Dems Defect from MoveOn.Org - OR - Democrats Cut Off Their Nose to Spite Their Face

[K Gardner]

Let's not any of us forget when and why Move On was founded. They were founded in defense of Bill Clinton. Move-on.org was founded in 1998, by two Silicon Valley entrepreneurs who were frustrated at the time by the Republicans efforts to impeach President Bill Clinton.
The group has consistently opposed the war and the Bush administration. How ironic that those they formed to defend are now defecting because of a political endorsement.

Let's not forget the many years of battles they have helped us fight and the many causes they have brought to the forefront of public opinion. Before any more negative posts go up or nasty emails to out to MoveOn, please look back and remember what and who they are fighting for. Right now, its all about a senseless, murderous war.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/2008-moveon-democrats-and-the-war/


April 10, 2007, 9:10 pm
2008: MoveOn, Democrats and the War
By Jeff Zeleny

The Democratic presidential candidates gathered tonight – or, actually, their voices did – for what was billed as the first Virtual Town Meeting of the 2008 campaign. Topic: Iraq.

Moveon.org, an on-line political community, was host to the event. If there was any lingering question of how influential Democratic candidates believe this group is, the answer was provided by tonight’s roster, who spoke in this order: John Edwards, Joseph Biden, Dennis Kucinich, Bill Richardson, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd and Barack Obama.

The pre-rerecorded event began at 7 p.m., featuring questions from previously selected members across the country.
One question posed to all candidates came from a Coconut Grove, Fla., woman, who wondered: “In your opinion, what is the best and fastest way to get out of Iraq?” Those crisp 15 words elicited considerably longer responses by the candidates – some answered the question, some didn’t – and most seemed to speak with great care.

If you have the time, take a listen at http://www.moveon.org — that’s the place for the full discussion.
Here’s a little taste of what some of the top candidates said:
Mr. Edwards: “This is not the time for political calculation, this is the time for political courage. This is not a game of chicken. This is not about making friends or keeping Joe Lieberman happy. This is about life and death. This is about war.”

Mrs. Clinton: “We’ve got to face up to the reality that the situation in Iraq is deteriorating. It is not improving. And all the happy talk in the world will not fix the grim reality on the ground.”

Mr. Obama: “The idea that the situation in Iraq is improving because it takes a security detail of 100 soldiers, 3 black hawk helicopters and a couple of Apache gunships to walk through a market in the middle of Baghdad is simply not credible and not reflective of the facts on the ground.”
(Yes, he was speaking about Senator John McCain’s recent visit to Baghdad.)


Mr. Biden: “To be responsible, one has to be able to answer a two-word question in my view after you’ve put forward what you think should be done, and that is: Then what? After we pull our troops out, then what? After we cap troops, then what? After we cut partial funding, then what?"

For the next two days, members of MoveOn will vote on the candidates’s responses. By Thursday, the “winner” will be known. The campaigns, of course, will encourage their own supporters to weigh in. (And the organization has cautioned that the result does not constitute its official endorsement of one particular candidate.) So the final tabulation might – or might not – represent actual public opinion. It does, however, set a marker.

“They know that in the months ahead, all of us will be watching what they say and do, supporting strong stands that can bring this war to a close,” said Eli Pariser, the executive director of MoveOn’s political action committee. “It’s our job to hold them accountable.”

[Freida5]

1. I'm moving on from Move On. Vote was fixed and unfair to Democrats who dont support Obama

[K Gardner]

6. There is none so blind as he who will not see

[MADem]

2. I'd say MOVEON cut off their noses by alienating so many of their donors, and

being mendacious back in April. Not too smooth.

[mondo joe]

3. MoveOn lost its way and made a poor decision by representing its members with such

a puny vote. Too bad.

[Freida5]

36. How can we fire the Board and the President?

[mondo joe]

37. You can't. Just withdraw your support and they can live with the results. NT

[K Gardner]

41. You and HRC supporters will be the ones who have to live with the results after you've

trashed every single organization, newspaper, group and loyal Democrat who has had the "audacity" to endorse someone other than Hillary. How can you not see the big picture? How can anyone be so blind or petty or small-minded? We will have no liberals left to come to our aid once you've demonized them all. Truly juvenile and immature.

[mondo joe]

48. It's not our fault if MoveOn alienates its supporters. They're not entitled to my money.

Neither are you.

[ErnestoG]

49. Yep. They are the very PICTURE of Cult-think. Scorched earth if they dont get their way.

[mondo joe]

52. How can 12 people "scorch" the earth of MoveOn?

[ErnestoG]

53. Just ask them. They are LEGION mwuhahahahaahahaaha

[mondo joe]

56. Evasive.

typical.

[ErnestoG]

61. you mean "truth".

[K Gardner]

4. Move On Success in 2007 - a sampling of liberal activism

Recent Success Stories Facebook: Protect Our Privacy!

In December 2008, Facebook took purchases its users made on other websites and made them public on Facebook without permission-- great advertising for corporations but horrible for basic privacy rights. MoveOn formed a pro-privacy group on Facebook that grew to over 80,000 members and was covered by media worldwide. As a result, Facebook reversed its policy—preserving its own integrity in the process.
Sign the ongoing privacy petition »

Medicare: Helped lead fight to reform
When Bush threatened to cut off as many 14 million seniors from the prescription drug benefit because they had not signed up in time, MoveOn helped fight back. We mobilized hundreds of thousands of Americans to sign petitions, organize local media events, and contact our representatives.

