Talk:Forward Party (United States)

src: https://www.axios.com/2022/07/28/andrew-yang-forward-party-merger JHelzer💬 03:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Additional source for co-chairs: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-former-republicans-democrats-form-new-third-us-political-party-2022-07-27/ JHelzer💬 03:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Co-CEO: Miles Taylor (Former Republican)
• national Organizing Director: Will Conway (Former Republican)

src: Twitter profile descriptions, need reliable source

• Advisory Board Member: Joe Sestak (Former Democrat)

src: https://www.politicspa.com/sestak-named-to-new-third-political-party-advisory-board/110831/ JHelzer💬 04:12, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@JHelzer

• Co-Ceo: Miles Taylor - https://www.politicspa.com/sestak-named-to-new-third-political-party-advisory-board/110831/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=sestak-named-to-new-third-political-party-advisory-board
• Co-Chair: David Jolly (only source said such though, others just founder) - https://www.wuwf.org/local-news/2022-08-01/calling-all-disgruntled-democrats-and-republicans-a-new-political-party-wants-you
• National Organizing Direktor: Will Conway - https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/08/tired-of-left-right-gridlock-forward-party-vying-for-michigans-2024-ballot.html Pennsylvania2 (talk) 04:25, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Co-CEO: Matt Shinners

src: Linked-in Profile. Need reliable source JHelzer💬 04:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Co-founder: David Jolly

src: https://twitter.com/Fwd_Party/status/1559180724661542920 (MSNBC) JHelzer💬 14:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The PAC and the newly formed political party are two separate entities, and while they are related I think it would make the most sense to split the two. A PAC is not a political party. What are other editors' thoughts? I am fine doing the work to split this out if consensus is reached. Cheers! --Kbabej (talk) 18:20, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. We go by reliable sources, not the government's definition of what a party is. And all reliable sources have defined this as a party, just as the organization has. The legal structure at the moment is a detail that can be mentioned, but there clearly has not been separate reporting on a PAC vs. a party. There's barely enough sourcing for one article as it is. Parties are complex legal entities with many parts, that does not mean those various parts need their own articles if they are not independently notable. ― 

Talk 20:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

In diving into the background more, I think you're right, @

Tartan357. Initially I thought it was created solely as a PAC and then made a decisive split into a political party, but it looks like it's been muddled from the start, at least from what I'm seeing. Cheers! --Kbabej (talk) 18:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Right. The intent from the start has been for this to be a party. Registering a political party in the US is no small task, and it is quite typical to have to start out as a PAC or other legal entity. ― 

Talk 18:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm not sure which of the following is more accurate.

a. The Forward Party started on October 5, 2021 by Yang with RCV and UBI as a platform and later RAM and SAM merged with it.

b. The Forward Party started on July 27, 2022 as a new organization, merged from RAM, SAM and FWD.

I have been thinking of it a option b. If option b is correct FWD PAC could have it's own page like the other two because all three started and have ended when the new Forward Party was created. An alternative is to give the three originals their own paragraph in the history section and delete the extra pages. JHelzer💬 14:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, there has been some disagreement on whether or not the Forward Party split from the Democratic Party (United States) and/or Republican Party (United States).

Democratic Party- [1] - This reference was used to list the Forward Party as a "split from" the Democratic Party and largely relies on the fact Yang left the Democratic Party to form the Forward Party. Personally, I think this is good enough to list it as a split from the democratic party. The parties founder and main advocate publicly split with the Dems to form this party.

Republican Party - [2] - This reference I think is actually better and could be used for both. It reads: "Dozens of former Republican and Democratic officials will announce a new national political third party to appeal to millions of voters they say are dismayed with what they see as America’s dysfunctional two-party system.The new party, called Forward, will initially be co-chaired by former Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang and Christine Todd Whitman, the former Republican governor of New Jersey."

What do other editors think of listing this party as split from the Democratic and/or Republican Party? Do the

I don't think it is supported, and one of these isn't a RS. The first one is Newsweek, which RSP says it is generally not reliable, per

WP:NEWSWEEK. The second source doesn't use that verbiage at all. If this is the best we have for sourcing about a "split" from either party (which seems dubious), it should not be included. --Kbabej (talk) 17:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Good catch! I saw the article was republished on MSN.com and didn't check to see the story was originally from Newsweek. On the second source, is "Dozens of former Republican and Democratic officials" not clear enough? What kind of verbiage is necessary if not? TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The kind of verbiage necessary would be something to the effect of "the

Talk 18:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

This seems far too strict. For example, the

Progressive Party (United States, 1948) is listed as having split from the Democratic party since it was formed by high profile dems leaving the party, but in no way did it break a party era and or clearly signal the transition to a new one. It seems to me your ignoring smaller splits in parties and advocating inclusion of the "splits" in the infobox only if they break the party they split from. Most 3rd party splits are unsuccessful in disrupting the party they split from, that doesn't mean they didn't split from a larger party. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

There aren't any RS that call it a split, though. The two sources above don't support that view. Why would WP call it a split when RS don't? --Kbabej (talk) 18:50, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My answer to this is requiring a "magic word" be used for inclusion when sources describe that process is bad. Just because a

Tartan357 removed it shortly after. This was the correct edit since the split was unsourced not criticizing Tartan. It was readded on Oct 14, 2021 and removed the 15th and readded again the 15th with the Newsweek source and remained on the page until now). However, it seems there is consensus that the prior sources weren't good enough, and I'm not planning on researching for other sources, so I'm fine with keeping it out of the infobox until someone else finds a more appropriate source and there is a discussion on that source. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 20:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Yang is categorically not a "high-profile Dem". I don't say that to denigrate him, it's just true. He's never held public or party office before. My standard is RS saying the Democratic Party split, not saying Yang split, but saying the Democratic Party itself did. I am trying to explain to you why I think they haven't called it a split, but all that really matters is that they haven't. ― 

Talk 18:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

No, that is not what the field is for and this is reading something from the sources that isn't there, and has the effect of inflating the Forward Party's importance. The "split" parameter is meant to indicate those parties divided in some meaningful way. That absolutely did not happen. It is not "one person left his party to make a new one". If that was the case, every third party in the US would be considered a split from the Ds and Rs. Yang is one person who has never held office or any position in the Democratic Party. The Democratic and Republican parties are no less intact because the Forward Party was formed by former members of those parties. ― 

Talk 18:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm not sure the split parameter is meant to be that strict. The

WP:UNDUE claims. Personally, I don't see the problem with labeling most 3rd parties as splits from either the Republican or Democratic parties because well, they usually are. 3rd parties tend to come into existence in the United States when party members leave the other two to form the new party. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 18:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Infoboxes are not about filling out as many parameters as possible. Editors need to apply discretion in choosing which parameters are helpful to have filled out in the infobox. I fail to see how this is useful in communicating any important information, it seems like just filling it out for its own sake. ― 

Talk 18:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I was looking to create a page about this individual, listed as a notable member for being Deputy Secretary of the Interior in 2014, however I could not find any mention of him online. The source attached linked to the Florida Forward Party website, where he is not mentioned. Anyone know of him? Microplastic Consumer (talk) 18:55, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a lot of redundant citations/references on this page.174.67.226.163 (talk) 20:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]