'Democratic Courage' Targets Hillary

Matt Stoller's tease last night, "Anti-Clinton Opportunity," certainly piqued everyone's curiosity. Today's Politico.com piece covers what Stoller teased, though without mentioning Matt.

"We'll definitely have sufficient resources to make a significant media buy," he said, adding that their campaign against Clinton would be "edgy" enough to get attention. "We don't need to raise an immense amount of money to make a big difference." ... ..

... .. "I'm definitely not a Hillary hater -- I think there are other candidates who are better for the progressive movement," Hurowitz said. "Most of the people involved in our PAC will be happy to support her if she does become the nominee."

Stopping Hillary from the left

The above quote is from Glenn Hurowtiz, the president of "Democratic Courage," a new PAC put together to push back on Hillary Clinton. I had a brief conversation with Glenn today. He confirmed that Stoller's post last night was indeed about his PAC. Hurowitz went on to say that the goal of Democratic Courage is to rebut the growing perception that the primary season is over and Hillary Clinton has the nomination won. As Glenn sees it, Clinton is "vulnerable," but between Republicans talking about her all the time and the media doing the same, according to Hurowitz, she's being assumed the winner far too early. The other issue for him is that Clinton is being portrayed as a progressive when he feels there are several candidates that fit the description much better than she does. Hurowitz's group is about to do a media advertising buy that will take Clinton on.

Hurowitz has written pro Edwards posts, and he freely admits he personally supports John Edwards, as well as having given money to Edwards. An earlier post of Hurowitz's covered "The Clinton-Obama energy plan." However, Democratic Courage is not a pro Edwards PAC. According to Hurowitz, others involved in the PAC support other candidates and they have no intention of endorsing anyone. He was quick to add that if he and the others joining him believed that Clinton was truly inevitable they wouldn't have formed Democratic Courage. He's more than willing to support Clinton if she wins, as the quote above illustrates, but he thinks the primary is far from over and his group is going to do all they can to make sure they get their message out.

Fewer than twenty people are involved in Democratic Courage right now. But when I asked Hurowitz what big name blogs were involved he wouldn't give the names. He also said his PAC had several "maxed out donors," who have already given $5,000. PACs can't raise more than that amount from any one individual, and the main advantage of a PAC is that there are far fewer limits on directly supporting candidates than 527s, which rely on unlimited windfall contributions from big money donors, but also come with tight strings attached on how you can use the money.

Hurowitz made a point of mentioning that tomorrow is the 5-year anniversary of Paul Wellstone's death, and Hurowitz will have a post up on Politico.com talking about it, something he also covered in his book. Looking at the homepage, you'll see a picture of Wellstone right alongside of John Edwards.

Looking at the Democratic Courage site, I found the blogroll interesting. John Edwards is the only candidate listed, so I asked Hurowitz why Obama wasn't included as well if the PAC isn't John Edwards centric. He laughed and said that the site was his personal blog until very recently when he made it the home of the PAC, and he's not gotten around to doing anything with it.

I've emailed the Clinton camp, but haven't heard back from them.

The primary temperature is about to heat up.

Comments

[IkeChicago]

You didn"t protect the nation when you had a chance to do so, you did nothing about the Arab Israeli conflict, you didn"t give us Health Care despite making it a key in your administration " Why should the nation trust you to Do the right thing now Hillary. What in your current resume tell us that you are prepared to lead us now.

You claim the Republicans stopped your Health Care Bill, well those same Republicans are still there, what do you plan to do different? What is your success in working with Republicans, you"ve been in the Senate for 8 years, just like you were in the Whitehouse for 8 years " Tell us what significant bills you have passed in the Senate, show us how you have worked with the Republican Senate.

[research]

What is the Clinton's relationship with Bush Sr and family? They vacation together, best buds.

That would make all of the American presidents since Raygun ,
4 presidents,
20 years of
just 2 closely knit families!

That ALONE is enough to vote against Hillary. No hereditary monarchy for the USA!

[oglala]

The Hillary bashers are out in force of late. It is telling how talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh use language to disparage or diminish her. Rush refers to her as "Mrs. Bill Clinton," rather than using the title she has earned and that is "Senator Hillary Clinton."

[longislandlol]

She is tied to the republican political machine in NY just as much as the democratic political machine- upstate new yorkers think she's their saviour- since they don't get $$up there as often and as much$$ as downstate NY gets-- my educated guess is she'll get the disenfranchised ny'ers and jerseyites-- and there are alot of them-- as for california-- she'll be out there soon promising more than the bushies--so she may have that wrapped--as for the South-- she'll pick a southern V.P. like J.F.K. did- and she'll squeak into the presidency by the same margin he did-- she's using his politicial strategies--not Bill's---

[SensibleAmerican]

One can have any agenda these days and garb it under some fancy name like "Americans for family values" etc. coined by the right wing nuts!