2007 Budget: Reversed cuts to key health and nutrition programs
The Republican budget proposal for FY'07 contained cuts that would take food of the table of 300,000 working families dependent on food stamps, and roll back health benefits for millions of low income people and seniors. MoveOn members sounded the alarm, writing thousands of letters to the editor telling personal stories about these key programs, staging local events and calling our representatives. The worst of the cuts were removed from the final budget package.

John Bolton: Blocked the anti-UN ambassador
MoveOn members raised a chorus of opposition when Bush nominated long time UN-basher and war apologist John Bolton as America's ambassador to the United Nations. Congress refused to approve the nomination, and Bush resorted to a "recess appointment" to side step Congress. But when the appointment expired, Bush withdrew the nomination and Bolton was forced to step down.

Voting Rights Act: Helped renew landmark civil rights legislation
When MoveOn members got word that southern Republicans were attempting to derail the re-authorization of the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965, we sprung into action. After hundreds of thousands signed a petition we rushed to Congress and flooded the capital with phone calls the law was renewed.

Voting Machines: Momentum for Paper Records
MoveOn members wearing “Got Paper? Got Audits?” T-shirts packed a recent voting machines hearing in Congress, spurring many elected representatives to speak up for voter-verified paper records. Phone calls from MoveOn members nationwide are convincing more and more members of Congress to get behind the bill requiring paper records—bringing the total to over 200 co-sponsors!

MoveOn Members Helping End Genocide in Darfur
"Million Voices for Darfur" organized by the Save Darfur Coalition will give our leaders a powerful mandate to act.

New hope for Maryland Voting Machines
After MoveOn members in Maryland made more than a hundred phone calls, the state House voted unanimously in favor of a paper record of every vote. Maryland was one of the first states to adopt electronic voting machines lacking voter-verified paper records, so the House vote in March is historic. With Maryland’s governor now supporting a paper record of every vote, the only obstacle left is the Maryland Senate. Thanks to public concern, more than half of the states will require a paper record of every vote!

PA Members Helped Protect Voting Rights
MoveOn members in Pennsylvania helped protect voting rights in Pennsylvania by making over 700 phone calls to state legislators to oppose House Bill 1318. Those calls helped stop an effort to strip paroled felons of their right to vote. Even though the legislature went on to pass an anti-democratic voter ID requirement by a narrow margin, the visible public outrage persuaded the governor to veto the bill.

Fantastic Progress for California Clean Elections
MoveOn members in California made hundreds of calls urging their state representatives to pass public financing of political campaigns. The measure would help clean up election corruption by ending the reliance on corporate and wealthy donors. Having been approved by the Assembly, the measure now goes to the state Senate and then before voters as a ballot measure. If it passes, California could lead states nationwide to adopt public financing.

[truedelphi]

69. i have been trying to figure out what they have been up to since 2004

Thanks for the outline.

I liked their General Petraeus ad.

I don't wholeheartedly endorse everything they do. But some of this is very good.

[emilyg]

5. They made a bad move. I moved to leave.

[K Gardner]

7. Let's hope we never again need their help.

[mondo joe]

8. You can make up for the loss by increasing your contribution.

If you like what MoveOn is doing, you support it.

[CyberPieHole]

34. Perfectly stated...n/t

[K Gardner]

9. Move On Success in 2005 in the Face of an Ascendant Republican Party

Annual Report: MoveOn.org Political Action in 2005 Executive Summary

We expected 2005 to be a tough year. Together, we faced an ascendant Republican Party which claimed a broad mandate to push American to the right. After the heartbreaking defeat in 2004, we assumed MoveOn members’ energy and engagement would decline to normal levels.
In some respects, we were right: Republicans’ ambitions were every bit as big as they appeared. But instead of shrinking, MoveOn grew. And when Republicans pushed to the right, MoveOn members pushed back and held their ground. Together, we’re now on track for a change election in 2006.

Here’s an overview of what happened at MoveOn in 2005:

We grew by 450,000 people. In 2005, MoveOn members enlisted nearly half a million folks to join the organization. We grew the way we always do: people told their friends, family, and colleagues about our campaigns, and they signed up.
We raised over $9 million for candidates and campaigns. We expected to raise around $5 million in 2005, after the blow-out year in 2004. We’d raised that much by June. As the year closes, nearly 125,000 people have contributed to a MoveOn campaign in 2005. The figure we’re most proud of? Average donation: $45 (and not a single check for more than $5,000).

We’ve built a field program to do deeper, more local work than ever before. In January, we launched Operation Democracy, our new field program. It was a gamble: we’d never tried something so big and so focused on off-line organizing. But it worked, and there are now thousands of Operation Democracy leaders around the country who can bring local MoveOn members together, hold events, and capture the media’s attention like never before.

