Pretending climate change doesn't exist and tossing LGBTQIA+ Americans under the bus is quite the choice. Good luck with your ghoulish machinations -- this is certainly the era for it.
Pretending Americans' actual views on climate change and LGBTQIA+ issues don't exist is also quite the choice, particularly in a (notionally) democratic political system.
Those issues are not monolithic. (E.g. antidiscrimination provisions in employment are extremely popular.) Understanding where to push and where to pull back is a whole lot better of a tactic than issuing mindless no-retreat orders.
Even $10 or $20...every little bit helps get us there.
Spread the need far & wide to your friends, family, & social media networks, please.
If anyone would like to learn more about the SBOR, start with its website (sign up there, please) and this article on its Substack (subscribe there for all sorts of great information 2-3 times/week, please):
Taking billionaire money to fight against progressive policies. Adam Jentleson is a blight on the Democratic Party and if any of you were serious about making this world better you would donate your money to charity and then walk into the woods alone.
This sort of inflexibility and rejection of reality is the exact mindset that got us 8 years of Trump and will get us many, many more like him if we do not change course.
Nope. Just the TQ+. No one is entitled to special rights over and above what everyone is entitled to. Keep men out of women’s spaces and sports. Stop trying to force unscientific, nonsensical, meaningless BS like gender onto the rest of us. We said “NO” and you loons got us four more years of Trump by not waking up. Wake up.
Even $10 or $20...every little bit helps get us there.
Spread the need far & wide to your friends, family, & social media networks, please.
If anyone would like to learn more about the SBOR, start with its website (sign up there, please) and this article on its Substack (subscribe there for all sorts of great information 2-3 times/week, please):
Great to see this effort. The hysterical comments from individuals who want to maintain the misguided and losing status quo liberal politics are predictable.
You have to win elections if you want to improve people's lives through politics. Moderating on high salience issues is an obvious way to do that.
For a Statement of Purpose, this doesn't seem to give much insight into your purpose. You say it is essential to start from first principles? What are those principles? "Policy is only as good as the results it produces," and "Durable policy produces better results."? I don't see how that amounts to anything beyond reinforcing truisms. Further, your four core values [Fairness, Pluralism, Growth, and Security] are so broad as to be meaningless without definition
Also, if you are going to have many different voices under the same roof, you need to be transparent about the data you take for granted. You cited as a key part of your reasoning a bizarre take on the political compass from Echelon Insights (it lists populists as being socially conservative?), a polling firm formed by key GOP strategists. I am not saying you should discount these results for that reason. Still, it is strange to base a key aspect of your understanding of the American people on a study from a clearly partisan organization without disclosing that partisanship.
As others mention, there is also a blatant lack of recognition of either minority or environmental issues. Focusing on minority issues (both queer and race) first, I understand that these are increasingly complex issues to incorporate, but you certainly cannot have a big tent without addressing the concerns of these constituencies. For environmentalism, it is bizarre that you don't mention wanting safe and healthy water/air/land among your policy goals. These are certainly goals that people can unite for if you break through the environmentalist terminology.
From these omissions, it seems to me like this organization is more willing to close its ears and eyes to complex issues that have fractured people for centuries, rather than actually addressing them. I hope future posts will address these substantive gaps.
My "heterodox" point is to stop being addicted to "heterodoxy". Above you say "We need an agenda that is as heterodox as the American people themselves." This makes no sense. "The people" are heterogeneous, not "heterodox". Later in your description of mission you say "heterodoxy breaks the binary and pushes leaders to embrace positions from different ideologies." But again, "heterodoxy" says nothing about "binaries". Pushing leaders to "embrace positions from different ideologies" does not mean you end up with a "heterodox" set of policies, but a heterogeneous one. Presumably the point is to assemble the policies that will work to deliver the results we want, regardless of the quadrant in which each such policy is considered "orthodox". That means you end up with a collection of policies that are orthodox, heterodox, or anathema, depending on the viewer and the source of the policy. Of course, if your goal is to convince liberals that they should only adopt policies that they as liberals would consider "heterodox", then you are merely trying to convince liberals to stop being liberals and to become populists, conservatives or libertarians. If your rallying cry is "We can only perfect liberalism through populist conservative libertarianism!" then you're just playing Orwellian word games. I believe in building a supermajority for effective policy ideas that will concretely and durably improve the material lives of Americans without sacrificing their Constitutional rights or their fundamental human rights and liberties. That is NOT a "heterodox" position.
I have subscribed hopeful of good ideas. I reject your contention that Democrats are afraid of innovative ideas. Democrats don’t control much right now, but where they do (states, local governments) many are fighting hard against authoritarianism. I also understand that all policy is flawed, and we must meet people where they are, but not at the expense of throwing difficult constituencies under the bus. A tall order. I’m anxious to see how you do.
