Hillary Hammers MoveOn?
What part of grass roots does Senator Hillary Clinton misunderstand? In her remarks at a private fundraiser, she had some harsh criticisms of MoveOn.org, an organization that came into existence to defend Bill Clinton in 1988:
“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.”
[Click for original article and audio]
A fact-check, above all:
- MoveOn.org has 3.2 million members across America. They are a progressive organization, dedicated to education and advocacy. It came into being in 1998 to protest the inordinate time and energy spent to impeach Bill Clinton.
- MoveOn agreed to endorse a candidate only if more than 60% of members voting between 1/31-2/1 chose a candidate. One candidate emerged and that candidate was Barack Obama.
- One would assume that a leader of the Democratic party would give great weight to the voices of the people, as expressed through organizations like MoveOn.org. However in her remarks, Senator Clinton intentionally distances herself from the “progressive branch” of the Democratic party.
- If Senator Clinton does not agree with 3.2 million members of her own party, why should she consider herself qualified to lead it?
- Reports from caucuses on the ground indicate that it was Hillary Clinton supporters intimidating Obama supporters. At the Texas county conventions, Clinton supporters stonewalled the delegate certification process in an effort to force Obama supporters to go home. Some of the state conventions lasted well over 20 hours as a result, turning into an endurance contest for all delegates. (More stories below)
Stories from the ground in Texas:
Andrea Richeson from Austin, TX (Precinct 239):
In the end, we got 3 Obama delegates to the Texas Convention in June — that’s out of the 4 available delegate spots for our precinct. A couple of wonderful neighbors and I were elected as Obama delegates to State, but it took about 12 hours of stress and strategy discussions and long lines and bad (expensive) food, traffic jams, cramped seating on bleachers, multiple rules clarifications, multiple credentials challenges, and unbelievably bad behavior by a couple of our Clinton-supporting neighbors to get there.
Many of the challenges were brought by Clinton supporters questioning the validity of Obama delegates. The Clinton campaign said it wouldn’t lodge any challenges itself but that it was helping supporters who would. The campaign previously said it was aiding supporters with legal advice and guidance on their challenges.
Obama was also lodging challenges in some counties over the complex formulas used to determine delegate counts, said campaign spokesman Josh Earnest.
“This math gets pretty complicated pretty quickly,” he said.
But Earnest said that unlike the Clinton campaign, the Obama campaign wasn’t challenging the seating of particular delegates.
“They’re engaged in a coordinated strategy to challenge our delegates and we’re not,” he said. “It’s disappointing to see the Clinton campaign throw up these obstacles.”
As he drove between Democratic conventions in Georgetown and Waco on Saturday to rev up supporters, Clinton adviser Terry McAuliffe said that the Clinton campaign has “not raised any of the challenges. A lot of our supporters have.”
More Twitterers’ words in real time here.
Clinton’s words to her supporters go beyond the “elitist” charge. They’re outright lies told behind another’s back for the purpose of personal gain.
That’s not leadership; it’s liarship.
Worse yet, are Howard Wolfson’s remarks defending Senator Clinton:
Howard Wolfson, communications director for the Clinton campaign, verified the authenticity of the audio, and elaborated on Clinton’s charge that these same party activists were engaged in acts of intimidation against her supporters: “There have been well documented instances of intimidation in the Nevada and the Texas caucuses, and it is a fact that while we have won 4 of the 5 largest primaries, where participation is greatest, Senator Obama has done better in caucuses than we have.” About Clinton’s remarks suggesting dismay over high Democratic activist turnout, Wolfson said, “I’ll let my statement stand as is.”
In fact, the Nevada caucuses occurred prior to MoveOn’s endorsement of Obama, and when Clinton made her remarks, the Texas caucuses had yet to take place.
Technorati Tags: Clinton, MoveOn, Texas, caucus, fundraiser, lies