We helped tip the balance in critical fights. MoveOn members helped swing opinion against President Bush’s Social Security plan. With other groups, our pressure saved the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and stopped Patriot Act renewal until the bill is fixed. Thanks to an all-hands-on-deck push, the “Nuclear Option” failed. In a number of states, MoveOn members helped reform election laws to protect our elections. Perhaps most important, MoveOn members helped cause a sea change in public opinion and in Congress on Iraq—Democrats are now speaking out for a responsible exit plan.

We’re on track for a change election in 2006. Winning back Congress is the next big step toward a progressive country, and it’s within reach. Through Operation Democracy, we’re working to shape the battlefield—especially in the local media. We’re also focusing on making sure Democrats stand up and fight: giving them support when they do, and giving them negative feedback when they don’t take principled stands. As 2006 continues, we’ll also be giving MoveOn members an opportunity to directly affect target races—from wherever in the country they are.

It’ll be a long, hard journey to win back Congress and start building a truly progressive America. But MoveOn members are active and engaged, the political climate is turning, and the course is clear. We’re on the right path.

[robbedvoter]

14. But now they turn against democrats? No longer what I signed for.

[LoveMyCali]

31. That's what I told them

when I unsubscribed.

[avrdream]

98. Me too.

If they truly wanted to represent Dems versus Repubs, they would have waited until our nominee was decided. This whole decision making set up is creepy and they just lost my donations (usually quite substantial, let me add).

[unapatriciated]

116. I thought the same....

If they truly trusted the will of the people they would have stayed neutral in regards to Dem candidates until the GE.

[K Gardner]

45. They turned against democrats because they endorsed an anti-war democrat? Or did they turn against

democrats because they didn't endorse Hillary? That one is confusing.

[K Gardner]

15. Promoting a Fair Judicial Process: Harrier Miers and Samuel Alito

Promoting a fair judicial process. As conservatives rallied to pack the courts with right-wing ideologues, we worked hard to make sure that America’s courts—especially the Supreme Court—are fair and just.

We fought like heck to stop the “Nuclear Option”—and won. In the spring, Republicans attempted a power grab to exclude Democrats from having any say over which judges are picked. MoveOn members wrote 59,645 letters to the editor, placed over 118,000 calls to Congress, held 1,539 house meetings, launched our famous “Save the Republic” Star Wars spoof ad, organized 192 simultaneous rallies, and delivered over 580,000 comments to Congress. In the end, the power grab failed and democracy won.

We worked to stop John Roberts and Harriet Miers. Although John Roberts was confirmed as Chief Justice, these campaigns were important—showing President Bush that he couldn’t appoint a right-wing ideologue like Roberts without some opposition and setting the stage for the Alito nomination next year.

We mobilized quickly to stop Samuel Alito. In just the first week after Samuel Alito’s nomination was announced, over 500,000 MoveOn members petitioned Congress to oppose his confirmation. We’re gearing up now for a major fight in January, when the hearings are scheduled to start.

Drawing attention to the CIA leak scandal. In August, it became clear that Karl Rove was involved in the CIA leak scandal swirling around Valerie Plame. We worked hard to put the Bush administration on the spot about its claims regarding the case, and made sure the media was paying attention. Our rally was featured in Time and Newsweek, and tens of thousands of MoveOn members downloaded the “Loose Lips: Pink Slips” poster that emerged as the winner of our contest.

[robbedvoter]

22. They used to be good - that's why I joined,contributed. Now my money used against my candidate

not so good.

[comradebillyboy]

10. why should I continue to belong to and support

an organization that works against my preferred candidate? They did great work in the past and I supported them, now they no longer reflect my views, so I no longer support them.

[balantz]

11. I wrote my complaint to Eli at Moveon and am done with them.

What they did to John Edwards the other day makes me bitter.

[robbedvoter]

12. Using my money against my candidate? They cut their own nose! F* them!

They didn't have to endorse in primaries.

[ErnestoG]

13. MoveOn should be congratulated for separating the war supporters from the rest of us

Good on ye, MoveOn.

[krabigirl]

16. I think the whole poll was a joke. No "none of the above" option for people who don't think they ro

should endorse.

[robbedvoter]

17. yeah, make the pie more exclusive! Good politics, good for elections smart!

[mondo joe]

23. Yes yes - and you can make up for the loss of our contributions.

Enjoy!

[ErnestoG]

39. All 12 of you? That's really gonna hurt.

[mondo joe]

40. If there's only 12 people leaving there's no problem.

:shrug:

[ErnestoG]

43. you're telling ME

[mondo joe]

51. Tell the OP - she's the one in hysterics about it, not me. NT

[ErnestoG]

60. This says more about Clinton supporters than it does about MoveOn.

It demonstrates that the Clintonistas are more concerned about the fortunes of their candidate than any liberal legislator or organization who has been fighting the Rethugs for years and years.

Puke-worthy pathetic? Yes. Surprise? No.

[mondo joe]

64. Nah, it means the OP is a hysteric who thinks her cause entitles her to the mony of other people.

You seem to also.

[K Gardner]

79. Nice "labeling" there, Hillary supporter ! Isn't 'hysteric' a bit medieval and misogynistic? I'm

not surprised, however, that you feel that posting four or five articles about the good works done by a progressive group constitutes "hysterics". Keep up the productive support of your candidate !