There is "offthebus" on this Board which blatantly promotes Obama and now 'Democratic courage' with Edwards. Plenty of these have come and gone and will come and go. The REAL netroots and Democrat liberals are MoveOn and ACLU. They don't just opine or rant, they actually do something. And when they do something, it is for the good of the party and not a self-serving political act

Hillary is steamrolling ahead and Edwards is stuck where he was 10 months ago, while Obama is headed down ...

[MPeter]

Finally some Democrats with a backbone are about to stand up to the so-called Clinton Jaggernaut. She is too corrupt and to hawkish, we do not need her in the White House. I hope the PAC features the progressives, including Obama and Kuccinich. Enough of Bush-Clinton Bush-Clinton bool.

[MinuteMan]

This is pretty typical; once someone is "crowned" the front-runner, an anybody-but-them movement arises. Supposedly Wesley Clark was asked (by Clinton?) to enter the '04 race just to counter Dean.

The real thing that would take the wind out of HRC's sails is for Gore to announce. You can help this along by voting in the Democracy for America poll at http://democracyforamerica.com/pulsepoll. You have to select "other" and then write in "Al Gore".

[Macready]

I totally agree . . . hillary ain't got the nominiation . . . and it is a mistake to think she will get it . . . she is a hawk, in bed with israel and lieberman and would be a total disaster as prez.

[Lon]

This was a more balanced post than I expected. And I think Hurowitz is right that the Clinton is inevitable storyline is bad for the democrats. Although I would certainly support Clinton over any Republican, she is the weakest in her positions and most vulnerable because she will boost Republican turnout. So if an ad campaign can head off her nomination I'm all for it.

There does seem to be some suspicion raised that this is an pro-Edwards move, but it does not seem like he is the likely beneficiary anyway.

[taikan]

I would much prefer to see Richardson get the nomination because I think he would be a better President than Clinton, Obama or Edwards. However, this is beginning to resemble the primary campaign for the Democratic nominee for Governor in California in 2006. After the primary campaign was over, Schwarzenegger ran ads filled with statements that had been made by the losing Democratic candidate during the primary campaign, and that pretty much killed the party's chances in the general election.
If the candidates really care about getting a Democrat elected President in 2008, then all of the candidates and their supporters have to be careful not to hand the Republican nominee a lot of ammunition he can use to shoot down the Democratic nominee, whoever he or she may be.

[kjg25171]

I too support Bill richardson. Those democrats who say getting out of Iraq is of paramount importance and yet support Clinton are hypocrites. She won't now commit to being out by 2013 although earlier this year she said if Bush does not end the war by 2009 she will.

In addition to Richardson's position on Iraq, he has respect as a negotiator from the international community. He has been UN ambassador and Secretary of Energy, both in the Clinton administration.

However, my ephiphany occured when I heard him interviewed about his decison to legalize medical marijuana in New Mexico. He said that a lot of county sherrifs were angry at him for that decision, but he did not care because it was the RIGHT THING TO DO. the man has principles.

[Rebelfriend]

Anyone who stands up against the tidal wave of corporate controlled MSM and the Democratic Party Washington Establishment determined to make Clinton the nominee (eventhough general election matchups clearly show Edwards leading, Obama second, and Clinton third) is to be admired. Hurowitz is showing intelligence and foresight not following the same myopic thinking that nominated John Kerry. We simply cannot afford another mistake, the stakes are too high. We need a candidate who can change red states to blue (Edwards has raised more money in the South than any other candidate - Democrat OR Republican!)
Edwards has also led the dialogue of this campaign since Day One, by speaking openly, honestly -- no triangulation, no manipulation -- giving thoughtful, smart answers to all the problems we face -- and he has forced Clinton and Obama to follow his lead.
Hurowitz sees -- as Democratic party establishment folks apparently don't -- that the Republicans are salivating at the prospect of revving up their base which hates Hillary with a vengeance, and the fodder her long history provides. If you think they "swiftboated" Kerry, just wait and see what they do to Hillary.
Corporate America knows Edwards will put working people above corporate greed; Washington insiders want business/politics in Washington to go on unchanged. Edwards speaks to the fact that the whole system is broken. We all know it is. But who has the courage to challenge it? The power of the Presidency (as Bush has so abominably demonstrated) is unbelievably powerful, that in the hands of a good, honest, smart man, a visionary of courage and will, things WILL change. We have a unique opportunity to nominate and elect a leader who will do what we all know needs to be done: John Edwards. We all know it won't be easy, but we simply must change, or our nation will destroy itself.
I say BRAVO to Mr. Hurowitz and his associates! They are true Patriots! We all need to follow their example rather than following like sheep to the slaughter, and do what we know is best for our country: Nominate and Elect John Edwards.

