op because all of those tedious, difficult tasks to run the party or a governmental office are absolutely needed. I would also bet that a random day the op spends doing those things is long term more important than if they joined a protest that day. Being with the protestors and protesting would be more exciting, but both things need to be done.

For well known elected officials, judiciously using some time to speak out, in the media, social media or to a crowd can have an important impact. However, remember that THEY have a staff, representing them and doing a lot of the type of things the op speaks of.

is to the US CONSTITUTION! How long will this idea be relevant if this conflagration is allowed to continue.

Clearly, IMO we need to put out the fire to continue to allow for Judicial electioneering.

We can in fact walk and chew gum.

In this environment we need people who are known and are press grabbing entities to raise their voices in support of constitutional norms.

That part of the strategy, is letting the pressure built. Trump holds most of the power, but his attempts to control the narratives isn’t working as well as before.

have already been rescinded by 5 pm!!!