[mondo joe]

82. If the hysteria fits...

Nothing wrong with posting about the good MoveOn has done.

The hysteria is about your reaction to a few people withdrawing their financial support from an organization they feel misuses it.

If this is is such a great thing for MoveOn to do, you and your friends can fund it.

[ErnestoG]

86. Floating point ethics, anyone?

[ZinZen]

96. So you would not have a problem

if I called Hillary "shrill" and "strident"? Not that I am but you are using sexist language against the OP to make your point, and than rail against these similar linguistics if used towards Hillary.
Oh the smell of hypocrisy.

[mondo joe]

101. Call her what you like, if you think it's apt.

I think hysterical is apt in this case.

[unapatriciated]

121. I do not support Clinton or Obama...

but WAS a very active member of MOVEOn. What you fail to see is that their members are are comprised of supporters of all the Dem candidates. Do it was wrong for them to use OUR voice and money to choose a candidate in the primaries. What if it was a headline like this....Demoratic Underground Supports Gravel! Get my drift.

[CyberPieHole]

26. Send them the money they got from me each and every month...

I won't contribute to them ever again.

[maximusveritas]

18. The Clintonites care more about their candidate than progressive causes

I can't imagine quitting an organization like MoveOn or my union just because they endorsed another candidate. Obama's just a candidate I happen to support. I'm not fighting for him, I'm fighting for these progressive issues.

[robbedvoter]

19. I'll fight through groups that don't betray me.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

77. They "betrayed" you? WTF?!?!

They endorsed another candidate. They didn't sleep with your spouse. Cheez, get OVER yourselves Clintonistas!

[robbedvoter]

83. They want to use MY MONEY against MY CANDIDATE. That's betrayal in my book.

3 fucking days they couldn't wait.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

91. So what? EMILY's List has my money and is using it against MY candidate.

Oddly, I don't feel betrayed by them.

I did quit NOW because they were helping spread lies about Obama's record on choice in Iowa and NH. Had they not done that I'd still be a member, despite their endorsement of Clinton.

Besides, they held a vote by their members. Don't blame MoveOn because their members don't like your candidate. Somehow I get the sense that had the vote gone the other way, you wouldn't feel "betrayed".

[mondo joe]

92. So spend your money that way if you like. No one else is obliged to follow your rather

odd example.

By the way: don't confuse this with MoveOn's membership: it reflect the opinion of a small fraction of members.

[mondo joe]

20. Nonsense. There are many progressive causes - why give to one that uses your money in a way

you don't like?

What a stupid argument you posted.

[maximusveritas]

25. What organizations are there that do what MoveOn does?

Please tell me. I keep on hearing Clintonites cry about leaving MoveOn, but they don't say what organizations they will support instead. I'd love to hear some examples because I can't think of any.

[mondo joe]

32. Every donor should find the cause most aligned with their passion and interest.

If a non profit isn't aligned with you, why support it?

I can just give more to ACLU, to American United and to other more local organizations.

Don't blame us for MoveOn doing something this dumb.

[comradebillyboy]

74. I give my money to the ACLU

and they have done more for America than any other progressive org including Move on. I just give more to the ACLU and cut of Move On.

[enlightenment]

35. Don't assume that everyone who left MoveOn were

Clinton supporters. You're painting with a broad brush. Many people do not believe that MoveOn should have endorsed a candidate in the primary election. Any candidate.

Yes, MoveOn has done great things, but they have made the decision to narrow their focus and in the process alienated a lot of their support. Not a wise move; but in the increasing internecine warfare that is defining the Democratic party, apparently to be expected.

[K Gardner]

38. Good point and I honestly had not thought of that. Thanks. I just saw an awful lot of vindictiveness

here today from HRC supporters.

[mediaman007]

70. My point exactly! Move On should not have endorsed at all, or endorsed

before Iowa. They waited until a critical time before jumping in. They waited until they could take the credit for any of Obama's success. If they would have endorsed before Iowa, that would have given all Americans a chance to nominate on their endorsement. So voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan, South Carolina, Nevada, and Florida didn't get to consider Move On's endorsement. That is just poor judgment on Move On's part.

[robbedvoter]

85. And this is my position as well. No attacking democrats in POTUS race.

ANY DEMOCRATS.

[emilyg]

89. Exactly.

[K Gardner]

21. How MoveOn Helped in the 2006 Elections - Taking Back Control of Congress

In 2005, we started laying the groundwork for a change election in 2006. We raised over $1.5 million directly for candidates, focusing on progressives and on key races in 2006. Our early money had a big impact: in a number of these races—candidates who were on shaky ground are now firmly in the lead.

Here’s where members made a difference:

$168,000 for Bob Casey, Jr. (D-PA), who’s running against radical Republican Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania. Right now, Casey has a double-digit lead in the polls over Santorum—a highly unusual (and promising) sign.
$832,000 for Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), who at 87 was considering retiring from the Senate. MoveOn members contributed to his war chest, and recently he announced he’s running for re-election. So far, no prominent West Virginia Republican has decided to take him on.
$164,000 for Nick Lampson (D-TX), the ex-congressman running against Rep. Tom DeLay. DeLay’s approval rating in his home district is in the gutter, and Lampson stands a good chance of sweeping him from power even if DeLay isn’t convicted.
$153,000 for Bill Nelson (D-FL), who faces a challenge from Katherine Harris (yes, that Katherine Harris). With a fundraising boost from MoveOn members, Nelson is looking good, and rumors are surfacing that Karl Rove is trying to get Harris out of the race.

