Move On Endorses Obama

Email Print posted by Chinese Democracy 02/01/2008 03:23:10 PM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
Move On has decided to endorse Obama

This could be huge

MoveOn will now use its email list to tap volunteers to make phone calls on behalf of Obama in Super Tuesday states. The group says it has 1.7 million members in the states that vote Feb. 5.

MoveOn.org's mobilization efforts are credited with helping the Democratic win the House of Representative in 2006.

"Our members' endorsement of Senator Obama is a clear call for a new America at this critical moment in history," wrote Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org's executive director in the statement.

< Jill Pike: What are you doing? | Nancy Skinner Makes it to DFA Grassroots All-Star Finals >
 Display:
Move On Endorses Obama | 17 comments (17 topical, 0 hidden)
It'll be interesting to see (none / 0)
how the mainstream media portrays this.  Because of the right wing framing and pressure related to the General Betrayus ad, my guess is that this could actually hurt Obama to the extent that the MSM will paint MoveOn as a fringe liberal group.

Then again in the *short run* it should help solidify the (correct, IMO) idea that Obama is more progressive (or at least less conservative) than Hillary.

Another interesting point is that while the right wing smears both Obama and Hillary, they clearly openly hate Hillary more.  But they also hate MoveOn.  How far will they go in ripping Obama here?  I can already hear O'Reilly talking about the "loony left" tonight on his show WRT MoveOn.

by ihavenobias on 02/01/2008 06:28:04 PM EST

It's a Good Thing (none / 0)
Overall, this is a good thing for Obama in the short term.  You can't really worry about the long-term effect if you don't actually ever get there.  If this endorsement helps him now, then it's worth the price he might have to pay for it later on.

So far, the media hasn't spun it negatively.  It seems to have been viewed as a benefit to Obama.

I didn't listen to the conservative nitwits on the radio too much today so I don't know what they've said about it.  I do know that they have always mentioned MoveOn and Hillary in the same breath which goes to show how little they understood the demographics of MoveOn.org.  MoveOn was founded as an anti-war group and Hillary Clinton was never the apple of its eye.

If MoveOn mobilizes for Obama and provides him additonal assistance that can make a difference going forward in the primaries, there is no doubt in my mind that this support will be helpful.

by KISSman on 02/01/2008 07:32:58 PM EST

Dude... (none / 0)
Are you like Brain Damaged? Who the Hell else were they gonna endorse, Clinton the Republican? Clinton the AntiChrist (to many libs, anyway?) Its not like they had a too many choices here, since there are only 2 people left?


And by the way, how the Hell do they have 1.7 members of anything? is one of them just 7/10 committed to the cause :)

I think this hurts Obama at this point in the general election, because McCain will pounce on the whole "Betrayus" ad (The fact that the actual term began on Limbaugh's show gives McCain all the more reason to enjoy it).

I am really starting to smell third party here. Does anyone else?

by bobo1 on 02/01/2008 10:44:15 PM EST

its simple (none / 0)
1.7 million = 1 million 700 thousand of something.

A 3rd party is not a viable option . Not now, not in the foreseeable future.

by Chinese Democracy on 02/02/2008 12:00:10 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Dude check your post... (none / 0)
I was just kidding about the whole 1.7 member thing. you just forgot the "million" in it on your original posting, thats all. No biggie...

As for the 3rd party, McCain Clinton would draw in a Bloomberg faster than a fresh pile of shit draws flies.

now could he win? Maybe not, but it would kill Democrats in the end this year...

thanks

by bobo1 on 02/02/2008 12:03:52 AM EST

[ Parent ]
is that right (none / 0)
The key word was VIABLE

I mean discounting the shit and flies and all dude.

by Chinese Democracy on 02/02/2008 12:20:00 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I Doubt that Bloomberg will even try. (none / 0)
No one has reported that Bloomberg has done any kind of exploration of the possiblility of running -- and with horserace psuedo-journalism being all the rage these days, I'm sure we would have heard about it.

by Juarez Traveller on 02/02/2008 03:43:14 PM EST

[ Parent ]
fuck moveon (none / 0)
hillary defends moveon, and obama cowers.  who do they reward?  obama.  moveon is moving from progressive to populist, and i ain't been liking them much as of late.

i hope they redeem themselves, because i used to be a huge fanboy of theirs.

by mathcore on 02/01/2008 11:55:22 PM EST

From "progressive to populist"? (none / 0)
Generally, progressives are both to the extent that they recognize the enormous concentration of wealth and extreme polarization in our society, things that need to be addressed.

