MoveOn.org is a conservative organization

[mudesi]

Oh, wait, not they're not.

So why is a Democratic candidate against a group of millions of liberals? Perhaps because she isn't one.

Open your eyes, Clinton supporters. She's a fraud.

Edited because this can't be repeated enough: Here is what she said

"Moveon.org endorsed Sen. Barack Obama -- which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down," Clinton said to a meeting of donors. "We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."

Bolded by me in case the dense among us still don't get it.

[rurallib]

1. Heard Rush was going to join for his "operation Chaos"

How's that going Rushie? Can't help but laugh at you.

[grasswire]

2. from WaPo

"Look up its history. It was started by rich businessmen who felt that both progressive Democrats and conservative Republicans threatened America. It has repeatedly angered progressives by its positions, such as its campaign *for* Iraq War funding only last year. Not surprising that it would only allow a choice between two candidates who have voted to fund the Iraq War, refuse to pledge to withdraw troops from Iraq at any time during their Presidency if elected, favor increasing the bloated military budget, and favor increasing the size of active duty U.S. military forces.

MoveOn is an organization dedicated to defending the establishment through duping progressives and falsely claiming to represent progressives."

[EFerrari]

6. Right. Their suppressive agenda is why they published a how to grassroots handbook.

You lost me there.

I've criticized MoveOn many times. But this conspiracy theory is ridiculous.

I helped launch this book in my town. We got every kind of citizen from every sector out to read and talk and plan how to get more active, not how to get more suppressed.


http://civic.moveon.org/book//

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. And we're supponsed to take WaPo's word on this?

And that's a mighty informal tone for a WaPo article - might that be an opinion column you're quoting? Or a LTTE?

How about a link so we can verify the veracity of the statement?

Otherwise, it's just malicious rumor.

[Occam Bandage]

19. Not even WaPo. See below.

[Occam Bandage]

16. LMAO. You're quoting a *user comment* to a *blog* hosted by WaPo.

Scroll down to the comment by "BillSamuel"

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/01/moveon_backs_obama.html

[grasswire]

20. I know that.

Can you refute his comments?

[Occam Bandage]

23. That isn't "from WaPo." Funny to hear you talk about someone else "attempting to mislead."

[Barrymores Ghost]

52. "When did you stop abusing your neighbor's children?"

See how your logic works?

So, you go searching for something that validates your pre-conceived notion and you settle on some largely-anonymous reader of the Washington Post with an axe that needs grinding and who doesn't even source his own claim -- and you expect the rest of us to "refute his comments?"

Beautiful.

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. It is interesting, reading through the comments, that this is going

to 'drive all the independents to Hillary' - as of last February.

Funny how it's worked out since then.

[Occam Bandage]

33. "MoveOn's endorsement is the kiss of death."

"This is bound to send all the moderates to Hillary."

"Sorry who ever said this is a kiss of death is right, first kiss of death was Kerry coming out for Obama."

"Poor Obama. He is doing along great when the curse came upon him with this endorsement of moveon.org."

"This is definitely NOT good news for Obama."

"obama is dead in the water."

:rofl:

[doublethink]

3. Oh wait !!!

K&R. A simple truth you speak lynrd_skynrd ... your on a roll today. Keep it going! LOL. Peace.

[cbayer]

4. Perhaps because that particular organization endorsed the guy she is running against.

What is she supposed to do? Praise them?

[Liberal Gramma]

7. Wasn't silence an option?

If I was running a campaign, that would be my choice. Her dissing them removes them from supporting her in the future.

[cbayer]

26. IMO, this is very similar to bitter controversey

Small private fundraiser. She was talking about how effective MoveOn is in gathering donations and how activists have been more effective in caucuses. She was asking for support and money and acknowledging that MoveOn's endorsement of Obama was hurting her. I don't see any dissing there. I see a statement of facts (other than the Afghanistan comment which turns out to be incorrect).

True democratic activists will work for the nominee, whoever that turns out to be.

[doublethink]

9. Maybe she shouldn't blame them for her failed campaign?

Maybe she should blame it on her own shortcomings as a viable candidate to convince people she should be our next President? And stop making excuses. Just a thought.

[cbayer]

28. I don't see blame

I see her actively acknowledging how effective MoveOn has been and how effective activists have been. It's true. They have been very, very effective.

[AllentownJake]

12. She could not

bash them. She might need them later on if she would somehow pull off the upset and become the nominee.

[cbayer]

31. Where's the bashing?

Saying that they are really good at raising money? That the activist base is really good in caucuses? That they show up in great numbers and that intimidates her supporters?

As I said above, true Democratic activists will support will support the nominee. I feel pretty sure about that. Those that do not, are not true Democratic activists, IMO.

