The TRUTH about moveon.org's support of Obama.

[grasswire]

Moveon held an election to see which candidate it should endorse. Ballots were sent to members by e-mail.

Out of 3.2 million moveon.org members, ballots were returned by only 300,000 members. Seventy percent of the 300,000 voted to support Obama. Thirty percent voted to support Hillary.

So that means the moveon endorsement of Obama was based on only a bit more than 210,000 members.

210,000 members.

So it is really, truly wrong to say that moveon's 3.2 million members endorse Obama. Really, truly wrong.

[grasswire]

1. further, the vote angered many members

Here's a commentary the day after the endorsement, from WaPo:

"If you were on MoveOn's email list, you would know that it was not a fair poll. If you clicked on a link to vote, you had only two options - vote for Obama or vote for Clinton. All MoveOn members who supported someone else or believed MoveOn should not endorse at all were disenfranchised. By my calculations, 82% of MoveOn's membership (using the figures MoveOn provides both as to numbers who voted and for their membership) did not vote for either Obama or Clinton. So you could say there was a landslide against the endorsement, but this didn't stop MoveOn's leadership.

MoveOn always reverts to form. 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."

[uberblonde]

I know a lot of people who unsubscribed to MoveOn....

Because of the way this endorsement was handled. I wonder if they're still counted as members?

[Mezzo]

12. I didn't unsubscribe, I just ignore them.

[TankLV]

97. I am one of them...

they can get lost as far as I'm concerned...

[jasmine621]

104. I'm one of them. Won't be sending them any more money. nt

[tularetom]

21. Maybe only 300,000 of their members voted

but clinton has now pissed off 3.2 million of them.

This is beginning to look beyond desperate. I don't want to see her anywhere near the white house. She'd be talkin to the presidential portraits from day 1.

I think she's lost it. Not the nomination. I think she's lost it.

[grasswire]

38. you're making an invalid assumption

I don't see how you can speak for 3.2 million people with no documentation to support your premise. What is your evidence that 3.2 million members are pissed off?

[Occam Bandage]

43. Definition of hypocrisy.

"I don't see how you can speak for 3.2 million people with no documentation to support your premise. What is your evidence that 3.2 million members are pissed off?"

"only corporatist candidates were on the ballot...and apparently 3 million members didn't like those options."

"uh.......three million members did NOT VOTE. Which means the majority did NOT AGREE to the election."

[democracy1st]

88. same as the Presidential election ?

[FlaGranny]

95. Doesn't that also mean

they didn't disagree either? How can you agree or disagree if you don't vote in an election?

[JoFerret]

98. It angered me

And I was against the war and indeed against the Gulf war (should that be of any interest.) It angered me because it was divisive, immature and premature.

[Nitrogenica]

2. So Hillary then acts like a rightie and slams them anyway?

Explain.

[Mezzo]

14. as soon as you explain OBama using Harry and Louise. nt

[AllentownJake]

22. Yet after 14 years

Hillary still hasn't found a way to combat those two...you'd think she might have something ready for that?

[Occam Bandage]

26. You're right. Picturing a nondescript man and woman in an ad is unforgivable.

[Nitrogenica]

36. What does that have to do with her stance on MoveOn.

Description of Two Wrongs Make a Right


1. It is claimed that person B would do X to person A.
2. It is acceptable for person A to do X to person B (when A's doing X to B is not necessary to prevent B from doing X to A).

[truedelphi]

3. Also, nothing prevents someone from registering two or more times

With MoveOn.
So they can vote more often as well.

[mindfulNJ]

4. Elections (and endorsements) are decided by

those who bother to vote.

[PM7nj]

5. Stop whining. There are no wimps in the White House.

:)

[EFerrari]

6. No. A majority of VOTERS selected Obama and so the GROUP'S

endorsement went to him.

Normally, we call that the democratic process. :crazy:

[grasswire]

13. but the membership did NOT vote to endorse Obama

Only a VERY SMALL portion of the membership.

Understanding the numbers means properly assessing the clout. There ain't much clout in 210,000 members.

