Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiProtesters are storming Barack Obama's website. But they all support Obama.
A grassroots group of activists has been organizing on MyBo, Obama's official social networking portal, to protest the Senator's recent decision to back controversial legislation granting the President more spying powers. The effort hit a big milestone on Tuesday afternoon: It is now the largest self-organized group on Obama's website, topping networks that were launched over a year ago. The spying protest, "Senator Obama -- Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity -- Get FISA Right," launched last week. (See Obama Network Organizes and Revolts Over Spying, The Nation.)
Membership spiked to about 8,900 people on Tuesday, edging out a student group with roughly 8,600 members, and one organizer estimated that the growth rate reached a rapid four percent during the daytime. The group initially spread through the Obama network, since the site's platform instantly connects members through a dedicated email listserve. On Monday, for example, over 200 emails shot across the wire, reaching the roughly 2,300 members who opted to receive individual messages. The exchanges ranged from policy debates, like whether immunity was acceptable if the telephone companies acted in good faith, to organizing strategies, such as promoting the group on sharing sites like Digg. Then some activists open-sourced the project, creating a wiki-hub for additional actions -- from calling Obama's office to urging Keith Olbermann to promote the group -- and launched partner groups on other sites like Facebook.
"To reach number one, we're going to need all of us to start talking to - and emailing - their family and friends," wrote blogger Mike Stark in a missive to the group at 3:46am on Monday. "[Obama] said he'd open up government and respond to the people instead of the special interests," he added, "so let's force him to respond." Stark also recruited members at the blog OpenLeft, while the group began drawing traffic from coverage in Wired, The Nation, TPM, Time, and The New York Times.
The effort comes in a pivotal period for Obama, who is tapping his enthusiastic base for fundraising and voter turnout, yet shifting his message to prioritize general election themes. In many Democratic presidential campaigns, this is precisely the time when the base is ignored -- or even defied to demonstrate the candidate's independence and "centrism." Obama's base activists, however, are still getting heard. They are reaching each other directly, through the campaign's network, and indirectly, with blogs and reporters covering their argument that Obama should not have backtracked on civil liberties. So far, Obama has not responded substantively, though his campaign was forced to acknowledge the "dialogue" under media prodding. But from the message boards, it looks like most group members want Obama to respond by reaffirming his original opposition to the White House spying bill, not simply acknowledging the conversation.
While Obama's advisers may view this week's activism as inevitable liberal tensions in a general election -- an odd gloss, given the Fourth Amendment's bipartisan credentials -- the key dynamic is the development of a sophisticated network of activists. After all, they're not asking the candidate to be more liberal, they're asking him to hold strong on his own promise to oppose the spying legislation.
Even conservative bloggers are impressed that the Obama Campaign provides an open platform for supporters to organize against the candidate's position. "Rather than react in accordance with the practices of most campaigns by shutting and muffling dissent," observed the GOP blog The Next Right, "Obama is providing dissidents (many of whom are supporters of his) the opportunity to organize on his campaign web-site." The blog contrasted the approach to top-down campaigns on the right. "Can you imagine a Bush campaign reacting like this? I can't."
Netroots activists are imagining -- and demanding -- an even more receptive response from Obama.
Update: A print article in today's New York Times covers the growing impact of this MyBo group, with more reaction from the campaign:
Thousands of [Obama's most ardent supporters] are now using the same grass-roots organizing tools previously mastered by the Obama campaign to organize a protest against his decision. In recent days, more than 7,000 Obama supporters have organized on a social networking site on Mr. Obama's own campaign Web site. They are calling on Mr. Obama to reverse his decision to endorse legislation supported by President Bush to expand the government's domestic spying powers while also providing legal protection to the telecommunication companies that worked with the National Security Agency's domestic wiretapping program after the Sept. 11 attacks... For now, the campaign is trying to put a positive spin on the new FISA fight among its supporters. "The fact that there is an open forum on BarackObama.com where supporters can say whether they agree or disagree speaks to a strength of our campaign," said Bill Burton, a campaign spokesman.