After Senator Jeffords announced he wouldn’t run for re-election, MoveOn Vermonters endorsed Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) for Senate early. We hoped to scare top Republicans out of the race, and so far, the tactic has worked. Sanders, a true progressive, has a good chance of making it to the Senate. When there were no candidates in the Ohio Senate race, we raised a contingency fund of over $177,000 for Paul Hackett (D-OH). Now there are two progressives running, Hackett and Rep. Sherrod Brown—either of whom stands a great chance of winning a Senate seat from Republican Senator Mike DeWine.

We also helped progressives win big in the 2005 elections. In states where important ballot initiatives were happening, we asked MoveOn members what positions we should endorse. Then we encouraged folks to get out and vote for those positions.
In California, we partnered with the California Courage Campaign, which ran an ad highlighting Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s conservative views. MoveOn members also volunteered to get out the vote, and in the end every single one of Schwarzenegger’s initiatives was defeated.

In Virginia and New Jersey, MoveOn members helped get out the vote for new Governors Tim Kaine (VA) and Jon Corzine (NJ). Both won.
In Maine, Washington, and Colorado, MoveOn members helped win victories to end sexual discrimination, ban indoor smoking, and protect funds for education, health care, and roads.

One sad note: Ohio voters rejected a broad set of initiatives called Reform Ohio Now which would have changed Ohio’s election system. Luckily, there are important races next year for Governor and Secretary of State

[CyberPieHole]

24. I canceled my membership and wrote them why I was doing so...I MovedOn from MoveOn...

no more money from me. They don't need my help anyway, I am sure that they don't need one single penny from ANY Hillary Clinton supporter.

[Beregond2]

46. Move On

I don't understand what people are upset about. MoveOn has always been about supporting progressive causes. They chose the candidate they feel best represents their positions. What, they are supposed to stay blindly tied to the Clintons, when there might be other candidates they feel would be better? Honestly, this board is starting to sound like a daycare.

[MoonRiver]

27. MoveOn cut its own nose off, and obviously does not care about its face.

See ya MoveOn.com. :thumbsdown:

[K Gardner]

28. Fighting Bush on Social Security and Helping After Hurricane Katrina: Fighting for the Middle Class

A fair economy: Building a middle-class America

We pushed back against the plan to privatize Social Security—and won. In early 2004, President Bush made clear that privatizing Social Security was his number one domestic priority. He embarked on a three-month road-trip to make the sell. But MoveOn members fought back, and in the end President Bush dropped the plan. Here’s a taste of the tactics we used:

Members attended Republican town hall meetings and asked tough questions—putting a number of members of Congress off their game.
Members made tens of thousands of phone calls to Congress—letting them know that the public was watching.
We ran ads at key moments, which got picked up nationally in the news.

Together with our friends at Americans United to Protect Social Security, we made sure that everywhere President Bush went, people were organized to push back in the press.

We fought the “reverse Robin Hood” budget—making clear to the public whose side Republican leaders are on. After Hurricane Katrina, radical Republicans moved forward with a proposal to cut $50 billion in services for the poor—while at the same time cutting $70 billion in taxes for the rich. We called it the “reverse Robin Hood” budget—stealing from the poor to pay the rich. Members’ pressure helped make sure that some of the worst cuts were dropped from the bill, and even convinced 5 Republicans in the Senate to vote against it. Although Republican leaders originally thought the bill would be a slam dunk, we’ve helped hold them off for months—the final vote just got bumped into 2006.

We took on Wal-Mart. We joined a coalition of hundreds of other progressive organizations and helped organize over 7,000 house parties to screen Robert Greenwald’s new film, Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price. Wal-Mart was so concerned about the campaign that they hired a “war room” of public relations people to spin back. No dice: a Zogby poll showed that Americans don’t approve of Wal-Mart’s worker-unfriendly policies, and we helped make Wal-Mart a vivid example of what’s wrong with a “sink or swim” economy.

[drmom]

29. I just sent MoveOn an email...

I was genuinely undecided until Edwards dropped out of the race, but this stunt by MoveOn, as well as other political stunts has me weary of the democratic party as a whole. I've never voted for a republican in my life, and I come from a very democratic family. (I do have a token republican friend, however.)

It's beyond me how an organization can make an endorsement dependent on the results of a non-scientific poll. A worker in the lab at work was bragging how he voted 12 times. They had to have been aware of this.

Why is everyone trying so hard to get "the masses" to turn away from Clinton? Something really smells here, and it makes me want to support her even more strongly.

[ima_sinnic]

42. and I call bullshit on that. Each member was sent an e-mail with a link

to one vote. There was no way someone could "vote 10 times."

HRC supporters just need to accept the fact that progressives just do not like her and would rather eat crushed glass than vote for her.