[Occam Bandage]

23. Er, this argument is like saying that Bush didn't win 2004 because only 30% of voters voted for him.

[Maribelle]

41. No it isn't. Folks register to vote for a president or others. MoveOn members did not join...

to choose one Democratic candidate over another.

[Occam Bandage]

48. Sure it is. People register so that

they may vote in any election they so choose, and for whatever candidates they so choose in whatever races they so choose. They are allowed to abstain from any ballot or line for which they have no preference, or for which they do not feel comfortable deciding, or if they simply do not feel like taking the time and effort to vote in a particular election.

People register at MoveOn to become part of the MoveOn community. This election was an official action taken by MoveOn. Like any of MoveOn's actions, all members were afforded the right to participate and the right to decline participation for whatever reason they might have.

[cbayer]

91. As someone who actively supports both candidates

I was very disappointed that MoveOn took this position. I am not sure what their motivation was, but they no longer spoke for me when they decided they needed to endorse a single candidate.

I did not sign up with MoveOn to endorse a candidate. I signed up because I liked a lot of the work they were doing.

The reason I respect and actively participate in DU is because it is open to all Democrats and has not closed it's doors to those that support candidates still in the race.

[EFerrari]

24. By voting, the membership agreed to the ground rules.

And those 210,000 members won the clout of the group.

You seem to have a basic misunderstanding of how voting works.

[grasswire]

28. uh.......three million members did NOT VOTE

Which means the majority did NOT AGREE to the election.

[Occam Bandage]

32. Now there's a leap in logic.

Since when does failure to return a ballot equate to opposition to the ballot? Are you suggesting that in 2004, 40% of Americans "did not agree to" the November election?

[Two Americas]

105. of course

"40% of Americans 'did not agree to' the November election?"

Yes, absolutely. Of course.

We can blame the "stupid idiots" - increasingly common among liberal and party activists, sadly, and which is where the appearance of elitism originates. Or we can take a look at what we are offering to people and how we are offering it.

With the pervasive consumerist and marketing models and mentality that modern liberals use for advocacy, it is surprising to me that it is nor obvious that if 40% of your customers don't select either product you are offering, that is indeed "no sale." Then do you say "well the customers are too stupid to want what I am offering them, so I really won?" Unfortunately, that is exactly what too many liberals and activists do in fact say. We are right, people should want this, and it is not our fault if the public doesn't want what we are offering - it is their fault.

[Cheap_Trick]

34. no, it means

THEY DID NOT VOTE. They had the chance and passed. Their fault if they don't like the end result. Kind of like FL and MI. They knew the rules and broke them anyway, and then cry about it.

[EFerrari]

42. Most Americans don't vote either. Are all our elections invalid?

I'm sorry if I'm being unpleasant, grasswire.

The vote is what is was. The people who chose to vote did. The vote resulted in a winner which resulted in an endorsement.

peace,
Beth

[grasswire]

57. gahhhhhhhh!!

Well, some of our elections ARE invalid. But that's another point.

The point HERE is that it is false to say or imply that moveon's 3.2 million members support Obama. The clout of moveon is vastly overstated. And that's wrong.

[EFerrari]

64. No. It's called an agreement. The group voted and the endorsement

went to the winner.

Why are you so invested in downplaying MoveOn's influence? Hmmm?

[grasswire]

72. who agreed, and to what?

Moveon sent out ballots. Where is the agreement?

[Occam Bandage]

75. Any member can terminate their membership at will. Sustained membership is agreement

to the organization's actions.

[EFerrari]

76. Moveon sent out ballots. You've answered your own question. n/t

[EFerrari]

62. Do you have some problem with understand how elections work?

[DearAbby]

90. Sort of like a election...

not all citizens of this country votes in an election, those who bother to vote, the candidate with the majority of votes wins. Moveon held an election, those who bothered to vote, were counted and the person with the most votes won...sounds fair to me.

[BeatleBoot]

7. And I left MoveOn.org because of it

[searchingforlight]

20. Yes, but did you vote or are you a non-participant who just whines about the results?

[Maribelle]

44. Was there a check box to vote for 'do not choose one democratic candidate over another'?

[Occam Bandage]

50. If you didn't feel like supporting one over another, you were free to not return your ballot.

If you didn't like either, you were free to not return your ballot.
If you didn't feel like filling out a survey, you were free not to return your ballot.