If you guys look at this asshole’s posts on other sites you see he posts stuff from Libsoftiktok supporting ICE. This is the type of people supporting you. That is all anyone needs to know are fascists like this guy applaud you.
A LOT of people support ICE. And fascism is not a personality trait. Maybe instead of scrolling TikTok dedicate an hour each day to educating yourself.
You decry the use of polls and data set in the same section you use both to make your program seem power and reasonable
We don't need republican lite. We need a responsive and moral party
Those us who paying our taxes while your billionaire donor funds your essay contest want equity in taxes the end of the genocide and real protection for the planet.
You offer no ear to our voices you just want to poach republican voters. Who does help ?
The rights of LGB voters are not in danger. Most of us are in favor of ending the *special rights* you TQ+ loons have enjoyed for the past four years. They (and the open border) are the reason we have Trump now. Face it.
Hahaha! You’re so dense! I also subscribe to the NYT and WaPo. I don’t live in an echo chamber. I have a well-balanced news diet and I am open to changing my mind when sound, fact-based arguments are presented. You should try it, shill.
Even $10 or $20...every little bit helps get us there.
Spread the need far & wide to your friends, family, & social media networks, please.
If anyone would like to learn more about the SBOR, start with its website (sign up there, please) and this article on its Substack (subscribe there for all sorts of great information 2-3 times/week, please):
I subscribed to continue to hear from this community, as did everyone else who commented below, even if it was to criticize and troll. I don't know if this group has the answers, staying power, or will to make a difference in our current polarization state. However, they are trying something. The Democratic Party is losing on all fronts, and this just might be a Hail Mary. I only saw one post that mentioned the core problem: the establishment itself. The word politician is a pejorative. The politician is a hated individual, no matter the party. Sure, Trump has a cult of personality at his feet, but there is no one to replace him. All politicians lie is the common refrain. The irony is that Trump's people love him because he is honest in his lying. They expect it.
My point is that our government representatives are all fundraisers first and public servants last. This will not change because they control the levers that keep them in their jobs. They will not pass laws limiting their terms or the money they can raise or earn in office. Though it is in the best interest of those they represent, it is not in their best interest. DC changes Mr. Smith. I do, however, not think it prudent to "throw" any group under the "bus". Human rights are part of what brought the Democrats into the future. However, taking a deep dive into what someone's "truth" is and how it makes them fall into the arms of an autocratic regime is worth analyzing in hopes of finding a way to teach and persuade. Once an educator myself, this can be done with basic pedagogy. Lectures do not change minds or allow for good information retention. Working together helps with learning. Questioning and analysis among all voters allows for mind growth.
Messaging can be changed into, I am in this with you, not here to tell you what to do and how to think. Americans hate the sanctimonious diatribes that come from both parties. That skepticism is the rock this country was built on; the people are the waves crashing against that rock. Sometimes we erode and sometimes we retreat. Adults resist change and harden their hearts with age, experience, and wisdom. Listening, discourse, and open minds help to erode the hardened rock. Maybe, just maybe, this group will open hearts, minds, and eyes. Then again, perhaps they are just part of the establishment, which is petrified in stasis. I will give it a chance.
Mink - You are the best advertisement for why Searchlight Institute is needed that I can think of. Just the intolerance and sarcasm tell the story of why you are now “ the problem” .
You're ignoring the 800 lb gorilla. The 2-party duopoly is what has caused the division. The Dem's massive list of platforms points are far too broad.
Only an absolute, complete rebrand and platform focused on ending the 2-party system (RCV, multi-member districts), getting money out politics and universal healthcare will save our nation and the Dem party.
Pretending climate change doesn't exist and tossing LGBTQIA+ Americans under the bus is quite the choice. Good luck with your ghoulish machinations -- this is certainly the era for it.
Pretending Americans' actual views on climate change and LGBTQIA+ issues don't exist is also quite the choice, particularly in a (notionally) democratic political system.
Those issues are not monolithic. (E.g. antidiscrimination provisions in employment are extremely popular.) Understanding where to push and where to pull back is a whole lot better of a tactic than issuing mindless no-retreat orders.
You'll fit in fine among these establishment shills. 👍
Can you help establish The Second Bill of Rights 501(c)(3) this month? We need donations to meet our modest goal.
https://www.secondbillofrights.us
Even $10 or $20...every little bit helps get us there.
Spread the need far & wide to your friends, family, & social media networks, please.
If anyone would like to learn more about the SBOR, start with its website (sign up there, please) and this article on its Substack (subscribe there for all sorts of great information 2-3 times/week, please):
https://thesecondbillofrights.substack.com/p/red-land-blue-flame-im-new-here-where
Taking billionaire money to fight against progressive policies. Adam Jentleson is a blight on the Democratic Party and if any of you were serious about making this world better you would donate your money to charity and then walk into the woods alone.
