LA Weekly: MoveOn’s state of denial is bad for Democrats

I was thinking of posting this oped since many of us are still debating about looking for the "center" or looking for "left"

++++++++

MoveOn’s state of denial is bad for Democrats
by Marc Cooper

Never mind that George W. Bush won re-election by 4 million votes. Or that Democrats lost in 28 out of 50 states. Or that more than a third of Latino votes went to the Republicans. And that something like 40 percent of union votes went Republican.

Don’t worry — be happy. "We are truly stronger than ever." I know that because the liberal political action group MoveOn wrote me to tell me so. Indeed, it was so darn pleased with itself and so amped up after a pre-Thanksgiving, coast-to-coast round of house meetings that the follow-up report issued by MoveOn quoted one participant as jubilantly proclaiming: "A groundswell is happening."

(snip)

I don’t really care what the Democrats do. The hardened inner shell of the party can and will go on as it pleases, raising gazillions and favoring sure-fire loser candidates like Hillary Clinton. I do care, however, about all those liberals and radicals and young voters who invested so much of their hope in MoveOn and similar groups as the backbone of some new progressive movement. Please proceed with great caution and even more skepticism.

(snip)

Let’s give each selected issue a quick glance:

Voting reform... Media reform... The war in Iraq. What does that mean? For or against? As soon as the Democrats decide, let me know. The environment, the Supremes and civil liberties. All worthy issues. None of them, however, offers a clue to a political strategy capable of building a political majority broad enough to govern and effect reform (remember that winning the White House alone ain’t enough).

Notably missing from the recipe dashed out by the MoveOn meetings are anything resembling an aggressive agenda that directly confronts the phony populism of the Republicans. Make no mistake about it. A progressive strategy has to consciously undercut the GOP’s appeal among working- and middle-class families by offering a tangible realignment of national politics. Urging people to vote against Republicans because they are bad and evil, or convincing yourself people vote Republican because they are ill-informed, stupid or brainwashed ain’t gonna cut it. I hope that that much, at least, has been learned from the November debacle.

But apparently not. What would the MoveOn agenda — as listed in those six priorities — mean for Americans worried about their jobs, their wages, their schools, their housing, their health care? And yes, their taxes (that remain too high for individuals and way too low for corporations)?

More..
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/05/02/dissonance-cooper.php

They endorsed Nader in the Gore/Bush election.
They played down the opposition to the Iraq invasion.
They had no good things to say about A.N.S.W.E.R. who was organized very sucessful protest marches before the invasion.
Now they're rying to discredit Moveon???

WTF????-

If it weren't for moveon.org there would have been considerably fewer "informed" citizens.

Moveon is doing what is best for them to continue to serve us best.

Don't believe everything you read in the L.A. Weakilng--
especially the music reviews! whew,! every new lousy band is the best thing since sliced bread.

Marc Cooper is a long-term and well-respected liberal journalist. I've read his work in the LA Weekly and The Nation and listened to his radio work in RadioNation and formerly on Pacificas's KPFK in LA for years. He's good, solid liberal - though he may not be a democrat.

It's the L.A. Weeeeekleeee that I was down on, not Cooper.
Article may not agree with my personal viewpoint-not saying anything bad regarding the author.
L.A. Weekly was extremely WEAK when it can to standing by the many sucessful protests that occured in L.A. before durring and after this country's illegal invasion of Iraq.

They just sometimes don't do "the right thing" when it comes to helping to mobilize the resistance to the Bush crime family-
I was just saying it's not surprising because since way back they have been "Weak" on the issues.
I mean c'mon ! A Nader endorsment when the Gore/Bush election was so close?
We all know Gore took California anyway but that endorsment has shown lack of good judgment as have many of the stands the publication has taken.
They're just weak.
Not to say they don't run good articles from time to time.
And the format and layout are superb (often imitated by other publications)!
They do need to taper down the hooker/porn section in the back-they should consider how it affects their image-They have way too many pages dedicated to the "call girls".

Peace?

BTW, you're almost at 1,000 posts!

yep almost 1000
Thanks for bearing with me--(I've been kind of rambling on a bit here about nothing important)-
just getting a few posts in to hit my thousand!

peace !

and is exactly RIGHT!

QUOTE--
"Notably missing from the recipe dashed out by the MoveOn meetings are anything resembling an aggressive agenda that directly confronts the phony populism of the Republicans. Make no mistake about it. A progressive strategy has to consciously undercut the GOP’s appeal among working- and middle-class families by offering a tangible realignment of national politics. Urging people to vote against Republicans because they are bad and evil, or convincing yourself people vote Republican because they are ill-informed, stupid or brainwashed ain’t gonna cut it. I hope that that much, at least, has been learned from the November debacle.

"But apparently not. What would the MoveOn agenda — as listed in those six priorities — mean for Americans worried about their jobs, their wages, their schools, their housing, their health care? And yes, their taxes (that remain too high for individuals and way too low for corporations)?"

This is exactly what progressive Dems need to do--focus on the one thing that really matters in people's lives: economic fairness.