If you oppose the idea of endorsing a candidate, or oppose the idea of endorsing Barack Obama, you were and are free to leave the organization. With the exception of a few loud anecdotes, that hasn't seemed to happen on a significant scale.

[Maribelle]

55. So - are you saying that MoveOn did not care why the majority did not return their ballots?

They just went ahead pretending that most members supported Obama, when that was far from the truth?

[Occam Bandage]

65. Probably because you'll never get a much higher response to a mass email.

On what grounds are you saying that it is "far from the truth" that most members of MoveOn support Obama? How do you know that most don't?

[BeatleBoot]

58. I voted.

No whining here. They can do what they want.

I just don't want to be a part of that lot.

Especially after being at a couple of functions and seeing the gadflys.

It's not for me, you know.

[grasswire]

25. a LOT of people did that.

The fact that only the two CORPORATIST candidates were on the ballot was an affront to all those millions of donors over the years.

[Catherina]

92. And 10 more joined because of it. Trust me, no tears there n/t

[Shakespeare]

8. All members had a chance to vote. If you didn't vote, don't complain.

Much ado about nothing. I'm not an Obama supporter (but I am a moveon member), and I have no problem at all with their endorsement and the way it was conducted.

[sandnsea]

9. Yeah I guess it's stupid to say the voter's decided about anything

Unless 100% of voters participate. Screwy argument.

Hillary doesn't deserve your support. You're smarter than that too.

[grasswire]

18. she doesn't have my support

Never did.

[sandnsea]

33. good to know

I'm not surprised by some of her supporters, others have really got me scratchin' my head. You'd have been in that category.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. A whole lot of people had the opportunity to vote but didn't.

It was their choice not to return a ballot, so how can they complain now if the majority of those who did vote chose to support Obama? Since the organization solicited a vote to decide whom it should endorse, and a majority of those who chose to respond chose Obama, it is fair and accurate to state that MoveOn endorsed him. Those who voluntarily failed to respond are bound by that decision as members of the organization.

[AllentownJake]

11. You'd think

If Moveon was so powerful as Hillary said her great campaign (runs like a well oiled machine) would have contacted her members and informed them about the endorsement and that they should vote to get it.

BTW I'm one of the 300,000 that voted for Barack....

[Occam Bandage]

15. It's just like the real world: If you don't vote, your voice isn't counted.

[pathansen]

102. They didn't give us enough time to vote!! Only 1 or 2 day warning

[SeattleGirl]

16. Sounds pretty much like elections in this country, actually.

Not everyone eligible to vote, votes.

Not every person in every party votes for that party's nominee.

Elections are based on percentages, not actual numbers, in the overall scheme of things.

Not everyone agrees with the who the ultimate winner is.

Sounds like business as usual, not like some underhanded "plot" or anything.

[Diamonique]

17. This has never been a secret.

I'm a member and I remember when they asked members if we should endorse a candidate. A *lot* of members said no (including me). But of those who actually voted on it, the majority of those who replied said "yes".

So then they held the endorsement vote; and the majority of those who replied said "Obama".

I still think MoveOn should remain issue-oriented and not endorse individuals. But they've done it, and I can't change it.

But none of that absolves Clinton of dissing "Democratic activists". Not all activists are members of MoveOn. Not all activists are Obama supporters. She has a whole lot of activists in her corner.

[mikehiggins]

19. Whoa! Isn't that how its supposed to work?

Those who are interested in voting do vote. Those who don't are basically saying they aren't interested. So, if only 10% of the members vote, that's the story Charlie.

Back when the vote was taken it may be that the majority of members thought it made little difference who got the nod, so long as he/she was a progressive. Of those who did vote, 70% voted for Obama. Is there any reason to suspect that if 100% of the members voted the percentage would have been different? Nah. But that doesn't matter. There was a vote. Obama won and so MoveOn supports Obama. If a member is that offended by the way the democratic (small d) process works, he or she is free to leave the organization. So long as there are 3.4 million members, however, MoveOn has a perfect right to state that the membership supports Obama.

