MoveOn.org backs Barack Obama campaign

February 1, 2008

MoveOn.org, one of the largest grassroots membership organizations in the country, invited members to vote online to see which, if any, presidential candidate won the group’s endorsement. In 2004, a similar effort did not produce a clear winner — though Howard Dean came close — so the group remained on the sidelines. This year, it nearly produced the same result: to win MoveOn’s support, a candidate would need to clear a 66% super-majority.

Surprisingly enough, Barack Obama got the support he needed, beating Hillary Clinton among MoveOn members, 70.4% to 29.6%.

“We’ve learned that the key to achieving change in Washington without compromising core values is having a galvanized electorate to back you up,” said Executive Director Eli Pariser, “And Barack Obama has our members ‘fired up and ready to go’ on that front.”

Organizers said they would “immediately” begin mobilizing on behalf of Obama, leading turnout programs and phone-banking members of MoveOn in targeted states. The group made seven million “GOTV” calls for Democrats in the mid-term elections, and it has an extensive voter file database.

The decisive victory shows that Obama is consolidating support from the netroots in the wake of John Edwards’ withdrawal. Obama also won the Edwards vote in Thursday’s Daily Kos reader poll. He bounced 35 points to reach an all-time high of 71 percent, while Clinton held steady at 11 percent. If Super Tuesday is a tie and both campaigns brace for a protracted delegate hunt, Obama could draw fundraising, volunteers and advocacy from a united front of MoveOn, netroots activists and bloggers.

In an email to members this afternoon, MoveOn added, “A few weeks ago, MoveOn members we surveyed were split. But with John Edwards bowing out, progressives are coming together…. What does MoveOn’s endorsement mean? People-power. Together, we are 3.2 million Americans who care about our country and want change. Half of us live in states with primaries or caucuses this coming ‘Super Tuesday.’ We know how to roll up our sleeves and win elections, and if we all pitch in together between now and Tuesday, we can help Sen. Obama win the biggest primary day in American history.”

I think this is interesting beyond just the obvious boost for the Obama campaign. It’s worth taking a good look at the interest coalition the Illinois senator is bringing together here.

I’ve been thinking about some of the recent endorsements Obama has picked up.

From the more conservative side of the party:

* Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.)
* Former South Carolina Democratic Party Chairman Dick Harpootlian

From the more centrist side of the party:

* Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.)
* Gov. Tim Kaine (D-Va.)
* Gov. Kathleen Sebelius (D-Kan.)

And from the more liberal side of the party:

* Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.)
* Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.)
* Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
* MoveOn.org

Put it this way: do MoveOn.org members and Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska agree on much?

Ultimately, this may or may not amount to much. As I’ve said before, there’s little evidence that endorsements actually translate to votes. For that matter, Hillary Clinton has plenty of high-profile supporters of her own. Indeed, Maxine Waters’ backing helps show at least some support for Clinton from the liberal wing of the party.

But I heard a pitch from an Obama supporter a while back that stuck with me: He unites the left and divides the right, while Clinton divides the left and unites the right.

In light of the MoveOn endorsement, we can probably expect to hear this line quite a bit more. After all, I never quite expected to see a candidate successfully outflank Clinton from the left and the right.

He unites the left and divides the right, while Clinton divides the left and unites the right.

a contra example that undermines this simplistic campaign line is within your post, Steve: if people like Maxine Waters are still declaring for Hillary (and much of labor), Obama too is dividing the left, not uniting it. Or, to be more fair to all of them, the left is divided. Both candidates would love to unite them; neither has yet been able to do so.

  • Posted on the Campaign round-up thread, below:

    Not to rain on anyone’s parade – really – but here’s a little context: the 280,528 votes cast represented only 8.7665% of MoveOn’s 3.2 million membership. I received an e-mail asking for my vote –and I didn’t; apparently 91.2335% – or 2,919,472 members, also did not vote.

    I don’t know what it means – maybe that there are a lot of people who still have not made up their minds to the point where they are ready to choose. Maybe there were a lot of Edwards supporters who haven’t decided which of the two remaining candidates will be the progressive voice they thought Edwards represented. Maybe there were a lot of people who know that they will be voting for whichever one is the nominee, so it doesn’t matter to them.

    I was probably in all three of those camps when the e-mail arrived yesterday, which explains why I didn’t cast a vote.

  • Or maybe people get so much political e-mail they leave it unread until a more convenient time, like the weekend (like this Clinton supporter who hasn’t even opened the MoveOn e-mail yet, or the DFA e-mails I’ve received daily all week, or two from Hillary this week, or. . . you get the idea.)

  • Sorry MoveOn but I don’t put much stock in your endorsement. I’ll wait until Feb 5th and later. Those polls will tell me more than you ever could about any candidate that deserves endorsement. That’s where the “rubber meets the road” and not in some popularity poll conducted by some organization that has become a little too big for it’s britches.

  • It’s not so much the endorsement as the operation they have that’s important. Just as Kerry’s endorsement doesn’t amount to much but the connections and records he has do matter.

  • I hope moveon.org has come to recognize what a lighting rod they have become and think through whatever they end up doing.

