The problem is the fear they have for the other party keeps them in their own.
I'd like to see Progressives distance themselves from the Democrat party, as most Libertarians have done from the Republican Party. Heck, I think it would be great if Progressives and Libertarians would join and create a 3rd party, a party that is strong on social liberties, anti-empire, anti-war, pro gov't transparency, pro balanced budgets, anti corruption. There would obviously be strong disagreement on economic policies and taxes, but I think looking at the big picture, that would be acceptable. Would they win? Probably not, but if the other two parties are forced to embrace some of those stances in order to stay alive, then we're better off.
There are limited choices in politics for a minority group. The progressives shows what happens when they are not in power to the Republicans under Bush - disaster.
The problem is that the progressives aren't the majority elected - and so they have to ally with others for having power, or have the Bush situation again.
It might be nice for them to be recorded as the minority 'no' vote on hundreds of bad bills, but it doesn't do much for the country.
The progressives are the party for the majority of people, at war with the concentrated wealth who propagandize the people not to support progressives.
Despite Kucinich and Paul allying on specific issue, the Libertarians are too wrong for progressives to ally with generally - but they could on something like money in politics.
The thing is, progressives + libertarians don't form a majority.
No, wealth goes a long way in propagandizing people - look at the dupes in this forum who repeat the well-funded talking points.
We just need people getting informed and then supporting what's right. We didn't follow Hoover with a Republican, we followed him with change - and we need more of that.