[Cha]

27. Tough shit..they should have supported what's her name..

so they could endorse everything their Org was against..no. And, you whine too much.

[SoFlaJet]

29. just another contest that doesn't count

according to Hillary LIEberman and her bots

[Liberal Gramma]

30. Didn't all 3.2 million members have the opportunity to vote?

People who choose not to vote can't complain.

[grasswire]

31. only corporatist candidates were on the ballot

...and apparently 3 million members didn't like those options.

[Occam Bandage]

35. Only "corporatist" candidates were still running.

And no, the Lee Mercer wing of the party doesn't count.

[grasswire]

81. so why do people say Hillary offended the liberal base?

You can't have it both ways.

[mikehiggins]

40. How do you know that? Maybe they were all at the beach that

day and couldn't get to a terminal. The idea that 3 million people protested by not voting is, IMHO, just plain silly.

[PM7nj]

45. Everyone else already dropped out!!

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080211/melber

After Edwards dropped out, MoveOn sent out an alert asking people to vote. Since it was only between Obama and Clinton by then, of course no on else was on the ballot!

[mudesi]

37. Who CARES?

If MoveOn wants to endorse a candidate, so be it. Maybe they're capable of doing basic arithmetic and realize that Hillary Clinton has already lost this nomination.

All I know is that MoveOn is a group for liberals, and Clinton is apparently against such radical thought!

[Life Long Dem]

39. Clinton is shutting out Democrats. What else does one need to know?

Little by little. First we here that we can't be bitter for the last eight years then the activist base is being shut out by her. I don't know about you but I don't feel like watching this play out over the next 4 to 8 years.

[blogslut]

46. So?

How are those numbers any different when compared to the voting ratios of the American electorate?

[Lucky 13]

47. Are you fucking serious? Let me get this straight.

As an organization, instead of having the executive director or the board decide which candidate they would support, they put it to their members.

As with the American political process, MANY individuals chose not to vote. Those that did vote determined the winner. Obama won with 70 percent of the vote... an IMPRESSIVE number, even if only a sampling of their entire membership. In the absolute fairest way possible, MoveOn chose to support Obama.

WTF is wrong with that?

Anyone who disagrees with them isn't being FORCED to remain a member. No one is being FORCED to continue donating. If you don't agree with them, there are plenty of other DEMOCRATIC ACTIVISTS groups to choose from that might more align with your views.

What's more, do you not recall that this is the organization that was formed for the sole purpose of telling everyone to MOVE ON from Bill's Monica Lewinsky scandal?! After all they have done for the Clintons, the slander of the group is outrageous.

You people have officially gone completely delusional. Hillary and her supporters must be stopped. That's all there is to it. Tuesday marks the beginning of the end for HRC - watching the panic set in is truly entertaining.

Peace.

[grasswire]

53. the only thing wrong is making false assumptions about clout

It's wrong to say or imply that moveon's 3.2 alleged members support Obama. That's wrong.

I'm only asking for a realistic, truthful assessment of what the endorsement means. Precious little, really.

[Occam Bandage]

59. Nobody claimed all 3,200,000 support Obama. However, the organization does,

and there are 3,200,000 who support the organization. Saying "not everyone returned their ballots" does not alter that either way.

[grasswire]

70. I actually challenge that 3.2 million membership number

So many people left moveon after the endorsement fiasco that I'd like to see a valid membership number now.

[Occam Bandage]

73. So after baselessly suggesting the will of the membership is opposite of the open vote,

we now suggest MoveOn is lying about its membership. Why not suggest that MoveOn lied about the ballot results, too?

[cbayer]

93. How can you say "Are you fucking serious?'

and "You people have officially gone completely delusional" and then end your post with "Peace"?

I must be missing something.

[Lucky 13]

99. Did you read any of the stuff in between?

[Zachstar]

49. You know it is not a good idea to continue to dig the MoveOn Gate hole

[Maribelle]

51. And then MoveOn proceeded to attempt to thwart Hillary's campaign

Anyone that tries to claim that Hillary 'lost' MoveOn with her statements in New Hampshire is simply spitting swamp water tainted by alligator excrement, :mad: or something like that.