  • Vincent, I agree with that – in the primary it probably has unambiguous upside for Obama. A little more complicated in the general, as MoveOn has been successfully demonized by the right much like the word “liberal,” unfortunately.

  • I’m not surprised by this, Obama’s support crushes Clinton’s in the blogosphere/internets realms.

  • Indeed, beep52 – the RNC probably has a banner on its website already “Group Who Slandered American General Says ‘Obama’s Our Type of Guy'” or “Petraus Bashers for Obama!” But in the Democratic primary that sort of attack by RNC may actually raise Obama’s cred.

  • “I hope moveon.org has come to recognize what a lighting rod they have become…”

    MoveOn isn’t a blob from outer space. It’s 3.2 million Americans. Vincent is absolutely right when he says, “it’s not so much the endorsement as the operation…”

  • So how does this differ from the Florida vote? Both seem like polls. Neither has delegates at this time, although Florida might eventually. Move.On backs Obama. Florida backs Clinton. Is it any surprise that Move.On members selected Obama? Is it any surprise that Florida voters selected Clinton? Is this any more important than the Florida vote? Might be in the primary to some extent, but whomever the nominee is, Move.On will back that person. Does this really tell us anything we do not already know?

  • The bottom line is this: the only group really supporting Clinton in overwhelming numbers right now is white women. (I think Obama is now making inroads among Latinos.) So it’s not about left and right. It’s about Hillary Clinton’s very limited support demographic support.

  • The question is did he seek the endorsement. If he did not and they offered to help, I guess you can’t fault him for that. I am an Obama supporter and I am wary of moveon. They are part of the kind of politics I’ve seen Obama not comfortable with. He is at his best when he is positive (last night’s debate). Moveon and Obama seems odd to me. Now more than ever he needs a moderate VP

  • My understanding is that MoveOn will make available the opportunity to do phone banking from home.

    I think this could be very helpful. I have been mulling the idea of doing some pre-superTuesday phone banking, but cant get away daytime and wasn’t sure I wanted to commit full evenings. But if I could help out in my recliner I’d be much more likely to do so. And I suspect I’m not alone.

  • 12.MoveOn isn’t a blob from outer space…

    I’ve never bought into those blob from outer space theories. I do know that the organization — not particularly it’s members — has created some unnecessary (and I assume, unintended) PR backlash. When you endorse someone, you no longer represent just yourself, but whomever you endorse. All I meant and said was that I hope they consider that.

  • the only group really supporting Clinton in overwhelming numbers right now is white women . . . It’s about Hillary Clinton’s very limited support demographic support.

    Damn, there must be a lot of white women, because last I knew HRC was still ahead — by a small and shrinking amount, but for now still ahead — in both national polls and most of the Feb 5 states.

    So while it is true that Obama has a lot of support and is gaining strength, almost by definition if HRC has “very limited demographic support” and Obama trails her, (a) his support is even more limited; (b) there are an astoundingly large number of white women out there; or (c) Callimaco is engaging in wild incredible hyperbole from Obama worship or CDS. Or any combination thereof.

  • I’m having endorsement fatigue – especially keeping track of the unions (for eg, the Transport Workers Union just went for Obama)

    Enough already. Wake me up when Hulk Hogan endorses Obama.

    Oh wait.

  • Responding to Bubba who wrote above “Florida backs Clinton…”

    Kudos to Clinton for winning Florida by breaking her pledge to Howard Dean, her Democratic opponents and the people of IA, NH, NV and SC not to campaign there.

    (Yes, visiting Florida just before the primary and announcing to the local press that, despite her pledge, she’ll fight for Florida delegates at the convention is campaigning in Florida.)

  • Eh. And I say that as an Obama supporter and someone who canvassed for MoveOn in Ohio four years ago.

    They’re more trouble than they’re worth. If they help boost his turnout on Ginormous Tuesday, that’s swell. But it’s a badly run group and I would bet that the general public has a negative perception of the organization.

  • “I do know that [MoveOn.org] — not particularly it’s members — has created some unnecessary (and I assume, unintended) PR backlash.”

    Without its members, there is no organization. MoveOn.org the organization isn’t endorsing Obama because of some nameless, faceless person behind a curtain. It’s members voted for him with a count of more than 2-to-1.

  • I wish we could stop this nonsense about how women vote or black people or liberal wingers, etc. This is the simplistic kind of framing Chris Matthews and CNN use, and let’s be honest. Their analysis is about as deep as a mud puddle.

  • “Responding to Bubba who wrote above “Florida backs Clinton…””

    Pretty obvious you missed the very small and insignificant point I was trying to make–the ‘poll’ out of Florida is no more, or less, important than the ‘poll’ out of Move.On. They both amount to polls. Nothing much more than that. Yes, some Move.On members may go out to canvass on behalf of Obama, but odds are they would be doing so already. Or, as dajafi says: “Eh.” That about sums it up for me (as a member of Move.On). Please put down the kool-aid you are drinking, let the Florida results drift to the farthest recesses of your mind, and focus on what you can do for your candidate going forward.

  • 24. Without its members, there is no organization.

