MoveOn To Reid And Van Hollen: Sorry, We’re Not Backing Off
MoveOn has a message for Harry Reid, DCCC chair Chris Van Hollen, and anyone else who may want the group to stop pressuring moderate Dems to support the President’s agenda: Forget about it.
MoveOn officials privately told people close to Van Hollen that they will keep targeting moderate Dems with ads, calls, and emails when circumstances warrant, according to a source familiar with their discussions.
Both Reid and Van Hollen recently signaled displeasure with outside groups such as MoveOn and Americans United for Change, questioning the pressure they were putting on moderates to back Obama’s budget. Reid called it “unwise and unhelpful,” while Van Hollen warned of a “circular firing squad.”
In MoveOn’s first public response to Reid and Van Hollen, MoveOn’s executive director, Justin Ruben, politely rejected their admonitions and pointed to the high-levels of Dem unity in passing the budget yesterday.
“Our ads, calls, and e-mails had one simple goal: Encourage constituents to call their Member of Congress and support legislation that’s critical to reviving our economy,” Ruben said in a statement emailed my way. “Educating and engaging citizens around key issues like the budget is an important part of the Democratic process, it’s core to MoveOn’s mission, and we’ll continue to use these tools to make change.”
“We will continue to advocate on our issues with moderates,” added Lauren Weiner, a spokesperson for Americans United for Change.
MoveOn officials argue that the groups ran ads and calls pressuring key moderate, wavering Dems who eventually backed Obama’s budget, including Senator Mark Warner, Rep Baron Hill and others. While it’s unclear whether the ads swung their votes, MoveOn officials argue, they certainly didn’t hurt the cause.
So expect more like this.
Update: DCCC spokesperson Jennifer Crider gets in touch to point out that Van Hollen never said he opposed pressure on moderate Democrats over the budget. He was merely arguing against primary challenges to sitting Democrats, because those could result, he said, in lost seats. That’s what Van Hollen meant when he warned against a “circular firing squad.”
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Wasn’t there a story yesterday about Plouffe’s group targeting the same Dems? I am pretty sure there was and I hope Move On keeps it up. I am actually surprised that only Nelson and Bayh voted no.
yeah, OFA targeted Indiana Cong. officials, including Bayh…
Greg, please stop using the innacuratebut much-beloved “moderate Democrats”to describe these people. The Blue Dogs are not “moderate.”
Barack Obama is a moderate.
These Democrats who are resisting the President’s moderate agenda are “conservative”at best, or more accurately, “reactionary.”
Or maybe even more accurately, “closet Republicans”.
Well, Obama’s budget passed in the Senate and the House, so MoveOn must have something to do with that change of heart. I know I called my state’s dem reps.
It seems that Harry Reid opposes success and considers it “unhelpful”.
Greg,
I’ll echo what TomBetz says. These people are not moderates, they are conservative, no question. Why not just call them conservative?
an ‘old horse’ like reid needs to be put out to pasture. He and some of his colleagues are what’s impeding the progress of the United States because they’re too tied to special interest groups….
MoveOn should go further and target Blue Dogs with primary challenges, at least in districts where Obama won. People who voted for Obama don’t want a Congressional representative who tries to undercut Obama by allying with Republicans.
And in disputes between people like Sen. Bayh and Pres. Obama, Reid needs to back Obama, not because Obama is always right but because Bayh is almost always wrong. The obstructionist Republicans love him and are talking about giving him a free pass for reelection because he’s basically a vote for their camp.
Bravo Move On once again. As though anyone other then Democratic senators actually listen to Harry Reid or think that he’s functional on our behalf. He stunk the place out when Bush was in the White House so why trust his lame instincts now.
To paraphrase a Bob Dylan song: “There’s something happening here and you don’t know what it is…… do you, Harry Reid?”
As long as MoveOn.org keeps going after these so-called moderate Democrats, they will continue to have my active support. This is exactly what we need in these times. Now is the best chance for – dare I say it – real ‘change’ in this country for the better. And I for one won’t let these Blue Dogs stand in my way.
What these Blue Dogs dont understand is that there can be no “negotiations” with those whose true goal is to destroy Obama and the entire agenda. How much negotiations does the head of the Republican party, Rush Limbaugh endorse? Same question for the entire litany of those that got us into this mess and now want to bring down Obama so they can rule over the ruins.
I applaud the proactive stance in accomplishing objectives. However, to suggest that Bayh is a conservative senator is nonsense. He and others are elected to represent their constituency. His is probably considered slightly right of center.
It seems that many forget that the left did not elect Obama. Had it not been for the center and even some conservatives, we’d be whining just as we did the past 8 years.
Accept that America is diverse and a majority is necessary to elect politicians. So please, let’s not try to put a litmus test on everyone in the party. That’s what turned the GOP into a minority party.
Move On and Americans for Change are doing just what I am doing, and helping me do it – letting my two Blue Dog democratic senators know just where I stand and what I voted for – no more obstructionists or special interest votes! We the People spoke on Nov 4 and don’t intend to stop “speaking”. We want what’s best for our country and now we are paying attention more than ever – about time!
@DaCoach
Number one, last I heard, slightly right of center is conservative. Secondly read Think Progress » this Think Progress summary of Bayh’s voting record and tell me why that isn’t conservative. Third, take a look at Ezra Klein’s graph and explain to me how Bayh is only “slightly” right of center.
And last, be a hall nanny all you want and feel free to lecture the rest of us about how diverse is our wonderful country and how us rowdies should come to acceptance. That simply isn’t the point. The actual point was, why call Bayh “moderate” when he is NOT moderate, his positions and voting record is not moderate. He record shows that he votes in lockstep with conservative Republicans, why not call him conservative. We are asking for an accurate representation of his record, that’s all.
DaCoach
.
Obviously you haven’t been paying attention to Bayh. He never gave a d@mn about being a conservadem until he thought he could be a veep candidate. He is an opportunist at best and a media wh*re at worst. At least Ben Nelson has been consistent in his conservative tilt. Check out this post from Ezra Klein and the chart that goes with it then try to convince me that Evan Bayh isn’t just a clown trying to make a name for himself as a “moderate”.
.
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezraklein_archive?month=04&year=2009&base_name=the_strange_case_of_evan_bayh
DaCoach needs to check out Ezra Klein’s analysis of Bayh’s voting record.
Bayh may not be moderate nor conservative — he may just be a completely value-free opportunist — but right now, he’s playing a pure obstructionist of Barack Obama’s moderate agenda, to the detriment of the Democratic Party and the nation.
Now that Bayh is no longer in the running for President or Vice-President, his voting record has veered sharply to the right, at the same time that his state’s voters have veered to the left.
As far as I’m concerned, the best part of Evan Bayh dribbled down Birch’s thigh.
Great minds think alike!
Moveon should stop acting like republican zealots and consider the consequences of their actions, intended and unintended. The alternatives are mostly worse than the current state.
Right on Moveon Support Obama or face a primary. Its time for new leadership Reid and Pelosi need to make way for the next generation of Democratic leaders for the lack of guts they showed in the last years of the Bush fiasco.
Moveon AS ALWAYS you’ve got my support. I’d rather deal with true republicans than have to guess what behind the mask of those “BLUE FACE” dems. I shocke at Clair McCaskil and heartbroken, as well.
Good for you Move On and the great work you do. I just read a list of fake dems that took labors money, walkers and phone calls from our members and are going to sell us out on the Employee Free Choice Act. I will gladly send Move On more money to target these two faced pieces of republican appeasing slime. I waited for eight years for them to oppose Bush and they would not. Now they are worried about deficits? How about a trillion dollar war for oil? Start with Evan Bayh and finish when they DLC is disbanded.
Bayh’s ADA ranking the past two congresses were 95% and 70% which were higher than Obama’s. In contrast, Sen. Lugar had numers of 45% and 20%. To those that wish Bayh defeated, you are insuring another Republican whose record will closely approximate Lugar, if not worse.
It is self defeating to demand that all Democrats think alike and vote alike. That’s Limbaugh’s philosophy, not those of a party that represents diversity and openness of thought. Tell me who is the great decider in our party? In a true democracy it’s no one. hat’s one of the great differences in the parties.
Some act as if they speak for the party. They don’t. No one does. One of the great beauties of President Obama is a willingness to listen and think. It seems that many in the party are unwilling to accept that concept.
Finally, some of his detractors seem unaware of the political landscape. A recent national study points out that 34 percent of the country identifies as “conservative,” 29 percent as “moderate,” 15 percent as “liberal,” 16 percent as “progressive,” and 2 percent as “libertarian.” To suggest that liberal or progressive policies are held by a majority of voters is to doom our progress to a short term solution.
DCCC spokesperson Jennifer Crider: “[Van Hollen] was merely arguing against primary challenges to sitting Democrats.”
This is absolute insanity. It’s precisely during the primary that you want challengers to surface. The alternative is for these challengers to run as 3rd Party candidates in the general. Talk about a disaster.
I think MoveOn is right. Just because there is a D beside the name, doesn’t mean you go along to get along, opposition is good. But to deliberately side with the opposition to harm your own parties President and agenda seems defeatist to me.
So where is the democratic process in all this? You can’t vote against a Democrat in the election because then a Republican might come in. You can’t vote against him in the primaries because if you do that a Republican might come in. You can’t put pressure on your elected representatives because then a Republican might come in.
Any reason why there should be elections at all? Any opportunity for the voters to vote for the change they desire?
So it’s the moderates not the left who won the election? Ok then – try it without the left voting for you. Oh that doesn’t work either, does it? Well then there’ll just have to be some compromise where the party aligns their policy a little towards their base.
I would call the “blue dog” democrats “liberal democrats” to distinguish them from the rest of the democrats, who are actually Socialists.
Primaries are an essential component to a healthy democracy.
Any politician that has forgotten that probably deserves to be primaried.
I noticed that this is not the first time you write about the topic. Why have you chosen it again?