Getting bogged down in abortion and gay rights and media coverage is killing us. None of that would matter if we hadn't alienated the working class with those peripheral positions. Why vote Democratic when they ship your jobs overseas just as fast as the Republicans do, especially when the Democrats are embracing some radical feminist group claiming that men are the "enemy."

The liberals are the enemy of the traditional Left, because they splintered into a thousand divisive "issues" oriented tribes and lost the focus on New Deal / Great Society programs that really mattered to people.

There are too many people who are willing to hold the party hostage for one "pet" issue or another. Until they are willing to work together with the party, the party will continue to lose. If they can't, they might as well go form their own party, for all the good that would do.

It was why the fuck are we pretending the candidates we backed were the best we could do. He seems concerned that "the party" let down the army of disaffected voters who came out to support Kerry.

Republicans are loyal. How else do you think they won this election? Because Republicans, faced with letting a Democrat win, or voting for one of the most bumbling presidents in American history, they chose, the war, the looting of the treasury, the international rebuke, the faux patriotism, the Mammon Jesus, the right-wing authoritarianism and all the other terrible things that went along with the bumbling president.

Why? They're loyal. Us? We're finicky.

I agree that there are too many "pet projects" within the Democratic party, and on top of letting the Republicans rip us to shreds with rhetoric, insult, conjecture and ridicule -- all based in logical fallacy, we haven't figured out what they already know: if we win, WE ALL FUCKING GET WHAT WE WANT, or at least a hell of a lot closer to it, than the other sides schlop constituents.

The problem is, that the loony right has enough voice in their party, that they reeled them all in, performing the AMAZING feat of getting
"Desperate Housewives" Susan, and "Maxim" Brad, to form a coalition with "Do-it-Clothed" Wilma, and "Ancient Ways Max." For different, and VERY complex psychological reasons, but they've figured it out. I mean, how the hell can you reel in the pink-polo shirted, turned-up collar, drink-till-we-puke contingent, while simultaneously giving the disciples of Jerry Fucking Falwell a reason to love you?

Sorry, Republicans, it does not have to do with your policies -- many policies of the "liberal program," including health insurance for children, support of domestic partnership benefits, abortion, the Assault Weapons ban, support of Social Security, as well as detraction for the Iraq war and the Federal Marriage Amendment CONSISTENTLY out-poll Republican positions -- when the voters are asked about SPECIFIC ISSUES.

It has to do with perception, a healthy dose of ignorance, and blind loyalty. This is NOT to say that anyone is stupid, or delusional, or anything else -- they just have been given BAD information by the unbeknownst-to-them, intellectual elite of the right, in THEIR ivory towers, conveniently crafting messages to play on their worst fears, suspicions, insecurities and prejudices.

And they're beating us, at that game. The fact that we don't stick together is relevant, and the fact that we have too many special interests is, too. I am not suggesting moving right, I'm suggesting moving more federalist or libertarian, but that's a whole 'nother issue.

...are equal rights and civil rights issues. They are perhaps 'peripheral' to some...but they are important to millions of Americans and if the Democratic party won't support these issues than no one will.

What's killing the Democratic party is this 'winning is everything' mentality. Democrats simply need to do what's right and tell the truth and they'll get all the votes they need to 'win'.

equalizer by itself. Rich couples knew how to get abortions before Roe v Wade. Look at Bush and his girlfriend in 1970. No one (or very few) are going to refuse to sell a house to Oprah because she's black.

I just meant we could make more progress faster if we focused on economic equality.

mouthpiece, it follows its own agenda, kinda like Michael Moore.


Msongs
www.msongs.com/howarddean2008.htm

nt

like its sister publication the Village Voice (NY), City Pages (Minneapolis) OC Weekly and others.

In contrast to most publications today that are part of a corporation, these weeklies usually follow their own opinions and do not bother to label themselves.

I thought that his core paragraph that I and others posted here is valid. That we were unable to deliver the message of the issues that are important to most Americans: security of wages, of health care, of education and of retirement. We should not have ignored the other issues of abortion and gay marriage, but we should have acknowledged them and dispose of them in one sentence. Many here often quote Clinton's: abortion should be legal, safe and rare.

Instead of Kerry literally putting his religion on his sleeve during the debate, saying that his religion bars abortion, he should have said that our goal should be to limit abortion by providing good education and promote adoption. And then move the the important issues.

One thing that I disagree with Cooper is his dismissal of the "election reform." We all agree that had voters in Ohio had easier access to the polling places the results may have been different.

First, "Democrats lost by 4 million votes." Yeah -- out of 120 MILLION or so votes cast. Placed in context it shows that while the Democrats lost 28 states (and at least three of them -- IA, FL, OH, have some fishy smells around them), it was NOT a mandate. The way this guy frames the vote, you'd think the Democrats were trampled. They weren't.

Second, WTF is this guy talking about? MoveOn always HAS pushed a variety of progressive issues. It's a big reason why the organization was created in the first place -- to push a progressive agenda by putting to be the sleazy impeachment scandal. Not to know that is shameful; knowing that and not mentioning it is Limbaugh-style manipulation of the worst kind. I don't know which is the case, but in either case it destroys the credibility of the article, IMHO.

MoveOn has been Bush-bashing, but it was also anti-war, pro-New Deal, pro-voters' rights - just the kind of progressive agenda that is being falsely asserted it isn't.

What Marc Cooper says about what the Democrats have to do is solid enough (although falling into the DUH?! category), but the bug up his butt against MoveOn is so big I can hear it buzzing from here. His bias is obvious and sloppy and affects his analysis.

In short, it's a bad analysis because he proves he doesn't know what the f**k he's talking about.

all of them-
he must have something personal against MoveOn.

Unless the Democrats adopt a populist agenda they are going to go down to defeat again and again and again.

You can't beat something with nothing.

was that the "major issues" promoted by the MoveOn meetings are those that have just about zero resonance with the "Lunch Bucket Republicans" who used to be a significant part of the Democratic Base. These are blue collar, union workers who vote with the Republicans because of gun control, abortion, gun control, defense, and did I mention gun control.

His argument, as I see it, is that the Democrats need to adopt a genuinely populist economic message to fight the cultural populism being used (quite effectively) by the Republican Noise Machine. We're not going to win back these votes by talking about the future of the Supreme Court or the Spotted Owl or how unfair the reporting is on Fox News. It just ain't going to happen.

straight males, then they are part of everything that's wrong with the world.

Let's face it, the unadulterated rage of the ABB crowd (and I include myself in that group) was not enough to change administrations. And I think that's reflected in the fact that even though voters thought Bush was doing a lousy job with the economy, they weren't sure that Kerry would do any better.

Constantly repeated the phrase "I have a plan" isn't enough to do it. We need to crack the media Iron Curtain (Air America is one way to do it, as is the internet) to get out a positive message about what Democrats are going to do for America and not obsess over what the Bush Administration has already done. Or might do in the future.

Just telling people that the other guy sucks isn't going to get you anywhere if you don't offer practical, palatable alternatives.

Take Social Security, for example, Bush's plan sucks. OK, great, what do you propose to do about it.

Right now the Democrats answer is something like "Duh, we'll think about it and get back to you ten years from now"

Sorry folks but that's not going to fly.

is causing untold damage to the Democratic Party. Blue collar America looks at this phenomena at mutters "What a bunch of pussies!" Somehow, over the last twenty years, the GOP has co-opted the "Regular Joe" image that used to be owned by the trade unions. Instead of getting upset about corporate welfare, they are annoyed by the latest sissy, killjoy, Political-Correctness-run-amok story on the TV.

The media ain't helping.

is killing us.

Note the recent "Happy Holidays" brou-ha-ha. They get pissed off because people don't exchange a meaningless pleasantry in a way that suits them? Sheesh. Get a life.

but his mistake was that he - or his advisers - did not know how to handle these "hot buttons issues" and this include the swifters.

Abortion and gay rights are important issues and should be a given. He should have acknowledged them in one sentence and than move on (no pun intended on MoveOn..) and should have also addressed the swifters in one sentence and then move on. This is where Kerry should have used his nuances to know how to touch on all the issues but at different degree of emphasis.

For example, like Clinton, he should have said that abortion should be legal, safe and rare and immediately move to the security of wages and heath care and retirement.

...something the Bushies have down to a science.

Give that man a cigar!

I'll tell you why we haven't own lately...And it's simple...

The Union vote!!!

I know these kind of poeple are considered SCUM OF THE EARTH around here, but good, hard-working, moderate, God fearing, gun-owning Americans USED to be our base.

because the union members and hard hats are the ones who are probably most directly affected by a Bush presidency. If they will not even vote Democratic, who will?

Even a hardcore socialist would have to admit that Kerry's economic plan offered far more hope and progress than Bush, and I did hear him discussing it at length.

The hard hats are LIFELONG Democrats!! Maybe the people here should actually listen to them and not demean them and tell them they're not welcome in the party!!

Me? I'll take the hard hats over the Michael Moore crowd ANYDAY!!

Now watch me get flamed to death over that statement...


(By the way...Great post. No offense intended towards you at all concerning my response here).

I've greatly enjoyed your posts, as I tend to agree. :)

I don't consider myself at all to be one of the people you're addressing, of course, but I do think we sure as hell should be doing better than 60% of the union vote.

Strategy is not Move On's problem. Strategy is the leadership's job. Move On's self appointed job is PR and grassroots. They do a pretty good job w/ the PR and an amazing shitty job with the grassroots.

I liked their PR stuff even if the ads themselves could have been much better, mostly, and I thought I liked their grassroots ops until I started talking to friends who spread accross the country working for various other organzations, the DNC, and the campaign. "Disorganized," they saud. "Head up the ass. Understaffed. hinderance, not a help." This, I chalked up to garden variety territorialism until it came time for me to do my customary last-two-week-of-the-election vacation/full-time volunteer stint. After working in two states doing GOTV stuff, I knew then that if Move On was in charge of mobilizing the youth vote, it wasn't going to happen.
We all know the outcome.