"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."
Listen to the audio below:
Clinton's remarks depart radically from the traditional position of presidential candidates, who in the past have celebrated high levels of turnout by party activists and partisans as a harbinger for their own party's success -- regardless of who is the eventual nominee -- in the general election showdown.
The comments also contradict Clinton's previous statements praising this year's elevated Democratic turnout in primaries and caucuses, and appear to blame her caucus defeats on newly energized grassroots voter groups that she has lauded in the past as "lively participants" in American democracy.
"You've been asking the tough questions," Clinton said in April of last year at a MoveOn-sponsored town hall event. "You've been refusing to back down when any of us who are in political leadership are not living up to the standards that we should set for ourselves... I think you have helped to change the face of American politics for the better... both online, and in the corridors of power."
Clinton's criticism followed MoveOn's endorsement of Obama in early February. The group was initially established in 1999 to oppose the Republican-led effort to impeach President Bill Clinton, and now claims 3.2 million members.
In a statement to The Huffington Post, MoveOn's Executive Director Eli Pariser reacted strongly to Clinton's remarks: "Senator Clinton has her facts wrong again. MoveOn never opposed the war in Afghanistan, and we set the record straight years ago when Karl Rove made the same claim. Senator Clinton's attack on our members is divisive at a time when Democrats will soon need to unify to beat Senator McCain. MoveOn is 3.2 million reliable voters and volunteers who are an important part of any winning Democratic coalition in November. They deserve better than to be dismissed using Republican talking points."
Howard Wolfson, communications director for the Clinton campaign, verified the authenticity of the audio, and elaborated on Clinton's charge that these same party activists were engaged in acts of intimidation against her supporters: "There have been well documented instances of intimidation in the Nevada and the Texas caucuses, and it is a fact that while we have won 4 of the 5 largest primaries, where participation is greatest, Senator Obama has done better in caucuses than we have." About Clinton's remarks suggesting dismay over high Democratic activist turnout, Wolfson said, "I'll let my statement stand as is."
In fact, the Nevada caucuses occurred prior to MoveOn's endorsement of Obama, and when Clinton made her remarks, the Texas caucuses had yet to take place.
The disclosure of Clinton's statement disparaging the prominence of party activists in the caucus process comes after she repeatedly suggested that Obama's electability had been compromised because he had allegedly offended other key Democratic constituencies.
This story was developed in cooperation with OffTheBus to which reporter Celeste Fremon is a regular contributor.
The problem is that people who don't like me exist and are in fact voting for someone else.
Is she suggesting that if you are not officially affiliated with a political candidate's campaign (i.e. on a campaign payroll) that you should not endorse or campaign for a candidate? Is she suggesting that unless you are in politics you should not be allowed to fight for a cause- that only politicians and lobbyists should have a say in anything and the rest of us should keep our traps shut? I I simply can't believe that is what she actually means. Can someone clarify this for me?
It's unfortunate this story wasn't released sooner.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo
Power corrupts, and lusting after it corrupts as well.
More Hillary double speak ,,first she is for you then she against you ,,it all depends on who she is pandering to.
Sure, they come out with thought-provoking videos -- oh, wait, there it is!!! Thought provoking !!!
if hil got the nomination, she'd expect this group to fall in line and have its members vote for her. but they could not count on any support for their views from her, and she'd treat them horribly until she needs them.
this is the type of politics that Obama is trying to change. It's why Nader is running again. It's why Bob Barr is running. There will be choices other than Dem/Repub this election, and perhaps if the voters do not make the choice in the Dem primary this year it will be time to look at other options.
She doesn't act like us either. She acts like Richard Mellon Scaife, Rupert Murdock, Rush Limbaugh and all those favorites of hers.
Now Molly was my kind of woman.
http://www.cnn.com/2006//POLITICS/01/20/ivins.hillary/index.html
says it all.
Birds of a feather, you know! But things do change. Lieberman is no longer pretending to be a Democrat; he's finally in the open, serving McCain. (But that's a lot like Hillary, too.)
Ann Richards said..' Poor George, he can't help it, he was born with a silver foot in his mouth." Awesome.
Molly was right, back before most of us realized how right she was.
I thought Swillary was a communist? :)
Only with massive, enthusiastic activism is our next president likely to overcome the influence of the health insurance industry to enact meaningful health care reform.
Only with massive, enthusiastic activism is our next president likely to overcome the influence of Bush-Cheney Republicans in Congress to bring an end to our occupation of Iraq.
Only with massive, enthusiastic activism is our next president likely to overcome the influence of the oil industry to reduce our dependence on oil in favor of more secure, more environmentally sound energy policies.
Only with massive, enthusiastic activism is our next president likely to overcome the influence of small groups with big money to create an economy that works for working Americans.
It's not just MoveOn. There's a massive, enthusiastic political movement out here. We're working for health care reform, ending the occupation of Iraq, energy policies that benefit the American people instead of the oil industry, living wages for working Americans. Obama's campaign is about us. The more of us, the better. The more active, the better.
What is Clinton's campaign about?
Hillary voters, being over 25, recognize this bunch of soundbites from elections over the past 30 years. It sounded great to us then when we were in college too
Obama 08
I say this from having given my flash light to Cindy Sheehan on the night before the Veterans for Peace Convoy excorted her to Bush's Ranch. In your zest for your protests, you could care less when the males on those trips harrassed women. You avoid the fact that several people were carrying marijuana on them and endangering others to be arrested alongside those. You risk innocent people's lives by allowing them to think that your cause is so just that you can do no wrong when in fact there is abuse of people in your world. Who will monitor it. I have seen no evidence that you people actually take any responsibility when your work ruins any one elses lives or livelihood. You are causing people to fear, hate and rebel against people that you do not know. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for harrassing people.
Were Clinton people were influenced in any way by Obama supporters....? Well, it makes me think of that old Jerry Rubin quote, "The only way to beat the status quo is to have more fun than they do." There you go.
I also noticed the potential for voter fraud and could see how it could be an intimidating enviroment, especially if you belonged to a union that was voting the other way. They would have counted me if I didn't say that I was from another state. A vote should be private and anonimous. We also phone banked for WY and a woman told us that her local newspaper said that the Caucus location was for Obama supporters only. I'm also a little disturbed that the people convening the caucuses wore the pins of the candidate they supported. Republicans were caught voting for Obama in one of the caucus site and it was supposed to be closed to registered democrats.