MoveOn.org endorses Obama

Written By: - Date published: 4:19 pm, February 2nd, 2008 - 11 comments
Categories: International - Tags:

MoveOn.org is a progressive political community, organised predominantly online, with over 3 million members.

For the first time they’ve endorsed a Democratic candidate, lending their weight and organising skills to that person’s campaign.

Obama took the endorsement over Clinton 70-30, with around 300,000 votes cast in total.

Obama has said of the endorsement:

“In just a few years, the members of MoveOn have once again demonstrated that real change comes not from the top-down, but from the bottom-up. From their principled opposition to the Iraq war—a war I also opposed from the start—to their strong support for a number of progressive causes, MoveOn shows what Americans can achieve when we come together in a grassroots movement for change. I thank them for their support and look forward to working with their members in the weeks and months ahead.”

This should be a huge boost to his campaign heading into Super Tuesday.

For more on MoveOn.org check out their website or Wikipedia (the usual caveat applies with regard to political content found there).

11 comments on “MoveOn.org endorses Obama ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Phil 1
    3 February 2008 at 12:21 am

    On a slightly relate note, I was pleasantly surprised by the recent Democrat and Republican debates on CNN.

    In both cases, the candidates had ample opportunity to state their case, and comment on the views of their competitors, without the constant interjections and bickering from them.

    When was the last time we saw that from our political representatives here?
    With the exception of Dunnes “organic friend” in ’02, our elected officials look like petulant children in comparison to Barak, Hillary, John, and Mitt. They could really learn a lot from watching those four in action.

  2. Michele Cabiling 2
    3 February 2008 at 12:45 am

    Here’s who MoveOn.org is:

    http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6201

    A bunch of unregenerate Hate America Communists — not only a slur but a statement of fact. Haters and wreckers.

    As Trevor Loudon makes clear on NewZeal, Obama is also the Communist Party of the USA’s preferred candidate and its members and fellow travellers are being instructed in all the CPUSA’s organs to get in behind him. Indeed, a number of long-term Commies are working on directly on his campaign.

    I wonder why …

  3. AncientGeek 3
    3 February 2008 at 1:10 am

    ‘chele – you seem to be incapable of distinguishing between the left as a general viewpoint, socialists, and communists. In fact I’m getting convinced that you probably think that the nats are ‘fellow-travelers’. After all they planning on retaining a welfare state.

    You seem think that almost the entire world is mistaken while you are right..

    I wonder why…

  4. outofbed 4
    3 February 2008 at 9:51 am

    If at around election time I can’t be bothered to go out there to help to get the vote out. I will read “chele’s posts and use the a inspirational material.
    Which is about the only use for them frankly

    captcha crack or (someone playing games?)

  5. all_your_base 5
    3 February 2008 at 1:40 pm

    captcha: yanks thankfulness

  6. Michele Cabiling 6
    3 February 2008 at 2:06 pm

    Liarbour introduced welfare in 1938. National was opposed to it. WWII intervened, and then in the 1946 election National made a mistaken virtue of necessity and accepted the welfare state. Ever since the debate has been “who can manage it better” … between Liarbour and Liarbour Lite.

    National needs to reopen the entire debate. The article on the link below provides a basis on which this should occur:

    http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=33590&Disp=0

    What is said in the article on the link is as true for New Zealand as it is for the USA. Ronald Reagan once said: “As Government expands, freedom contracts.” He’s right.

  7. outofbed 7
    3 February 2008 at 2:32 pm

    Ronald Reagan also said dubby dabby dda do I think I’m an orange
    Your point?

  8. peter 8
    3 February 2008 at 2:52 pm

    Wow, Michele, do you actually spend your own free time brainwashing yourself with that dribble? I guess it must distract you from what I assume is a fairly tragic personal life.

    Carry on.

  9. deemac 9
    4 February 2008 at 10:17 am

    so those big businesses backing Obama are giving money to a commie? how generous. I’ve heard plenty of cricicism of Obama’s policies but not one person has accused him of being too left wing – until now; hilarious!

  10. AncientGeek 10
    8 February 2008 at 7:51 am

    Been digging around looking at the US races to candidate. The economist has a good leader on McCain, Half-way there

    It is all good stuff, and makes me understand the man a bit better. They point out in a section entitled “A few chinks in the armour”:-

    Mr McCain is certainly the right man for the Republicans, but we are not yet ready to endorse him for the presidency. His age is one drawback: at 72, he will, if elected, be the oldest president ever to take office (though Ronald Reagan was older when he was re-elected in 1984). His health has not been perfect—though his 96-year-old mother looks reassuringly sprightly—and his choice of a running-mate is therefore a subject of more than the usual concern.

    They go on to talk about Huckabee as a potential running mate. He sounds a bit dangerous to me if McCain has a health problem. They conclude their comments about Huckabee with:-

    The possibility of a Huckabee presidency would give many independent voters (and this newspaper) pause.

    The horse-trading for the republican running mate is going to be quite important this time. Fortunately, I suspect that it will be for the American voters as well.

Links to post