Several activists and bloggers predicted that Mr. Obama's move toward the center on some issues could sharply reduce the intensity of support he has enjoyed from liberal activists. Such enthusiasm helped power his effort to secure the Democratic nomination, and it has been one of his campaign's most important tools for fund-raising and organizing around the country.
Markos Moulitsas, a liberal blogger and founder of the Daily Kos Web site, said he had decided to cut back on the amount of money he would contribute to the Obama campaign because of the FISA reversal. "I will continue to support him," Mr. Moulitsas said in an interview. "But I was going to write him a check, and I decided I would rather put that money with Democrats who will uphold the Constitution."
Ari Melber is The Nation's Net movement correspondent. He is also a contributing editor at Personal Democracy Forum.
Copyright © 2008 The Nation
24 Comments so far
Show AllI know you're right. Giving Green the vote bolsters the whole party. It's just that I have a deep and abiding respect for Nader (and Kucinich) it's a shame that the Greens haven't taken Ralph in for another ride.
I'd like to kiss two birds with the same stone.
It is troubling that even amongst ourselves we have split the progressive vote three ways. Sheesh... it's gonna get ugly.
Yes - I was confused about Nader vs. McKinney. I realized I did not know which "Party" Nader is in. Nader seems to be more of an individual than a representative of an organized group. If you cannot organize an identifiable group around you over the course of 12 years, then it may not be wise to put yourself forth as the only electoral alternative again and again.
I finally checked out Cynthia McKinney in more detail. If she is anything like her video persona, she would make a wonderful president. If someone like McKinney sets the tone for the Green Party, then it may be a promising enterprise going forward. In the past I have seen some very flaky things with the Greens in Europe. (Not radical, just sloppy and peculiar).
Parties and explicitly radical organizations make me nervous, since my experience has been that the strident and narcissistic types with privileged backgrounds tend to dominate, eventually silencing others and driving them away. A nasty and contentious atmosphere is a great opportunity for name calling and diversion by agents who want to destroy the organization. But between having no organization and having something, I guess that something like the Green Party would be the lesser of two evils.
Obama (my third choice dem) lost me when he decided to forgo a publicly funded election as he stands to benefit so richly. This FISA stuff just gives me smug warmies.
Nader, or McKinney? I really love Ralph, but I'll vote third party majority.
I think that the Democratic camp in general has failed to recognize what the last two elections have done to our perceptions of how we value our ballot. Those of us who held our noses and voted for Kerry when he made this about face are not able, even if we like Obama, to watch it happen again. We still have a very bad taste in our mouths from doing that the last presidential time around, watching flaccid political shimshammery build upon that unlistened to appeal to a nonexistent middle. WE ARE THE MIDDLE!
I am so upset with politics now that it will need a real stampede back to progressive speeches on the part of any candidate to get my interest at all - and that includes my own Tom Udall who is dressing his message up in neocon support the troops language, even to the point of standing in front of something that looks suspiciously like a Hummer - ye gods! Who are they trying to placate?
There is no there there, politicians! No there at all. Put your glasses on - WE'RE OVER HERE!
Obama is being pragmatic by allowing dissent on his website.
Obama really risked progressive support in voting for FISA and now that he did that, he needs to cover his ass. So he says, "This is a new kind of politics where everyone's voice is heard." (not necessarily listened to.)
Well Obama supporters who strongly oppose FISA should be listened to and should not let Obama and the Dems walk all over them.
In recent years he Democrats have been much better enemies of the left than of the right.
The way things are going ,the number of people under Senator Obama's bandwagon looks all set to surpass the number riding on it.
But then, aren't let-downs and betrayals very much part of any politician's stock-in-trade.
Ultimately ,they're all driven by plain , simple self-interest - though not of the 'enlightened ' kind . Some (politicians) make no bones about it . While others do so more subtly.
Please wake me up when Obama has acceded to the demands of the people who oppose his actions but nonetheless continue to support him.
Yep, it'll be a cold day in hell when that happens.
Don't vote for candidates that betray you. Please. Doing so disqualifies you as competent to make your own life decisions, much less vote.
hi all
i am a member of the green party here in the houston area of texas(yes there is a green party here). everyone should be supporting cynthia mckinney. she is a progressive candidate that will be for real change in this screwed up country of ours. obama is selling out his own base already and his great policies will be more of the same old shit that corporate dems are famous for.
support mckinney and help her do well. she has more experience then obama and insane mccain.
I have given up on Obama. He has lost my vote. I do not know if he can change my mind or not. First he wants to pull the troops out of Iraq but allow contractors (Blackwater and thugs to stay on, therefore continuing the privatization of the military). Secondly, he goes too far with AIPAC. He once said nobody suffers like the Palestinians and now that he's running for office he says Jerusalem would be the undisputed capitol of Israel when even both republican and democratic presidents in the past have refused to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem from its present location. I do know he has retracted that statement but did not say he would be against Jerusalem being the capitol of Israel. It belongs to the Palestinians. He does not recognize Hamas as the democratically elected government of Palestine. He is strongly aligning himself with Israel. At first I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt thinking that once in office he will be more pragmatic. However, he has lost my confidence. I have always voted democrat for the same reason a lot of people vote democrat -- to keep a republican out of the White House. However, if we want to change the democratic process and its two party rule, those of us who keep voting democrat need to stop worrying about keeping a republican out of the White House and concentrate more on changing the two party system. Anymore there is little, if any difference, between a republican and democrat. I am voting for Cynthia McKinney or possibly Nader. But McKinney is my first choice. It is sad to say that I don't care if casting my vote for a third party puts McCain in office. Maybe we Americans will go over the edge if McCain gets elected. That doesn't mean gloom and doom. Maybe it will bring everyone to their senses and realize that we must go back to the values of our Founding Father. I'm sure everybody is familiar with the belief that an addict has to hit rock bottom before they are willing to stop. America may have to hit rock bottom for enough of us to take to the streets and demand change. I just hope it will not be too late. All I know is change has to begin somewhere. We have the internet now. We can use it to fight this two party corporate loving, military industrialized system we have now.
Thanks, Jerry. Fantastic endorsement of McKinney, and the posts were very helpful too. Question: Are there any issues on which McKinney and Nader differ? I'm leaning toward McKinney, FWIW.
Re: the question of Cynthia McKinney as presidential candidate. See the ringing endorsement of her candidacy in this week's edition of Black Agenda Report:
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&...
I had the distinct pleasure of spending part of last weekend with Cynthia in Miami and can add to the testimonials here about her impressiveness. She speaks forthrightly and knowledgeably to every issue raised, always with a strongly progressive perspective. Her "Power to the People" campaign focus will attract support from many "people" disfranchised from "power" in this crazy inequalitarian society we have evolved. I think (hope) that once she obtains the Green Party nomination (July 13 ends their nominating convention) she'll begin to get some of the media exposure that has been so lacking; especially if whatever is left of progressive energy in the grassroots will push for that exposure.
I've watched McKinney's speeches, received her campaign updates, and thought she was impressive and powerful in the Green Party presidential debate in January 2008. I also admire Ralph Nader and also receive his emails. I wish they were running on a joint ticket. Why aren't they? What a ticket that would be! As McKinney said at the Green debate, all progressives need to UNITE to make a difference. Any way we can do that?
I really do appreciate the anger within Obama's camp on his pointless FISA "good compromise" comment. A deep analysis on MyBO today called out BO staffer Greg Craig on some utterly false and illogical nonsense he was spewing to the media in response to the rank and file protest. Go there and read it. Very good. Meanwhile, the only thing we can hope for is that BO will do what he still says he will do - vote against telecomm immunity in the Senate when the bill gets there. He'll have to squirm to explain this if he does it and his explanation will not appease the yapping jackals of the right or their great army wing of dim followers. The MSM (except of Olberman) will accuse him of flip-flopping and thereby try to shore up their "independent" bona fides. It won't matter that this isn't a flip-flop. The truth doesn't matter to this people, only the fake trumped up "controversy"
Or he could stick to his politically stupid and unprincipled decision to pander to the Right on a core consitutional issue. That will please the David Broder, David Ignatious and Chris Mathews crowd to some extent but not the average voter who will see BO as posing and pandering. That is of course, exactly what he was doing. He could have just said, "I'll wait for the Senate version; meantime see my previous remarks" and spared himself and us this whole thing. Is it because BO doesn't have the cojones to ignore his handlers or because he doesn't have the cojones to defend the Consitution in general. Hard to say at the moment.