[Occam Bandage]

52. Um, yeah. They supported the candidate their membership endorsed. What bastards.

[Maribelle]

60. The point is that the majority of 'their membership' did not support anyone.

MoveOn only pretended it did. It was deceptive.

[Occam Bandage]

66. Sure they did. They were spoken for

by those who returned ballots. If you don't vote, your voice gets taken by someone who does. That's the way things work in a democracy.

[grasswire]

67. thank you

Finally.

The whole charade has become a textbook example of framing.

Hillary's comments are a lot less explosive when one sees that only 220,000 members of moveon voted to endorse Obama.

[Occam Bandage]

71. 3.2 million were given ballots. The response was 70% Obama. In any election,

if you don't vote, your voice doesn't exist. Claiming "oh, well, maybe they wanted to endorse someone else and that's why they didn't vote" is trying to put words in the mouths of those who refused to talk.

[grasswire]

74. your logic is not worthy of your candidate

70 percent of 3.2 million did NOT support Obama. 220,000 did. Nearly 3 million refused to support Obama.

[Occam Bandage]

77. Refused? That's a strange word to use. Why are you ascribing motive? As you said,

"I don't see how you can speak for 3.2 million people with no documentation to support your premise."

[EFerrari]

78. No, that's false. You are lumping in members who didn't vote

with members who voted for someone else.

Really, that's just silly.

[grasswire]

63. there you go again

The 3.2 million "membership" did not endorse Obama.

Seventy percent of 300,000 members did.

[Occam Bandage]

68. I think by this point it's obvious

that you are not actually reading posts, but instead copy-pasting that, since that does not actually address what I wrote. What should MoveOn have done, supported the candidate that their membership voted against?

[grasswire]

80. they should have built in a provision...

....that a certain number of ballots needed to be returned in order to commit to an endorsement. They should have said so -- that no endorsement would be forthcoming without forty percent (or some such) return of the ballots.

The way it was handled smacks of a corporatist agenda -- of misleading the membership and now misleading the general public into thinking that Hillary has angered the base, when moveon does not represent the base.

[Occam Bandage]

82. Guess what? If you decide not to vote, your voice doesn't count. It works that way

in the general election. If you're a stockholder, it works that way with the ballots they send you. It works that way with MoveOn, too.

[grasswire]

96. fine. But don't be defrauding the public by mischaracterizing the results.

It is fraudulent at worst, propaganda at best to say that moveon members endorse Obama.

[PM7nj]

84. No one was preventing the others from voting.

They could have but they didn't. That is MoveOn's fault?

[Lucky 13]

79. The membership voted to support Obama.

I haven't hear Hillary "lost" MoveOn with statements. I heard the membership voted and opted for Obama.

Why the anger at them? Do you not recall what this group did for the Clintons less than a decade ago?

[Maribelle]

83. The majority of MoveOn's membership did not vote to support Obama.

And I think to attempt to continue this deception is truly shameful.

[Occam Bandage]

85. How is it deception? Everyone was given a ballot. The majority of votes were for Obama.

Ergo, Obama won.

[Lucky 13]

100. What is your problem? I don't get it.

All were provided with a ballot. Just like with U.S. Elections, some chose not to vote. The winner of the membership voting was Obama with 70%. The organization, based on the voting of their membership, is supporting Obama. No one is saying that all 3,200,000 members are all voting for Obama, but THE ORGANIZATION is. Some members of the organization disagree. That's ok too.


How do you propose they do things? What is the problem here? I don't know how much more clearly it can be explained for you.

[bunnies]

54. Those that didnt vote dont get to complain.

Period. 210,000 members and I am one of them. Dont like it? Tough shit.

[stevenleser]

56. Official "You are a sore loser" *PLONK*

[izzybeans]

61. .

:spray: :rofl:

[ProSense]

69. Are you trying to prove that MoveOn is not responsible for Hillary losing?

She distorts, she lies, she panders, she whines...that's why she's losing.