[in_cog_ni_to]

54. Hi ima! I am/was a member...monthly donor, and never got a ballot.

They didn't send them out to all their members, apparently.

It's nice to see you! I hope all is well?

[ima_sinnic]

65. Hi in_cog! did you see my post to you on another thread?

Check your e-mail from yesterday--you didn't get one from Eli Pariser in the middle of the day, subject "URGENT! Presidential Endorsement: Vote Today!" ?

[in_cog_ni_to]

72. No, I missed your post.:( I'm sorry. I went through a weeks worth of emails today and it's not there

:(

[robbedvoter]

87. No dear. Only 10% of members got to vote. "Roving sample" they called it

[in_cog_ni_to]

50. Yes indeed. Something stinks to HIGH HEAVEN and I think I know what it is.

But I won't say it here.

[ErnestoG]

63. Maybe because Clinton sucks as an opponent to kick the Rethugs out of the WH?

Just a thought.

[jbm]

122. I agree...

and I think it has backfired so badly that I caught myself wondering if that was someones strategy all along. I'm not into conspiracies, so I don't seriously believe that Ted and Bill met in a backroom somewhere and said, "Let's glorify Obama and villianize Hillary so badly that it backfires into a landslide for Hillary, and maybe that will cause the Repubs to think twice about playing the demon card in the general election."

Like I said, I don't really believe that's what happened, but it's pretty bad when the dems bashed her bad enough to make me wonder if it was true!

[K Gardner]

30. 1,354 Vigils in 50 States to Honor Fallen Soldiers

What Members Had to Say About the Vigils
At the end of the vigil, there were only 3 of us standing there, shivering in the cold. A woman came out of the pizza shop where she was working, looked at our signs, and then offered us some pizza. She said she had served in Iraq for 13 months, and that the military hadn't even provided them with basic essentials like soap and shampoo. She thanked us for the vigil.
http://pol.moveon.org/iraqvigils/



–Jessica
Ipswich, MA

We were so fortunate to have a Gold Star family with us, and the mother spoke of her son and how proud she was of what he had accomplished in his life. She spoke of his honor and heroism - and how she felt compassion for the other 1999 families who had had the same experience they had had. She expressed the wish that all of the fallen be honored by remembering and supporting and honoring those in the military who continue to serve - remembering the risks they are taking to serve the rest of us. In addition, it was possible for the military families to explain about the isolation they feel and the public's apparent apathy over the war because it doesn't touch their lives on a day-to-day basis, and also gave them the chance to tell of instances of great character, courage, and compassion that they've witnessed in our servicemen and women.
–Peggy
Urbana, IL

Ther is no question but that I would attend a vigil again and take my grandsons again. I do not want to see my boys or anyone's children become names on a list like the one which was read tonight. I would be interviewed by a television reporter again. I will continue to stand up and speak out. I will not go quietly. I will not back down. I will continue to set an example to my grandsons until our troops are safely home.
–Robin
Bakersfield, CA

[mondo joe]

33. Too bad the leadership pulled this dumb stunt and lost support for their good works.

Blame them.

[ima_sinnic]

57. but if HRC had won, you'd be praising the membership up & down

MoveOn is a PAC. Mobilizing its members is what PACs do. The members voted and an overwhelming majority voted for BO--and that is because progressives would rather eat crushed glass than vote for HRC. Her supporters need to get over themselves. She isn't that great.

[mondo joe]

62. No - I don't think MoveOn should be dickering with the primary.

And an overwhelming majority of members didn't vote for 0bama --- an overwhelming majority just didn't vote at all.

It's called a QUORUM. Look it up.

[ISUGRADIA]

67. Quorum? God help us if we required that in primaries and caucuses

Move On had a lot higher % turnout than many states will

[mondo joe]

68. You think so?

And do you think the principle of the quorum applies in elections as well as in membership organizations?

[emilyg]

90. Not true.

I would have been just as disgusted with them.

[in_cog_ni_to]

44. Maybe they should have thought about that before they decided to choose a candidate

before the people did. Not all of their members support Obama. I hope they lose a BUNCH of money. I know mine won't be funding their Obama ads.

[K Gardner]

55. "I hope they lose a BUNCH of money" ! How mature. Read a list of all they have done in just the

past three years and tell me where we would be without their help. I'd venture to guess most people who are raising petty hell here don't have a clue what MoveOn is or what they have actually done for progressive causes and candidates in America. Its all on the website, just in case you don't know. Unless you don't care about anything but what YOU want, of course, then don't bother doing anything.

[mondo joe]

58. They're not entitled to anyone's money. If they can't live up to their past they'll lose

those supporters, appropriately.

[in_cog_ni_to]

59. I KNOW what they have done! I helped PAY FOR IT! I have been a monthly donor for YEARS.

Please don't lecture me on this.

[K Gardner]

66. Sorry Incognito. I know how irritating it is when someone you don't know from Adam

seems to be telling you "what you are". I was really trying for a generalization and shouldn't have responded to you personally. Apologies!

[KennedyGuy]

47. yep..moved on alright...

[stillcool]

71. There has been wrath...

expressed here at DU towards anyone who endorses Obama. If that equates to some pro-Hillary people picking up their toys and going home, so be it.

