It invites skepticism, a prepackaged answer, and wanting to feel the rain besides getting wet, reader help is needed.
Who? How financed? How cognizant of Our Revolution is this earlier operation (dating at least from 2011), and where were they in 2016?
If they are competing for the same pot of money as Bernie and friends, one really should be duly skeptical.
Has anyone seen a road map, besides this [possibly so] sucker-list solicitation:
The 2011 item was authored well before Bernie ran, and he was then merely a Socialist Independent Senator from New England. Since the linked 2011 Politico report was authored, have they been an actual non-factor? Witness 2016. Having not heard peep from them while Bernie was packing every venue at which he spoke, has any reader any experiences to share? If so, a helpful comment would be welcome.
If they are at cross purposes for small donor cash with Bernie and Ellison, they'd best justify splitting the cause.
The 2011 Politico item footer states:
[Item author] Matt Stoller worked on the Dodd-Frank financial reform law and Federal Reserve transparency issues as a staffer for Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.). He is now a fellow at the Roosevelt Institute.
Grayson has been one of the good guys, so where is he now, [UPDATE: reviews are mixed on Grayson, as rudimentary websearch will show; e.g., NYT here, and Grayson's home state followup coverage here and is he at peace with or in fiscal competition with]
There is the old saying about putting all one's eggs in one basket; but the flip-side of that coin is you can't split one egg between multiple baskets. Who is best to lead the opposition?
That is the question to ponder while agreeing with the notion that "Third Way" talk is corporatist deceit.
One wishes Rand Paul had better social policy positions to go with some of his fiscal libertarian beliefs. His split that way is an ongoing frustration, as much of his suggestions make sense; war-wise, and otherwise.
Do either of the two focused solicitation efforts publish budget/board/staff detail; at least average donation size, whether corporate or lobbyist money is accepted; what's been taken in so far, and how it's been spent? HELP, readers.
The sensible approach is to see through the Trump first hundred days; and in a shorter time see whether Ellison or Perez is elected by the 447 inner party convening savants who have the vote; and if it is not Ellison, hope is thin. Ship of Fools, same ship, same fools, same shoals, flat learning curve, etc.
If the inner party does not give up superdelegate insult; same ship, same fools, same shoals. There has to be give by the failures. If it is not Ellison, and if we face ongoing superdelegate rules, still after the last election debacle, then it's back to Tennessee, Jed.
The "Our Revolution" effort has had a share of disagreement over organizational detail and limitations imposed on a 501(c)4 operation; but nobody has questioned the ethics of its initiators or its board. Sanders and Harry Reid are not rumored to have exchanged any hostile words while serving together in the Senate, disagreement between them, if any, not being as visceral as reported Reid criticism of Grayson's hedge fund manageent in the context of Grayson's Florida Senate candidacy.
The Young Turks video noted at the top of this post clearly endorses the justicedemocrats effort. It is circumstantial that a 2011 item, as cited above, was written by a former Grayson staff person. That does not definitively connect Grayson as being behind, or even involved in policy or day-to-day operation of the justicedemocrats website, organization, or funding solicitation. The intent here is to suggest areas that need to be pinned down by a prudent contributor of the progressive persuasion, before cutting a check or even, perhaps, before getting onto anyone's emailing list. Such lists can be traded in political commerce, possibly sold, one entity to another.
As one favoring Sanders, a personal decision would be to affiliate with and contribute to ourrevolution. That is NOT intended to encourage or discourage anyone else's decision making. Just disclosure of a preference readers are better off knowing in judging posting here.
The Young Turks video, on reexamination, was posted Jan 24, 2017; hence, ourrevolution was already up and running when it went unmentioned and the justicedemocrats operation was touted in the item.
Aside from that, the video message was clearly and primarily a critique of "Third Way" ways and means and foreseeable probable motivations. It leaves some loose end questioning by failing to even acknowledge a parallel progressive effort, ourrevolution, in the "same market" as justicedemocrats.
Is such silence golden?
One fact, Bernie already has the "$27 on average donor list" of the well-intentioned non-corporatist progressive multitudes. He, hence the ourrevolution effort he supports, hold that "marketing" hammer. Already.
Some might think it pure folly to actually believe that by resort to hand-waving $20-million dollar funded studies in support of status quo refraining from rocking the cushy boat, that the spoils can be retaken. It surely is an insult to the intelligence of the majority of the people who crave actual reform, and for myself, I don't appreciate being insulted by beltway bunnies, of the think-tank variety (while also friends of lobbying interests), or office holding friends of lobbying interests. Early Beatles; Money Can't Buy You Love. (For some toady types it can buy agenda adherence, and it surely can buy a snowstorm of dinning propaganda). Ease up, third-waywards, your shell game's been exposed - we thank the alternate media for that, even should you call it "alternate facts." "Third way" has a stake in what's fake.
1) Grayson is not without the charm of the enemy of my enemies is my friend, whatever else might be fact or fiction.
2) YoungTurks, Jan. 26, 2017, posting, more justicedemocrats coverage. Nineteen minutes to the segment. Does this guy hold a copy of the Sanders' list? Does he have a legal right to exploit it, were he to have a copy?
3) More, here and here. There is some redundancy between the shorter and the longer video items. But it is clearly an insurgency and not a splinter-party spinoff that the speaker is addressing. The agenda is to primary in-office Democrats, and to eliminate or enter and flood closed primary state politics.
4) Those two solicitation operations have to explain the how/who of what, if any, overlap exists. Each must at a minimum go on record that the other is/is not astroturf. Bernie, he's not, but all else needs clarity. Those videos don't address the need. Real insurgency, vs reform as best feasible, matters.
5) This is important stuff. False propheteering can be suspect, as profiteering on actual people's wants AND needs.
6) Time has its answers. Cutting a check or getting on an emailing list need not be on today's "must do" calendar. If the two are legitimate, it is a godsend.
7) We live in interesting times. Does NSA know how you plan to spend today? Your friendships?
The difference may be that justicedemocrats involves Bernie supporters who disagreed with ourrevolution being a 501(c)4; and by splitting being more of a hands-on paticipant in actual primary challenge politics. That's only a guess, so any reader with knowledge is asked to enter a helpful comment.