This sort of inflexibility and rejection of reality is the exact mindset that got us 8 years of Trump and will get us many, many more like him if we do not change course.
Inflexibility means throwing LGBTQ people under the bus. You are are willing to sacrifice any minority group.
Nope. Just the TQ+. No one is entitled to special rights over and above what everyone is entitled to. Keep men out of women’s spaces and sports. Stop trying to force unscientific, nonsensical, meaningless BS like gender onto the rest of us. We said “NO” and you loons got us four more years of Trump by not waking up. Wake up.
Dude you follow Rufo and LibsofTikTok shows you are MAGA through and through.
So, as expected, you have no cogent argument. Just ad hominem attacks and baseless insults. Typical. Grow up and wake up.
Bro this isn’t a debate and we’re not in school. I straight up don’t fucking like you and hope you die. Stop talking to me you pathetic fucking worm.
You follow the biggest fascist on the Internet including a sworn neo-Nazi. That is not ad hominem it is fact. 🤡
Can you help establish The Second Bill of Rights 501(c)(3) this month? We need donations to meet our modest goal.
https://www.secondbillofrights.us
Even $10 or $20...every little bit helps get us there.
Spread the need far & wide to your friends, family, & social media networks, please.
If anyone would like to learn more about the SBOR, start with its website (sign up there, please) and this article on its Substack (subscribe there for all sorts of great information 2-3 times/week, please):
https://thesecondbillofrights.substack.com/p/red-land-blue-flame-im-new-here-where
Great to see this effort. The hysterical comments from individuals who want to maintain the misguided and losing status quo liberal politics are predictable.
You have to win elections if you want to improve people's lives through politics. Moderating on high salience issues is an obvious way to do that.
For a Statement of Purpose, this doesn't seem to give much insight into your purpose. You say it is essential to start from first principles? What are those principles? "Policy is only as good as the results it produces," and "Durable policy produces better results."? I don't see how that amounts to anything beyond reinforcing truisms. Further, your four core values [Fairness, Pluralism, Growth, and Security] are so broad as to be meaningless without definition
Also, if you are going to have many different voices under the same roof, you need to be transparent about the data you take for granted. You cited as a key part of your reasoning a bizarre take on the political compass from Echelon Insights (it lists populists as being socially conservative?), a polling firm formed by key GOP strategists. I am not saying you should discount these results for that reason. Still, it is strange to base a key aspect of your understanding of the American people on a study from a clearly partisan organization without disclosing that partisanship.
As others mention, there is also a blatant lack of recognition of either minority or environmental issues. Focusing on minority issues (both queer and race) first, I understand that these are increasingly complex issues to incorporate, but you certainly cannot have a big tent without addressing the concerns of these constituencies. For environmentalism, it is bizarre that you don't mention wanting safe and healthy water/air/land among your policy goals. These are certainly goals that people can unite for if you break through the environmentalist terminology.
From these omissions, it seems to me like this organization is more willing to close its ears and eyes to complex issues that have fractured people for centuries, rather than actually addressing them. I hope future posts will address these substantive gaps.
Congrats! Needed, timely, and overdue. I am excited to see your vision unfold and the growth of Searchlight. Super! 😎
My "heterodox" point is to stop being addicted to "heterodoxy". Above you say "We need an agenda that is as heterodox as the American people themselves." This makes no sense. "The people" are heterogeneous, not "heterodox". Later in your description of mission you say "heterodoxy breaks the binary and pushes leaders to embrace positions from different ideologies." But again, "heterodoxy" says nothing about "binaries". Pushing leaders to "embrace positions from different ideologies" does not mean you end up with a "heterodox" set of policies, but a heterogeneous one. Presumably the point is to assemble the policies that will work to deliver the results we want, regardless of the quadrant in which each such policy is considered "orthodox". That means you end up with a collection of policies that are orthodox, heterodox, or anathema, depending on the viewer and the source of the policy. Of course, if your goal is to convince liberals that they should only adopt policies that they as liberals would consider "heterodox", then you are merely trying to convince liberals to stop being liberals and to become populists, conservatives or libertarians. If your rallying cry is "We can only perfect liberalism through populist conservative libertarianism!" then you're just playing Orwellian word games. I believe in building a supermajority for effective policy ideas that will concretely and durably improve the material lives of Americans without sacrificing their Constitutional rights or their fundamental human rights and liberties. That is NOT a "heterodox" position.
I have subscribed hopeful of good ideas. I reject your contention that Democrats are afraid of innovative ideas. Democrats don’t control much right now, but where they do (states, local governments) many are fighting hard against authoritarianism. I also understand that all policy is flawed, and we must meet people where they are, but not at the expense of throwing difficult constituencies under the bus. A tall order. I’m anxious to see how you do.
An idea whose time is far overdue! Thank you for having the courage to do what should have been done for the party a decade ago!!