If MoveOn is doing a better job recognizing that, awesome.


I wouldn't use "populist" as some kind of pejorative (something many conservatives do frequently).

by ihavenobias on 02/02/2008 11:35:44 AM EST

[ Parent ]
have to agree with that (none / 0)
I agree. Complaining that Move On has become more popular and accepted is silly. They arent an indie  band.

by Chinese Democracy on 02/02/2008 01:46:10 PM EST

[ Parent ]
how much did that do about fisa? (none / 0)
i didn't get a single freaking email during the fisa battle.  i did get notices to vote on their apple parody video and on who i want as president.

really?  that stuff is more important.

progressive --> populist

by mathcore on 02/02/2008 03:04:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
you have a point (none / 0)
I remember the apple parody video! Made me laugh when I read that. You have a point. But I still think Move On might help obama, because if anything they are fervent and tenacious . The ad that is going to live on forever good or bad is the General Betrayus one.

by Chinese Democracy on 02/02/2008 03:13:11 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Does it have to be either/or? (none / 0)
I still think this may suggest a false dichotomy.  I think progressive-populist is a better description. Not that you necessarily said it was either/or but it may be implied.

One thing many people don't seem to get (I'm speaking generally here, NOT specifically to you) is that uncontrolled corpratism (notice I didn't just say "corporations") can be just as damaging to rights and Americans in general as any domestic spying or bad foreign policy.

To that point, I notice a lot of former fiscal conservatives/right of center types who are moving left foreign policy wise because of the awful Bush Administration policies. Yet they still haven't realized that there are also a LOT of failed conservative domestic/economic policies as well. 

Some are *just now* starting to get the pictures in light of the current/looming economic crisis, but even with that I believe they are ignoring some of the underlying contributing factors, some of which go way back to the 80's.

At any rate, back to MoveOn...again, it's not an either/or deal.  Should they have sent another email about FISA?  Probably so, I'm not disagreeing there.

by ihavenobias on 02/02/2008 03:29:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Does MoveOn Owe Anybody? (none / 0)
WorkingAssets, as you probably know, is a sort of leeberal "grassroots"  ;lobbying group that sells cell phone service.  Naturally, they'd be scared silly to fight against retroactive immunity for telecoms.

Does MoveOn have any ties like that?  I don't know.

by Juarez Traveller on 02/02/2008 03:48:05 PM EST

[ Parent ]
movon (none / 0)

Nobody aside from Bill O'Reilly and Liberal Bloggers care who move on is--the idea that anyone has a clue what the Betrayus thing was about is ridiculous. 

The truth is that this might help Obama pull in some volunteers and that means everything.  

 

I'm amazed to see people saying stuff about third parties and this and that when we have the greatest presidential candidate in 48 years.   

by schmoab on 02/02/2008 02:51:09 AM EST

Well (none / 0)

it is nice to see.

"Nobody aside from Bill O'Reilly and Liberal Bloggers care who move on is--the idea that anyone has a clue what the Betrayus thing was about is ridiculous."

At least someone around here has some grip with reality. 

by z1p101 on 02/02/2008 07:51:17 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Let's not forget one important thing here (none / 0)
The *media* creates the reality.  If the mainstream media decides to start up a big story on how a "far left" organization is supporting Obama and that idea gets repeated over and over again, it *could* have a short term positive, long term negative impact.

I agree that it's more likely to be the former but I can't 100% rule out the latter, although I suspect the impact won't be as important.

That is the reality of the situation.  It doesn't matter if no one knows who MoveOn is (outside of the political junkie sphere), it matters what the Media TELLS them it is. Before you scoff at that idea, keep in mind that people pay more attention to politics (far more) in election years, *especially* this election year.

You want evidence?  Look at the ratings of the debate the other night.

by ihavenobias on 02/02/2008 11:42:07 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Move On Endorses Obama | 17 comments (17 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: