"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."
I love that Clinton is granting so much credit to Moveon and the activist base, explicitly saying that we are why she is losing. That's a concession towards our political power that I wouldn't expect, and it's welcome. Here's Moveon's response.
"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."
What I find interesting is how Clinton insists that she does not agree with Moveon with regards to foreign policy. What exactly she mean by that? I know she hasn't apologized for her Iraq war vote, and that her surrogates seem to think that is purely tactical. This seems to belie that analysis; Clinton really doesn't think her vote was wrong and does not see the importance of a political consensus for a different foreign policy apparatus. And that's why she thinks Moveon is such a problem.