[democracy1st]

86. Well using that then the USA doesn't vote for Pres

:wtf:

[dkf]

87. So why throw move-on under the bus then?

It was gratuitous and for the benefit of those people who despise "liberals".

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

89. As I understand it,

however, every member got the email and every member knew the choice and that MoveOn would endorse whoever got the most votes. So if people really wanted Clinton over Obama, wouldn't they have voted?

FYI, I got the ballot, but since I didn't like either of them, I didn't vote. But I have no problem having MoveOn endorsing one candidate.

[johnnydrama]

108. actually

MoveOn wouldn't even endorse if somebody only got 50%, It had to be 66.7% of their membership in order to endorse.

[bigtree]

94. Obama skipped voting on the resolution condeming the MoveOn ad

For that act of *political courage* :sarcasm:, he receives the group's endorsement.

He did vote for the bill which immediately preceded that vote, offered by Barbara Boxer, "reaffirming strong support for all men and women in the military and condemning attacks on the “honor, integrity and patriotism” of any individual who is serving or has served in the Armed Forces."
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/obama_walks_on_antimoveonorg_s.html

As a reward for her part in voting against the fascist resolution, Hillary Clinton is passed over by the organization in their endorsement of Obama. (she stood with 22 other defenders of free speech)

I remember the issue of that vote was a big deal here at DU, at one time.

here's Obama's explanation:

"The notion that we’re wasting time debating about a newspaper ad makes no sense. So I just, I didn’t even vote on that vote," said Obama.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/09/obama-explains-.html


here's an account:

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) offered a “sense of the Senate” resolution

. . . that Petraeus “deserves the full support of the Senate” and said the Senate “strongly condemns personal attacks” on his honor and integrity.

Cornyn’s resolution was a direct swipe at the anti-war group, MoveOn.org, a powerful factor in the Democratic presidential primary. Senators Hillary Clinton voted against the Cornyn amendment.

Obama didn’t vote at all on the Cornyn amendment to the Defense authorization bill.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2007/09/obama_walks_on_antimoveonorg_s.html



The Boxer amendment that he voted for was a diversion from the question of the MoveOn condemnation. It wasn't on point at all. This was a republican assault on an anti-occupation organization speaking out (on our behalf) against Petraeus' political promotion of his 'surge'. Those 22 senators, including Hillary Clinton, took this on directly, unconcerned with any political liability or political calculation. It was a rare defense of free speech at a time when the White House was controlling the impressions of his escalation of force.

We need these voices to speak out. It was Congress' duty to address this head-on. Some chose to sidestep the question of MoveOn's right to speak out as they pleased. Some chose to stand directly behind that right. Obama chose to sidestep the question and took the political cover of the Boxer substitute, instead of simply stepping up and voting against the arrogance of the republican attempt to muzzle and suppress dissent to their bloody occupation.

[pathansen]

101. And they only waited to about 1-2 days to make their decision

I didn't get a chance to vote.

[Two Americas]

103. very telling and significant

What this tells me is that most moveon members are not very motivated or enthusiastic about either candidate.

[burythehatchet]

106. oh this is too easy....so by your logic her insulting all 3 million was what....??

[krawhitham]

107. I did not vote

Because I feel Moveon should not be endorsing anyone

[susankh4]

109. Yep. Sure is!

And we all know it too.

Move-on has lost my support (and my family's) forever.

Let 'em get their own damned party and quit F'in with mine!

[Seabiscuit]

110. That was the wrong move by Moveon to endorse a candidate before GE.

I also was angered by the choice to endorse because they need all members to be active when we get into the GE and even more the money generated. I ignore them now too and won't send anymore money.

[dave123williams]

111. So the statistically significant sample they took of their own member base means nothing.

Are you stupid, or something?

[bridgit]

112. Sure, that represents some 6.5% of their membership. Not too unlike a DU poll...

where with a potential sample of 119,000 yields maybe 124 votes in favor of Barack and is then declared a landslide. Which is some less than .007%, so go figure :shrug:

[mdmc]

113. Obama won moveon.org's support

would be accurate:toast: