Hillary Clinton Attacks MoveOn
‘At a small closed-door fundraiser after Super Tuesday, Sen. Hillary Clinton blamed what she called the “activist base” of the Democratic Party — and MoveOn.org in particular — for many of her electoral defeats, saying activists had “flooded” state caucuses and “intimidated” her supporters, according to an audio recording of the event obtained by The Huffington Post.’
Here’s what she said (you can click on the link above to hear her say it):
“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.”
Of course, the MoveOn crowd doesn’t like it, to say the least, but she’s completely right. The far left thinks they control the Democratic Party. As far as I’m concerned, Hillary now does what leading Democrats should all do; tell MoveOn, Daily Kos, CODE PINK, and so on, to go screw themselves.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
oh, so it’s not the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy (tm by HRC) this time around?
Hillary Rodham Clinton – The Victim Candidate for you.
LOL – although she most certainly enjoys playing the victim, she’s not alone in this. Obama does so constantly (as well). Even worse than Clinton. Especially his hardcore supporters. They’re not nicknamed the whiners for nothing.
The one thing I like about her statements here is that she’s clearly delineating her positions from those of the netroots. I’d much rather see politicians do that rather than taking a phony triangulation stance. On the minus side, though, she only came out with this after it was clear that there’s absolutely no way that she’ll make a foothold with that crowd (so it’s based on expediency, to try to further attract the part of the Dem base that also doesn’t like the extreme left, rather than being done on principle.) Note that I’m not saying that any other politician is being more principled about this, I think they all try to keep one foot on either side of certain lines all of the time. McCain came pretty close to a principled stance on immigration, and I like that even as he’s given some ground to the far right on the issue he does so grudgingly rather than pandering to them: "All right, I’ll build the damn wall." By responding that way, he’s accepting the political reality but he isn’t giving over too much power and influence to the more extreme wings of the party. That’s the way a moderate should act, IMO. Fight hard for the middle ground, and then if it becomes apparent that there’s too much opposition from the wings, you give up just as much ground as you have to but you don’t pretend that you suddenly agree with them.
Whatever Clinton thinks about the activist base, it’s nothing compared to the vile attacks launched at her and her supporters by MoveOn, Kos, and the Netroots.This despite the fact that it was Clinton who had the spine to send Wolfson on O’Reilly to defend Kos. Never mind that Clinton voted against censuring MoveOn, while Obama skipped out of the Senate just minutes before the vote was held.We Clinton supporters have been threatened, attacked, and banned all over internet. We know are well-aware of the loony left’s tactics, and perhaps, just how Clinton feels.
I guess I read to fast and missed some of the details; I see now that I was wrong about the timing and also didn’t realize that Clinton said these things behind closed doors.
Why doesn’t she say it publicly? She has nothing to lose at this point, Moveon, Kos and Huffington are have been so blindingly anti-Hillary, pro-Obama that if she pointed it out, and the differences that she has with them, she might actually get some converts for having some intestinal fortitude. But… its Hillary, she doesn’t have any, she has no internal values, and is just a pure politician.
That is why the polls don’t move with all of the negative things that come out about Obama – because she keeps stepping in it herself, or reminds people why they don’t like her – dishonesty, manipulation, etc.
Hillary sure loved MoveOn when they defended Clenis for the Monika thingy. Now they won’t play in her sandbox/litterbox and Billary isn’t happy, and kicks them out and takes their toys. So what…
A veritable "vast left wing conspiracy"
It gets better – while Clinton is attacking MoveOn.org, Richard Mellon Scaife’s newspaper in Pittsburgh endorses Hillary…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080420/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_endorsement
Irony so thick you can cut it with a knife.
better and better. This farce of a candidate now has had Bill say this
I think Bill forgot which candidate said they were doing the throwing.