The "compromises" Dems always make on these things never make any political sense. They never actually result in increased support or even neutralized opposition from the center or the Right. They always strengthen the Right instead. I would understand all this "tacking Right" if it worked but it never does. Yet they keep doing it often on issues where they'd be better off just shutting up and letting the thing blow over and almost always on issues of principle. You give a little on tax policy, land use and highway dollars. You don't budge an inch on the Constitution but the Dems don't get that.
How many new votes will BO get for throwing the 4th amendment under the bus? More than he loses? WTF is the point?
I saw McKinney speak at the Conference on the Assassination of Malcolm X. Very impressive! Also has written an articl you must see about Operation Lantern Spike and the Assassination of MLK. She's for real. Thats why she is kept off all kinds of stages!
Anne, good question, why is Nader promoted here more than McKinney is ?
I guess we get a Clinton candidate after all.
Nyah, told you so! When does the anti-faith-based Blog get started? The anti-torture....?
This group of people is able to connect and communicate on-line and hold the candidate to account for flip-flopping. The members can exchange views and debate and even take informal votes on sub-issues or matters of procedure and tactics. This phonomenon could be a very early stage of an internet-enabled deliberative grass-roots direct democratic system to replace our elite-dominated republican form of government. Very interesting.
Aside from that, in the short term it would be a real coup if this group forced Obama to vote against the FISA bill.
For those advocating voting third party/independent, I'd really welcome your input on Nader versus McKinney. I see most people here on CD advocate voting for Nader. Why not McKinney?
Nader has integrity, but I don't feel confident that he can lead a country. Willy or anyone else, can you point me to the best Nader info possible that I can read and absorb and will help me make my decision about him ? I'm looking for real substantial info, not flowery summaries a la you-know-who.
The only true choice is Nader...a man of proven integrity. Better grab it when it's there since you will not find it very often in politics.
I agree, Obama needs to respond to his supporters ! Of course, I have to wonder why they supported him in the first place when all he did was make vague promises of hope and change. They didn't bother to ask for details ? At least now they're waking up, and they need to stand up to this nonsense.
As you can tell by my name, I'm an atheist. I'm furious that Obama has stated that he will EXPAND Bush's fantasy-based initiative program, i.e., taxpayer money to religious groups, and although he claims that there will be oversight we all know there will be almost none. Any dumb*ss can don a velvet and glitter outfit, proclaim to be a mouthpiece of god, and promise to do charitable work ... and then grab taxpayer dollars and waste them on whatever he/she wishes. This is insane ! I urge EVERYONE write to Obama and tell him you will not vote for him unless he promises to remove this ridiculous tax dollar drain.
Department of I Told You So:
At 9:54 this morning I posted on yesterday's Arianna Huffington article about Obama's
"move to the center" and, in part of it, made the following "prediction."
"(Referring of course to Obama), will the Panderer-in-Chief ever pander to "us" by throwing some bones of apparent agreement with the progressive point of view? I'm guessing that he will do that in some way, simply to reassure the wavering about their ability to make Obama more liberal than he appears to me. It's interesting that a website of his own supporters set up a special program for them to urge him to change his stance on the FISA bill. Will such change be the "bone" that will keep the faithful dogs coming back to the support supper dish? (See, see, he IS responsive to "the people" when they speak!) Or would such change cost him votes with the "centrist" crowd who want a "tough" stand on terrorism? It will be interesting to see."
And I would add in the light of this article, to see whether his campaign continues to "acknowledge" the protests and crows about how it proves that he listens to the people who support him; or whether he actually delivers the "bone" of a substantive change of position.
Not sure what is worse, Anne; BO or B HO.
Is anyone amused like me about the title "My B.O."? Something definitely stinks, I'll say that.