[larry278]

Democratic candidates for POTUS must be prepared to go through very rough primary campaigns to get the nomination. Democrats must establish that their candidate is the bare knuckles champ. The iron fist in a velvet glove ploy, all too often, fails because the candidate has a glass jaw and the velvet glove is filled with putty. Fresh putty is too soft. Dried putty shatters.

[OrvilleHLarson]

I'm a Dr. Ron Paul man myself, but it's good to see Democrats who oppose Saint Hillary of Clinton.

She's corrupt, you know. Remember the now-you-see-'em, now-you-don't Rose Law Firm billing records? The unjustified firing of the White House travel office employees? The hundred grand she made in the dubious "cattle futures' bullshit?

She's owned by every big interest in town. She voted for the war in Iraq, and she recently voted for the war-enabling Kyl-LIEberman amendment. The Israel lobby owns her.

Support the candidate you REALLY favor, and not the so-called "inevitable" one.

[KenoshaMarge]

Wow, got your Hillary bashing Republican talking points right down pat doncha? What if we do support Hillary in spite of those that call her inevitable? Are we allowed to do that? I don't know why I would ask about anything from someone that would confess to supporting a Republican Libertarian of all things.

[Doofus]

In a couple of months, there will be primary
voting and this will all be sorted out. What
we're seeing now is just how ugly democracy
can be - the worst form of government except
for all the others. If anything has gone wrong
this time, it's the effort to decide who the
candidates will be *before* the primaries,
which turns out to be 'not such a good idea'.

A little patience is in order, if you please.

[rich1107]

Besides the many other reasons HRC is not the best choice is that her margin of victory will be smaller than might otherwise be the case. If we want the country returned to the democracy column we don't need just the presidency. We must have the largest majority possible.

It is long past time we had a female president, but HRC has far too much baggage. If she is the nominee it is a safe bet we will wind-up regretting it.

[rssrai]

Hillary is very scary to me, and I a democratic woman who has voted democrat all her life. The women who are supporting Hillary are like rabid dogs when anyone (man or woman) says anything negative about Hillary. If this is how it is now, I can imagine what a Hillary presidency will be like. Women will be out in droves daring any man to say anything negative about Hillary. If they do they will get turned in as sexist or fired even. I can see women as PC police using being a woman because of Hillary to empower themselves. I believe in equality, but I think that PC has been pushed so hard it is now become scary. Racism and sexism has no place in society, but I fear that some women if Hillary is elected will become power hungry. I would like to have a woman president someday, but one who doesn't scare the crap out of me.

[KenoshaMarge]

You need to go sit somewhere quietly for a while. What you wrote is about as scary a tirade as anything I have read thus far. Phyllis Schlafly fan are ya? Rabid dogs? Using Hillary to empower themselves? Then if must be that if a man is elected he will use his manliness and testosterone to empower himself and all his little manly followers. What a bunch of drivel!

[INQUIRER]

Yeah, your intuition is very interesting, but you have not an iota of evidence to back it up with. Sit up, shake your head. It was only a dream.

[oldpotsmuggler]

Expose just enough to make it interesting, but not really enough to evaluate. In principle, I have nothing against trying to make more of a horse race out of this thing. In practice, big money would be required to actually pull that off and, coming in $5,000 chunks, that would be at least one or two thousand deep pocketed chunks.

Who are they?

[slc20]

The problem dems have is that the Pro- Hillary folks -and the polls showing her ahead- underestimate the anti-Hillary sentiment nationally.

If Hillary is nominated, i think we'll have the biggest republican voter turn out EVER. They hate her.

Polls cannot measure this aspect because they only poll "likely voters" and prior voters. There are millions of people who don't usually vote who will come out just to vote against her.

The republican's great hope is that we'll go ahead and nominate her so they can pull their base together and vote against her en masse.

So...i hope "democratic courage" is sucessful.

I'm an Obama supporter, myself, but Edwards would be my second choice. But Hillary? Never.

[KenoshaMarge]

Republican Hillary haters got nothing on the Hillary haters on the left. I support John Edwards, don't like Obama much and would vote for Hillary without having to hold my nose. But ANY Democrat is better than ANY of that bunch of war-mongering Republicans.

[otispfudpucker]

I'am with you slc. But if HRC does get the Nomination, I shall be voting Republican or Independent if there is one.

Our country is already on the path to destruction because we have had these two dynasties running it. Bush, Clinton, Bush and another Clinton. No thank you. That would mean almost 24 plus years of their control.

The cycle needs to be broken so our country can heal and perhaps one day return to the way it once was. If that means putting a Republican in so be it. At least the cycle will be broke.

People that live in other countries are also wondering why Americans would want two dynasties to continue to control our government. Good question don't you think?

If people were to follow the money they would see that HRC is just as evil if not worse than Bush. Also the wars will continue, the secretive BS, and our country will remain divided by a divisive person at the Helm. Same old Shit? Not for me!
Otis P.