    Without its members, the Catholic Church doesn’t exist either. Does that mean it’s irrelevant to talk about the Catholic Church? The point, which shouldn’t be that hard to grasp, is that an organization has a face. An identity. An image. A voice. When moveon speaks, it speaks for its members, one voice is heard. No one said its members are faceless or hiding behind curtains — which, true or false would be irrelevant — or didn’t vote.

  • You have lost all credibilty. Hillary stood up for you. Even had her people go on Fox to defend you & the whole netroots community. Obama hid until it all died down. BTW, remind me again just who you have ever put in office? Funny no one comes to mind.

  • I never quite expected to see a candidate successfully outflank Clinton from the left and the right.

    That’s because Obama’s views transcend the simplistic, linear left/right spectrum. This is also why he is preferred by independents, who also are more likely to have views which don’t fit neatly on the left/right spectrum.

  • While Teddy and Caroline and Patrick all endorsed BO, invoking memories of Jack and Bobby, I’m reliably told that all of Bobby’s kids endorsed HRC, for whatever it’s worth. We’re not hearing much about that in the media. And I am NOT an HRC supporter. Formerly committed to Edwards, now equally wary of both of the survivors.

  • I am another moveon member who didn’t vote. For some reason the call to vote when into bulk mail when most of their emails go into my in box.

    I misread RonChusid’s post #29. Thought he said ‘Obama transcended the simplistic, linear mass/light spectrum’. And I was going wow, that explains why my neighbor who keeps crystals everywhere adores him so completely. He’s New Age!!

    Guess it’s time to add Absolut to the kool aid and stop trying to read after a hard day.

  • I think the issue here isn’t a left-right thing, but Clinton versus non-Clinton. That’s why Obama is picking up the Edwards people, because he was the best choice that wasn’t Hillary Clinton. Overall, I think Hillary’s appeal is limited and that most people who consider her to be the best candidate would be the people who totally like her; as opposed to people like me, who will support her, but would prefer someone different. She’s a known quantity and if you see her flaws for what they are, she’ll be at the bottom of the top-tier candidates.

  • There are major flaws in the post at Democratic Daily.

    The quotes on Obama leave out the important fact that he only played down how he would have voted before the 2004 convention to avoid saying anything which could be taken as negative about Kerry and Edwards. After all, he was speaking at the convention.

    The major flaw in the quotes from Clinton is that she didn’t oppose the war until it became politically expedient. I could perhaps accept her argument on voting yes, but to do this I’d compare her actions to Kerry’s.

    Both Kerry and Clinton votes yes and gave similar arguments that the vote was not approval to go to war except under limited circumstances. Kerry made this clear in his Senate floor speech as well as in articles in The New York Times and Foreign Affairs at the time of the vote. When conditions necessitating going to war were not met, Kerry spoke out against going to war several times before the war started. At the onset of the war he called for regime change in the United States.

    Contrast this with Clinton. She not only voted yes, but she remained a cheer leader for the war even after the war started. She did not speak out against the war until it was politically necessary.

    There is a tremendous difference between someone like Kerry who spoke out against the war before it started and someone like Clinton who did not speak out against the war until much later. If Clinton had spoken out against the war before it began as Kerry had then her argument might be plausible.

  • I have nothing to say except that if you are a Hillary supporter and are on the MoveOn.org email list please unsubscribe immediately. They ask you why you want to unsubscribe and all you have to type is “I’m a Hillary Clinton supporter”. If they want to help Obama then fine. But they sure as hell aren’t going to get my money or support.

  • Regarding the MoveOn vs. Florida thing…There is another wrinkle to consider. Clinton “won” Florida by absentee vote by mail folks. For those who voted at a polling place on primary day, Obama won handily. This suggests to me that he is picking up mementum in that state.

    Regarding MoveOn, I only hope they refrain from any “General Betray Us” type ads. That kind of thing would be very very bad for Obama. Assuming MoveOn limits its support to phone calls that stick to his talking points, then it is a plus to have their members helping him.

  • MoveOns decision to endorse a primary candidate was very unethical. Those of us who have contributed to the organization and support another candidate are now faced with our money supporting the opposition candidate. They should have said they were going to do this last year, before we sent our money to them. The deceit was unethical and borders on illegal.

  • Pingback: Atheist Revolution

  • I have given money to moveon.org since it was founded. In the poll they took, we were given no option to either (1) write in a name or, more importantly choose (2) no endorsement. What was the rush? I am voting for Edwards since his name is on the ballot.

  • There is something that the Republicans can use against Obama to discredit him as a unifier.
    Move On ran an ad last fall called “General Betray Us” about General Petraus. All the Republicans have to do is run a snippit of that ad and say that Obama endorsed it and he will lose whatever reputation he had as a non-partisan candidate–which is one of they ways in which supposedly differs from Hillary.

    This shows how naïve the Move On leadership is about politics.

  • I had already started questioning my involvement with MoveOn when I could never find a place to send them a comment or a question. After the vote I totally cut contact as did my closest friends. We had contributed, made phone calls, signed petitions, did everything we could to supprt Move.On. The “management” has gotten too big for their britches.

    • Comments are closed.