« To Be Sure | Main | Insanity »

June 18, 2003

The Internet Primary

Posted by Ezra Klein

We've seen this blogging phenomenon spring up in the past few years, growing exponentially and becoming a powerful medium - we were crucial in the Trent Lott takedown, the right-wing blogosphere did much to hasten the punishment of the NY Times recently, Kos has created the epatriots, MoveOn directed $4.1 million in contributions in 2002, etc.

This, of course, is the natural continuation of the blog "movement" which is, at its heart, a cry from politically concerned citizens fed up with their own impotence and the utter incompetence of our media and power structures. First we were content to just get our ideas out into the 'sphere, hopefully we'd influence somebody, now we're trying to affect the actual structure. And we can.

This is the crucial moment for the progressive internet movement, this is the moment where we either become a key constituency to be respected and placated by those we will vote for and support, or we are relegated to blogger and our own subgroups of readers, our writings devoid of larger relevance.

Which brings me to the MoveOn primary. MoveOn is the most powerful and effective part of the progressive internet movement, with over 1.5 million active members (both in a grassroots and monetary sense), they are our flagship organization, so to speak. Now they're deciding which candidate to endorse and throw their very substantial money and numbers behind. This endorsement will likely make the difference for whomever it goes to, immediately catapulting whoever gets it up a tier and ahead of their opponents. The effects of that endorsement, the push it will give its recipient, has the potential to instantaneously make this internet group, and by association the online progressive movement, a powerful, make or break constituency. In effect, gaining MoveOn will give one candidate access to the heart and soul of the progressive movement - and from that point on, our work for that person will give us unheard of power to shape the future of the Democratic Party.

This is our moment, I cannot emphasize this enough. You must go register with MoveOn and make your voice heard. I don't care who you vote for, this is not a partisan thing - I just care that you vote and make our rhetoric and fervor a real, tangible, shining prize that will have to be won in ever coming election. Make a choice and give us a candidate we can support, that we can carry to victory. Make grassroots support important again, take back this democracy from the top down media manipulation we are all subjected to and frustrated by. Give us the power again.

If you're a blogger, I want you to direct your readership to register. If you're a reader, I want you to register and tell your friends. Either our rhetoric about democracy and the future of this country is real and we are willing to work in service of our ideals, or it's a load of shit and we should stop spitting it. I don't believe that we are hypocrites or lazy, I believe that we can make this happen and I believe that we will make this happen, for all of our sakes.

Go to it. Register. Make it happen. This is the Internet Primary and it is our moment, all of our talk means nothing if we do not seize it.



12:28 PM



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Comments



And after you're done registering, remember to vote for Howard Dean next week.



Posted by: Joe Rospars at June 18, 2003 01:12 PM


Or whoever you think we should support. This is a non-partisan plug.



Posted by: Ezra at June 18, 2003 01:29 PM


Ah, the energy and innocence of a first presidential campaign... too bad mine was Gore. That sunk me forever ;-)



Posted by: Unlearned Hand at June 18, 2003 03:52 PM


I think I understand the excitement behind the Move-On primary. It'd be great to raise money for a Dem, to counter W's huge edge. And it'd be nice to winnow the field, so maybe we could start shooting at W instead of each other.

But calling Move-On "non-partisan" is disingenuous. Move-On, which began as a way for people to register their disgust with Ken Starr and the Rehnquisition, has morphed into a rallying point for people opposed to war in Iraq.

Dean begins this primary with a huge edge among site visitors. Some new people may be attracted, of course, but it's hard to believe anyone else can win, or that Move-On's organizers really want anyone else to win.

More to the point, it's hard for Dems who were ambivalent about the war (I count myself here), to see Move-On as a palatable face for the party. Its politics during the war were every bit as exclusionist and small tent as the DLC.

I agree that the Dems need to reach out to the grass roots, but I have grave doubts that Move-On is the way to go.



Posted by: Ted at June 18, 2003 04:13 PM


I mean non-partisan in that I'm not recommending a candidate (i.e, Dean, Gephardt) to vote for. Just go and cast your vote with whomever suits you.



Posted by: Ezra at June 18, 2003 04:30 PM


I'm skeptical. Not just because it's meaningless (I shouldn't say that -- I just haven't yet been convinced of its meaning), but because it's misrepresentative. There's one candidate who has expended enormous amounts of energy building a massive internet support group. There's one candidate who has attracted the youth and subsequently the more likely to be tech savvy. There's one candidate to whom this primary is likely to matter. You get my drift. The guy who wants to win it most and would be most likely to vociferously brag about it once he did is the one guy who is obviously going to win it. What fun is that?



Posted by: Matthew Langer at June 18, 2003 10:21 PM


Ted, I thought it was the Democratic Party's job to be the big tent. Inside you've got all kinds of different constituencies: unions, environmentalists, etc.

Why is MoveOn obligated to be more inclusive than the DLC or the Sierra Club? And isn't MoveOn's agenda determined by its membership? Can't you join MoveOn and only participate in the actions you agree with, or foment for other actions you feel they're ignoring?

Matthew, considering the amount of money potentially involved, I don't think there's any candidate that wants to win more than the others. And last time I checked, the Internet was wide open to anybody. There isn't anything inherently unfair about one candidate's having shaken more action there than the others.



Posted by: hamletta at June 19, 2003 01:47 AM


I kind of think the entire MoveOn thing is a bit premature and counter-productive at this stage. Check this out to see why I am so pessimistic on the project:

http://yankeeblog.blogspot.com/2003_06_01_yankeeblog_archive.html#95783844



Posted by: Rich at June 19, 2003 07:07 AM


1. MoveOn's primary 'is', so it needs to be acknowledged and dealt with.
2. Whoever wins is going to get a bucket of money after New Hampshire.
3. Right after the S.Car. primary is a quick series of critical multi-state primaries and campaigning in those states will require a lot of money for a lot of TV. 'Retail' campaigning can't get to all of them fast enough.
4. Other than Kerry and candidates endorsed by unions, a campaign will need the infusion of money MoveOn can provide to survive those big primaries.
5. Get registered with MoveOne and vote for your candidate, because the bottom line is to retire George Bush!



Posted by: Don at June 19, 2003 12:39 PM


I guess my point is, MoveOn is trying to argue that it is holding a Democratic party primary (not a Sierra Club primary or DLC primary or antiwar candidate primary) that's open to anyone. As Don suggests, this is an institutional opening -- an alternative to unions or PACs. And, as hamletta says, anybody can join.

That's true only in a very misleading way. Sure, the MoveOn primary is open to everyone. And any Democrat can go compete for the nomination in Iowa -- but we all know Dick Gephardt will have a big advantage there because he grew up nearby. Same thing with MoveOn. Committed antiwar folks run the site, and committed antiwar folks see the site as their own.

Why should I, a person who doesn't live in Iowa or MoveOnWorld, want to give my money to a majority that has already settled there -- to control and use as they like? Why should I, by participating, help MoveOn present its endorsement as a the result of the "grass roots" -- the result of a contest that was free and open to all?

(BTW, Don, you kind of give it away with your line "other than Kerry and candidates endorsed by unions." Why don't you just say, other than candidates who supported the war or are endorsed by institutions that supported the war.)

More broadly, MoveOn has a lot of work to do before it can convince Dems who weren't anti-war that it can recognize the difference between us and King George, or that it has a strategy that can actually result in the regime change we so badly need in this country.



Posted by: Ted at June 19, 2003 01:28 PM