[MindMatter]

73. I think I'm going to write them a big check tonight

Just to irritate the Hillary-bots. :)

[K Gardner]

75. I already did :-)

[MindMatter]

76. But seriously folks, how many Hillary supporters have an affinity with MoveOn anyway?

MoveOn was formed as an activist organization to push against the status quo centerists like the Clintons. It seems incongruous that many who really like the Clintons would also really like MoveOn. While there is some common ground, it seems to me that one is either comfortable with the establishment or one is comfortable agitating against the establishment -- not both.

These threats to withdraw support from MoveOn ring pretty hollow to me.

And with that in mind, it seems like a very good move by MoveOn to take their own pulse. That endorsement of Obama by no means ensures his victory. And if Clinton ultimately prevails becoming President, the need for MoveOn will be as great as it has been with Bush. The natural comfort zone for a Clinton in in the mushy center-right -- the "triangulation" strategy if you will. No intelligent person should expect Hillary to advocate consistently for progressive causes. We will need organizations like MoveOn to draw Clinton away from the fascists.

[robbedvoter]

78. Yeah, Hillary's people are subhuman- check your history - the name is connected

with the impeachment - that's what they were supposed to move on FROM. Clinton's supporters were here first. And are leaving now. For 3 fucking days they couldn't wait.

[mondo joe]

80. What did you think MoveOn was formed for?

Do you know?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[MindMatter]

84. It was to move on from what the fascist movement was doing to our country.

The Starr inquiry was a catalyzing factor, to be sure, but suggesting that it was formed to fight for Bill Clinton is nonsense. To my knowledge, MoveOn has not devoted ANY resources to defending Bill Clinton's legacy or to involve itself in any of Clinton's legal skirmishes that continued after the failed impeachment. From the very first day -- and I have been a member since the beginning -- it has addressed itself to the larger issues -- issues much bigger than whether or not Clinton was fairly treated. Indeed, that is the very definition of moving on.

I expect that MoveOn will continue to advocate and agitate for the vital progressive causes in this country, and I expect that will frequently put them at odds with the DLC types who are more comfortable with the status quo. But that's OK. MoveOn has been highly effective so far, and none of this will change that.

[K Gardner]

81. Actually, it was founded in defense of Bill Clinton during the right wing impeachment attack. Other

than that, I agree that the need for groups such as MoveOn is not nearly close to being at an end.

[robbedvoter]

88. And I know, other groups still exist, better than Moveon - not turning against

their members in time of need. As soon as I'll get over mourning this kick in the face, I'll remember which they are.

[ima_sinnic]

99. "turning against their members in time of need"???

awwww, Hillary did not win the MoveOn vote. :nopity:

[Bluestar]

95. Do you work for MoveOn or something?

Your posts here are really over the top. People have just decided to take their money and their support elsewhere. Why is this so important to you?

[MindMatter]

100. Au contraire

It isn't important to me at all. If you read my posts, you will see that I am rather skeptical that many of today's most vocal Clinton supporters have been active financial backers or grass roots fighters for MoveOn. It is easy to get on the internets and type self-righteous posts on the subject.

The MoveOn poll had 30% voting in favor of Clinton. A fair number of those people may not be very enthusiastic about either candidate, or may see Clinton as the lesser of evils or "the devil we know". I'd bet that the MoveOn membership had fewer than 5% people who are strongly backing Clinton. And if those people feel they have to move on from MoveOn, they will be missed. The other 95% will have to pick up the slack -- especially if Clinton is elected.

[K Gardner]

123. LOL. Posting samples of what MoveOn has done is "over the top"? I don't work for them. I'm just a

progressive democrat who appreciates their years of work for US, unlike you evidently.

[ima_sinnic]

97. yes, I see an awful lof ot "me too" posts by people I suspect were never

MoveOn members to begin with. Kind of like the "former Democrat" LTTEs and callers to talk shows, the fakes and phonies who think they're so clever, but who are such obvious poseurs it's a joke.

It has been very revealing to me--and totally disgusting--to see such an outpouring of faux outrage and trollishness. It is a well-known fact that HRC is not at all popular here on DU or among progressives in general--yet from the numbers of "MoveOn can shove it" posts, one would think that DU was nothing but HRC supporters. Which makes it even more clear to me that an HRC regime would be as Orwellian and fake as *'s has been. It is heartening to know that Obama scored so decisively among MoveOn voters and I just hope that it reflects what is going to happen in the primaries.

[zulchzulu]

93. So MoveOn endorsed Obama? That means all HillHeads take their marbles and go home?

I think that the people who are frankly a bunch of sour grapes crybabies because MoveOn dared not praise the Goldwater Girl in an ever shining light of focus-grouped admiration can go right the hell ahead and leave.

MoveOn has been known not to cater to one particular candidate or other over the years. They are consistently against the Iraq war. So they chose Obama. Big whoop!

As someone who has signed up for MoveOn and has been part of some events, I know they aren't perfect all the time nor do I agree with them all the time. But for the Hillary crybabies to act like their little tantrum matters in the long term is an amusing joke at best.

Join one of Bill's ponzy scheme groups to secretly fund his pockets and library for all I care.