If you guys look at this asshole’s posts on other sites you see he posts stuff from Libsoftiktok supporting ICE. This is the type of people supporting you. That is all anyone needs to know are fascists like this guy applaud you.
A LOT of people support ICE. And fascism is not a personality trait. Maybe instead of scrolling TikTok dedicate an hour each day to educating yourself.
Fascist says what.
Good point. 🙄
The truth hurts boo.
ICE's favorability ratings have been underwater since at least June, per Newsweek (not exactly a liberal publication!!) and Pew Research:
https://www.newsweek.com/ice-donald-trump-approval-rating-polls-immigration-2087184
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2025/08/27/republicans-views-of-justice-department-fbi-rebound-as-democrats-views-shift-more-negative/
You decry the use of polls and data set in the same section you use both to make your program seem power and reasonable
We don't need republican lite. We need a responsive and moral party
Those us who paying our taxes while your billionaire donor funds your essay contest want equity in taxes the end of the genocide and real protection for the planet.
You offer no ear to our voices you just want to poach republican voters. Who does help ?
You do not speak for anyone but yourself.
They speak for the vast majority of LGBTQ voters who don’t want our rights thrown under the bus Chad.
The rights of LGB voters are not in danger. Most of us are in favor of ending the *special rights* you TQ+ loons have enjoyed for the past four years. They (and the open border) are the reason we have Trump now. Face it.
No boo. You can pretend you are a Democrat all you want. The fact you follower Rufo and LibsofTikTok shows exactly who you are. 🤡
Hahaha! You’re so dense! I also subscribe to the NYT and WaPo. I don’t live in an echo chamber. I have a well-balanced news diet and I am open to changing my mind when sound, fact-based arguments are presented. You should try it, shill.
Can you help establish The Second Bill of Rights 501(c)(3) this month? We need donations to meet our modest goal.
https://www.secondbillofrights.us
Even $10 or $20...every little bit helps get us there.
Spread the need far & wide to your friends, family, & social media networks, please.
If anyone would like to learn more about the SBOR, start with its website (sign up there, please) and this article on its Substack (subscribe there for all sorts of great information 2-3 times/week, please):
https://thesecondbillofrights.substack.com/p/red-land-blue-flame-im-new-here-where
Get that money while you can. We see what you are doing.
I subscribed to continue to hear from this community, as did everyone else who commented below, even if it was to criticize and troll. I don't know if this group has the answers, staying power, or will to make a difference in our current polarization state. However, they are trying something. The Democratic Party is losing on all fronts, and this just might be a Hail Mary. I only saw one post that mentioned the core problem: the establishment itself. The word politician is a pejorative. The politician is a hated individual, no matter the party. Sure, Trump has a cult of personality at his feet, but there is no one to replace him. All politicians lie is the common refrain. The irony is that Trump's people love him because he is honest in his lying. They expect it.
My point is that our government representatives are all fundraisers first and public servants last. This will not change because they control the levers that keep them in their jobs. They will not pass laws limiting their terms or the money they can raise or earn in office. Though it is in the best interest of those they represent, it is not in their best interest. DC changes Mr. Smith. I do, however, not think it prudent to "throw" any group under the "bus". Human rights are part of what brought the Democrats into the future. However, taking a deep dive into what someone's "truth" is and how it makes them fall into the arms of an autocratic regime is worth analyzing in hopes of finding a way to teach and persuade. Once an educator myself, this can be done with basic pedagogy. Lectures do not change minds or allow for good information retention. Working together helps with learning. Questioning and analysis among all voters allows for mind growth.
Messaging can be changed into, I am in this with you, not here to tell you what to do and how to think. Americans hate the sanctimonious diatribes that come from both parties. That skepticism is the rock this country was built on; the people are the waves crashing against that rock. Sometimes we erode and sometimes we retreat. Adults resist change and harden their hearts with age, experience, and wisdom. Listening, discourse, and open minds help to erode the hardened rock. Maybe, just maybe, this group will open hearts, minds, and eyes. Then again, perhaps they are just part of the establishment, which is petrified in stasis. I will give it a chance.
Mink - You are the best advertisement for why Searchlight Institute is needed that I can think of. Just the intolerance and sarcasm tell the story of why you are now “ the problem” .
Thank god this is happening. Which coast are you based on?
You're ignoring the 800 lb gorilla. The 2-party duopoly is what has caused the division. The Dem's massive list of platforms points are far too broad.
Only an absolute, complete rebrand and platform focused on ending the 2-party system (RCV, multi-member districts), getting money out politics and universal healthcare will save our nation and the Dem party.
I can see your policy priorities and core principles. What is your governing framework and its core principles?
Project 2025 realigned the governance framework.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOvFM_kjsjV/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
I was wondering if Searchlight has an opinion about an actual election on the horizon, the NYC mayoral race?