*Dag-gone*, Senator Clinton.
How much did that *cost* you?
By Moe Lane Posted in 2008 | Not In Your Name | Rooting For Injuries | Suckers! — Comments (20) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
I mean, we all figured that the Moveon folks would have been able to avoid keeping their membership from endorsing Obama with that 67% cutoff, but 70%? Whoever set that up for you, give him or her a raise; it's earned.
MoveOn endorses Obama
By Klaus Marre
Posted: 02/01/08 12:17 PM [ET]
MoveOn.org announced Friday that it will endorse Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) for president, adding to the momentum that Obama hopes will carry him past Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).The liberal group, with its 3.2 million members, is expected to provide a boost to the Illinois senator ahead of Super Tuesday. MoveOn said it has 1.7 million members in the states in which voters are going to the polls next week.
[Snip of text attempting to paper over the uncomfortable truth that Moveon.org's principles only activate during Democratic Presidential administrations. Not In Your Names.]
MoveOn voters favored Obama over Clinton by 70 percent to 30 percent.
More here. I'm glad that you're happy for the endorsement, Senator Obama: goofy of you not to be with them at their time of need, but hey, it was just politics, right? You're all one big happy family now: you, Moveon.org, International ANSWER, CodePink...
Hmm. Now that I think of it, I guess that means that you approve of the way that the City of Berkeley's trying to push out the Marines. Isn't that right, o... centrist?
No, I wasn't particularly expecting an answer, either.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Quibbling with McCain — Comments (53) »
*Dag-gone*, Senator Clinton. 20 Comments (0 topical, 20 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
...and "unite" us for the goal of bringing socialism to the U.S.
I would like someone to explain how the most liberal senator in Congress and someone who is endorsed by Moveon.org is this great "bipartisan leader".
“.....women and minorities hardest hit”
My experience is that the only people who care are them what would never, ever vote for a Republican or them what would never vote for a Democrat.
Man is free at the moment he wishes to be. --Voltaire
It's an important endorsement in the battle against Hillary though, right?
Which Democrats who were going to vote for Hillary are now going to vote for Obama, just because of the MoveOn endorsement? My guess is zero. It may influence the undecideds, but with Edwards having trailed so badly for so long, who among these folks has not already decided between the two? Also, what percentage of registered independents are pro-MoveOn? I'll bet both numbers are also very low.
32 million last quarter. Toss in the ability to directly solicit Moveon's loony toons that make the Ronulans look sane, well you have a truly formidable force.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Well, if I remember the numbers correctly, the Edwards percentage of the vote would have been enough to swing the election either way in most of the contests thus far.
I certainly could be wrong, but I think you overestimate the speedy decision-making capabilities of many Edwards supporters.
Regardless, momentum is important. Every bit helps.
I believe that a growing number of democrats are growing tired of the "netroots, & are ready for them to take a back seat in the party. If the democrats are unsuccessful in taking the white house, & would imagine that the netroots will receive much of the blame however it happens.
...for Democrats. It now acts as a useful catch-all, umbrella group for when the media wants to talk about "online Liberals." Other than that no one cares. It's being sustained more by the useful strawman role it plays in right-wing attacks than left-wing dedication to (or desire for) its existence. Which I'm sure most of you understand, but I wanted to clear it up if there were any doubters out there.
Useful strawmen that make it up ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
But that was the number that took the trouble to vote for Obama.
Perhaps he just borrowed some Ronulans to win the endorsement.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
A number of news reports are throwing out the 1.7 million number as the number of participants. But apparently it's just the number of people on their email list who live in the 22 Super Tuesday states.
The group has a total of 3.2 million members, with 1.7 million of them in 22 states whose populations go to the polls next Tuesday.
I've heard that only 10% of the people who got the email responded, though I can't find the source right off. I got it in the hotmail email account I use for junk and responded; I sort of dislike MoveOn and so voted for Obama because he didn't defend their stupid ad with an actual vote. So even the vote totals are sort of a bad estimate of support.
Basically, they say they have over 3.2 million members. What they have are 3.2 email addresses they've collected over 10 years. To me it looks like both the right-wing and MoveOn have motive to pretend MoveOn is something more than it is.
But Moe has graciously avoided being cruel below, so I'll stop now and not tempt him further.
Internal issues.
I would certainly acknowledge your greater expertise and possible inside knowledge.
Your statement of course begs the question. If they are so small and unimportant how come they were able to control the actions of the majority party in both houses of congress ? Why was their ring kissed over the petraeus advert ? It certainly would have been a lovely way for certain senators to move to the center, no ?
I also have to ask, while Obama may not care or even want the Move On endorsement why is his campaign almost a total pander to their positions ?
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
You don't splutter. :)
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
I'm just going to note for the record that I could be, and... why, yes: move on. :)
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
The irony is rich, nay, verdant.
We'll sort out our problems or be honest about any splinters. These folks just adjust the goal posts.
Do the numbers. MoveOn claims 3.2 million members, and 197,444 votes to endorse Obama. That's 6.2%, not 70%.
As they have done in the past, they came up with a way to try to rig a poll for a preordained result. They claim they require a 2/3 vote to give an endorsement. But they knew there was no way they could get that.
So how do you do that? They provide only one alternative to their decision - Hillary Clinton, whom they know is not that popular among their members. What about MoveOn members who favor Ron Paul? Not allowed to vote. Favor Cynthia McKinney? Not allowed to vote? Favor Mike Gravel? Not allowed to vote? Favor Ralph Nader? Not allowed to vote. Favor someone else? Not allowed to vote. Favor no endorsement? Not allowed to vote.
Many MoveOn members were effectively not allowed to vote. In fact, 91% of MoveOn members did not vote. Because MoveOn didn't count, we don't know how many of those didn't vote because they favored another option, how many didn't get to their email before the very short time frame to vote, or something else.
For more analysis, see MoveOn's 6.2% Landslide at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_bill_sam_080201_moveon_s_6_2_25_...
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
He has joined the nutroots.