This nonsense from the Hillaryworld camp is yet another perfect example of how it's all about the Clintons. Oops! This could be bad for their bloviated reptilian drive for power and career!

:crazy:

[mondo joe]

94. MoveOn has not previously endorsed a Dem in a primary. This time they did, and based

on not a full vote of the membership but a sampling.

They're free to do so, of course, but those who don't care for such things will not support them.

There are many good causes - no one needs to support one they feel misuses their contributions.

[MilesColtrane]

103. Sampling?

You must just be angry because you blew off voting.

I remind you that ALL democratic elections are just samplings.

The number of actual voters from the pool of all eligible voters in a national election is just a sample, (rarely over 50%) but it is the final say in this country.

[mondo joe]

106. "ALL democratic elections are just samplings"? Not quite.

All voters can vote or not in real elections. That wasn't the case for MoveOn.

[MilesColtrane]

111. Really?

I didn't know that.

Where did you acquire the fact that this was a survey and not a vote?

[mondo joe]

115. From MoveOn's statement.

It is described as a survey of a "rotating sample".

[MilesColtrane]

120. Wrong.

Sampled surveys were taken prior to the endorsement vote in which a ballot was sent to EVERY MoveOn member.

I quote from a MoveOn email sent prior to the vote (my boldings):

"You've probably heard—John Edwards dropped out of the presidential race today, narrowing the field of leading candidates for the Democratic nomination to Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

That leaves us with an important choice together, and we wanted everyone to weigh in: Given this news, do you think MoveOn should hold a presidential primary endorsement vote on Thursday (that is, tomorrow)? Each MoveOn member would be allowed to cast one vote, and it would take a two-thirds majority to endorse a candidate. Voting would last one day, which isn't ideal but would be necessary to have an impact before the Super Tuesday primaries next week.

This is a big decision for us to make, together, and we want to make sure we've got the process right. Clicking below will record your opinion.

Yes, MoveOn members should vote on a presidential primary endorsement Thursday.

No, MoveOn should not hold an endorsement vote yet.

Please respond by 11 a.m. Eastern Time on Thursday—we'll have to move quickly if we want to make an impact.

Here's some more detail about how it would work. If a majority of MoveOn members support the idea of holding an endorsement vote, we will send out an email Thursday with a link to vote online for the endorsement. Voting will be limited to current MoveOn members, and each person can only vote once. We'll also have a verification system in place, a way to audit the vote and confirm it was accurate.

A candidate would need to win at least two-thirds of the votes cast in order to win MoveOn members' endorsement. This is the same threshold we've used in congressional primary elections. Voting would be open until 11 a.m. Eastern Time on Friday, and we would announce the results of the vote on Friday.

More than half of MoveOn's 3.2 million members are in states that will vote on Super Tuesday next week. An endorsement would mean we can push hard, together, as a unified movement to elect a candidate who will represent us. What happens if we don't meet the threshold? We'll sit the Democratic primaries out, for now, and focus on winning the White House in the fall.

Thank you for giving your input into this important decision.

–Eli and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
Wednesday, January 30th, 2008"

[Skip Intro]

102. Fuck MoveOn.

nt

[cgrindley]

104. 50% sour grapes, 50% cry babies

it's pathetic. So are all those idiots going to boycott reading the LA Times? Are they planning to boycott Carter?

[mondo joe]

105. The Times isn't an advocacy group funded by contributions. If your contributions are being

used to fund something you disagree with, why would anyone continue to make them?

[cgrindley]

107. Of course it is... Jesus H. Bogtrotter

When you purchase a newspaper, you are supporting its editorial stance and its operating philosophies. What planet do you live on?

[mondo joe]

108. The Times isn't an ADVOCACY group. It is not funded by CONTRIBUTIONS.

Learn to read, bucko.

The Times sells a product. Buy it or don't.

MoveOn sells advocacy. Support it or don't.

You get what you pay for.

[cgrindley]

109. Yes it is... CONTRIBUTIONS = cover price and ADVOCACY =

the stories it chooses to report in the manner it chooses to report on them in being designed to persuade its readers to think and act in certain ways....


DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE MEDIA EVEN A LITTLE?

[mondo joe]

110. So: If you don't like the product you're getting, why buy/contribute?

[cgrindley]

112. My point is that there is no difference between Moveon and any other endorsement

which includes a great many unions, individuals, organizations, newspapers, and so on. People are instead whining and crying like Moveon is somehow not a media organization. I cannot believe how naive people are.

[mondo joe]

113. You're wrong, but that's not new. Bye-bye. NT

[cgrindley]

114. So you lost the argument and now you're taking your ball and running upstairs to sob in your room?

typical.

[mondo joe]

117. Yes, I'm sobbing. I hardly know whato do with myself. Now I have to go take the clothes off the

outdoor clothesline.

Boo hoo.

[cgrindley]

119. Outdoor clothesline? That's anti-social behavior

you should keep your yard clean and tidy, comrade. You are showing substandard zeal before the block committee.


PS my neighbors and I once banded together and mowed one of the other neighbor's lawns when it got too tall. He never let us down again.

[Evergreen Emerald]

118. MoveOn--I will not give you any more money.

I will not support you. That is my right as a democrat.