[AllentownJake]

39. Making accusations of voter intimidation

is bashing. If she has proof of such matter she should report it to the media and the authorities. She has none.

[cbayer]

41. Ok, let's look at the quote

Because as we all know, statements made at small private fund raisers can really be taken out of context and distorted.

"they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."

Now, the way I read that is that they are very effective at getting to the caucuses in large numbers and that is intimidating to the Clinton supporters who show up. I don't see any accusation of voter intimidation, only recognition that it is an intimidating situation.

[AllentownJake]

42. "Intimidate people who show up to support me"

Yep, that is the definition of Voter intimidation. It doesn't sound like she meant they passively do it with their numbers. It sounds from her quote that they actively are trying to suppress her vote. I'm no civil rights or election lawyer but that is illegal. I don't see where your coming from on this.

[cbayer]

47. Active voter intimidation is illegal.

That's why I don't think that is what she is describing.

Can we agree to disagree? I find this non-issue about as important at the "bitter" non-issue. I am doing what I can to defuse it, that's all.

[AllentownJake]

48. Yeah

I just think Karma can be a MFer. Both have their little private party tapes they have to deal with.

[RaleighNCDUer]

36. If you are dealing with people who essentially agree with you,

but on particulars disagree, and so support someone else, you reach out to those people to convince them you best represent them.

She claims to be anti-war. She claims to be progressive. So how does she benefit by dissing an anti-war progressive site with a 3 million membership?

She will lose because she has no political instincts. At all.

[cbayer]

40. She was giving them credit, IMO.

She was talking about how they had raised money and flooded the caucuses. She was admitting that they were hurting her and asking for money.

Where is the dissing? She is not going to convince MoveOn to change their position no matter what she does.

I am still a member of MoveOn, but I don't feel dissed at all. I am disappointed that they chose to endorse a single candidate but recognize how effective they have been in supporting that candidate.

[RaleighNCDUer]

49. Read it again. It is wholly an oppositional statement.

"Moveon.org endorsed Sen. Barack Obama -- which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down," Clinton said to a meeting of donors. "We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn't even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that's what we're dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it's primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don't agree with them. They know I don't agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."

"We" in opposition to "them". The activists.

"So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me."

Intimidate? When has the word intimidate ever denoted giving credit to the other guy? Besides, only the weak-minded would ever be intimidated at a caucus. It is nothing more than a process to field the best candidate with the best arguement - if you can't defend your candidate's position, maybe you should consider a different candidate. And that doesn't even happen often - mostly it's just a hand count -- 10 for X, 14 for Y, 3 for Kucinich; Kucinich is out of the running, so those three choose a new group. What's intimidating about that?

IT'S A REPUBLICAN MEME.

[cbayer]

50. I've read it again and it sounds the same to me.

Ever see the movie Rashomon? What one hears, sees, experiences is all a matter of perspective.

At any rate, I didn't hear much negative in Obama's bitter comments either, even though a lot of people apparently did.

Each camp will grab on to anything they can at this point to try and hurt the other. That's just the way it is. I would rather try and defuse some of that than buy into it.

As for the Republican meme comment, all I can say is that I don't think true Democrats accuse other Democrats of being Republicans. You may not like or support her, but she is not a Republican.

[RaleighNCDUer]

51. I never said she was a republican.

She is, however, a DLCer, which by their own definition of being a "third way" means she is no Democrat.

[Triana]

5. She used to be a Republican...

...Still is, IMO.

[Uben]

8. Why the hell would she support MoveOn?

They endorsed Obama. And, they took the money Clinton supporters sent in to support Obama. That borders on fraud and deception because they endorsed after the monies were sent in. I wouldn't send Eli another red cent because you have no way of knowing how he will spend it. He's just another political hack, anyway. Had he endorsed Clinton, you Obama supporters would be screaming bloody hell because he spent your money on her.

[EFerrari]

11. Why the hell would you endorse a democratic organization founded

to support your spouse through a crisis and to help America get back on track?

Do I have that right?

:rofl:

[doublethink]

14. MoveOn had a vote ...... 70% favored Obama, 30% Clinton.

It was laid out on the table ..... Democratically Obama won, like he's doing in the primaries. MoveOn (an 'activist' organization) endorsed Obama and got busy. Eli didn't endorse as you sate, the people that comprise the 'whole' of MoveOn endorsed.

Hillary's shortcomings as a viable candidate has convinced not just the members in the MoveOn Organization, but as we see..... the majority of voters in the primary's that she's not the one we want representing The Democratic party as our candidate for President in 2008.

That's roughly how Democracy works. Peace. :hi:

[grasswire]

22. No.

Seventy percent of 300,000 voting members supported Obama. Not seventy percent of 3.2 million members.

[Occam Bandage]

29. Every one of the 3.2 million members was given a ballot. 70% of the votes were pro-Obama.

Spin it how you like.

[grasswire]

34. okay, 2,900,000 members voted against Obama

Either by ballot or by refusing to participate in this fraud.

[Occam Bandage]

35. So, since when does not returning a ballot mean you're "voting against" a particular candidate?

[doublethink]

38. Read post #29 then consider this ......

"Today's endorsement is the first time MoveOn.org has endorsed a candidate for President in the Democratic primary. Over the past year, MoveOn surveyed a rotating sample of 30,000 members each week to determine their membership's preference in the Democratic presidential primary. For months, MoveOn members were divided among many candidates -- as many waited to see who would take bold progressive positions on the issues. As the primary race has gained momentum, the polling showed a consensus forming and, with Senator John Edward's withdrawal from the race, members made their decision in favor of Senator Obama. The vote took place from Thursday, January 31st to Friday, February 1st. -snip-

http://moveon.org/press/pr/obamaendorsementrelease.html

note: Just as in any past General Election ... if some chose not to participate .... and the results came back not to their liking.... well ..... again that's how Democracy works and has for some time now. Peace.

[RaleighNCDUer]

18. That's just silly.

The money people sent to MoveOn was used to support MoveOn. If you send MoveOn money, you've got no reason to bitch about how they spent it.

Hey, I sent Hillary money for her 1st senate campaign. Do I have reason to bitch that she used it to vote us into a war?

I guess, by Hillarylogic, I should.

[democracy1st]

24. Question you should ask is why did MoveOn endorse Obama

And why did Daily Kos,Americablog,etc. Let me know if I need to tell ya

[crankychatter]

10. I did hear THIS the other day, that Activists are former Republicans

unhappy with their vote for Bush in 04... on the periphery of the party... former Republicans that have "found religion" etc... and that REAL activists belong to the local Party, go to all the Party meetings... pay their dues and support Hillary Clinton.

I said... "yeah right... move-on is just a pack of ex-republicans"

I don't know what the response was... because that person is now sitting in my ignore bin, marking the days with X's on the wall.

[EFerrari]

13. But MoveOn was operating before 2004.

Never mind. lol

As soon as someone sneers "activists", you know that Rush is in there somewhere.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

17. What I don't understand is why any candidate would tick off

the activist base of their party. These are the folks who volunteer to man phone banks and drive people to the polls. They are the ones who take time off work to be poll watchers. They are not the people who should ever be dissed by a candidate if that candidate wishes to win.

Has Obama said anything negative about Democratic activists? Not MoveOn, of course, but other Democratic groups? Just curious.

[grasswire]

25. who says it's the "activist base"?

220,000 members of moveon.org are the activist base of the 72 million members of the Democratic Party? Come on.

[Occam Bandage]

27. No, 3.2 million members of MoveOn are a large part of the activist base of the Democratic party.

She wasn't just insulting those who voted in their open ballot. She insulted the entire organization.

[EFerrari]

32. "Activist base" is a right wingnut term -- oh, and Hillary's. n/t

ETA: A term meant to dis people who get active in the democratic process.

Thanks, Hil! Vote suppression much?

[mudesi]

43. I BOLDED IT

But I guess I'll have to copy and paste it into this reply for you as well.

Hillary Clinton said:
We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

44. Then it is ok with you for a Dem to diss a Democratic organization?

Personally, I think MoveOn is a Democratic activist base. If I were running for office, I would try my best not to say anything negative about any Democratic organization, as I feel it only alienates folks. Clinton could have kept silent about MoveOn, but chose not to--chose to say things that are bound to tick off MoveOn members. In these times of close elections, I simply don't think it is wise to alienate any Democratic group.

[Maribelle]

21. MoveOn has attempted to thwart Hillary's campaign on many occasions.

Say honest.

[CADEMOCRAT7]

37. Everyone voted

Moveon.org was willing to support Clinton or Obama. We will stand together to support the democratic candidate that gets the most votes. There was a vote, and Senator Obama won.
Why are people attacking Moveon.org ? In my neck of the woods, they have a lot of respect.

[BzaDem]

45. Just because she doesn't agree with you on everything doesn't mean she's a fraud.

You really aren't *that* important.

[OneDemsConscience]

46. Bottom Line is she isn't with the Move On activist community on foriegn policy

That's the substantive point I take from this. Regardless of her rhetoric there's some evidence she has made certain commitments on staying the course in Iraq.

If she's honest to anyone about policy, it's to these elite donors. And she's made it clear that she opposes the MoveOn position (which, to be sure, is more moderate than that of a large part of the anti-war activist community)

Now that isn't to say Obama is ideal on this issue or even that much better. But it would be an illusion to say Clinton shares the views of those who opposed this war from the beginning and want a withdraw as soon as possible. She doesn't.