Opening the Day: Obama Picks Up Supers

by: Matt Stoller

Fri May 02, 2008 at 09:20


What are you reading?
Matt Stoller :: Opening the Day: Obama Picks Up Supers

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Opening the Day: Obama Picks Up Supers | 26 comments
Positive story r.e. You Tube and activism (4.00 / 3)
From the WSJ:

     

"Unilever built the popularity of its Dove soaps and skin creams with ads encouraging self-esteem in women. In recent weeks, Greenpeace used parodies of those ads to accuse the company of destroying Indonesian rain forests for palm oil, a key ingredient.

Thursday, the environmental-activist group claimed a high-profile victory when the consumer-products giant said it would buy palm oil only from suppliers who can demonstrate they haven't cut down forests.

The speed of the campaign marks a big moment for activist groups. One Greenpeace ad has been watched more than 250,000 times in the week it has been on YouTube.com. ..."

     

Here is what the Clinton people are capable of (0.00 / 0)
WOW! (0.00 / 0)
so when is that from, '96?

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Dems and FOX (0.00 / 0)
NYTimes article.  FOX set a year-to-date viewership record with the Clinton interview (3.66 million people tuned in), raking in the money.

Also, Howard Dean is going on with Chris Wallace this Sunday. Awesome.

Sad state of affairs.

Get your copy of The Progressive Revolution
Me on Facebook

Me on Twitter

Showdowns sell (0.00 / 0)
Clinton v O'Reilly is a huge draw as a clash of super contentious personalities. and you can bet there were plenty of progressives breaking the mythological boycott to watch it.

I'm not against a boycott, i like the idea, but i think if you really want to be serious about it then you have to really go for it. And to me that would mean a boycott of all NewsCorp programming and properties ( with an exception for the WSJ which is a fine newspaper and would only be hurt by losing its more liberal readership ). But is the so called creative class ready to stop watching Simpsons and Family Guy? I doubt it, even progressives only care so much.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
The boycott was not about not watching Fox (0.00 / 0)
it was about Democrats not APPEARING on Fox, because as most of us realize by now, it's more than simply a biased network for conservatives, it's really the RNC Network.

First Obama, then Clinton, now Dean. Dems are a hapless lot, aren't we?

[ Parent ]
actually (0.00 / 0)
the boycott was about not appearing in any debates on Fox, not about boycotting FoxNews all together, thus the mythological aspect of it. There have been plenty of Democrats appearing on the Fox broadcasting network and FoxNews.  

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
True. (0.00 / 0)
But if one accepts Matt's argument (as I do) that "Fox News is a partisan GOP propaganda outlet, not a news station," what's the rationale for limiting the boycott to the Nevada debate?  
[ Parent ]
regardless of whether there was a "rationale" (0.00 / 0)
there WAS NO BOYCOTT so calling out Dems for breaking some mythical boycott, especially after the fact (in the case of Obama) is just odd
[ Parent ]
there WAS NO BOYCOTT? (0.00 / 0)
From Eric Boelhert's post, Fox News is in for a very rough 2008 over at media Matters.

...last winter, after Fox News tried to smear Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for purportedly attending a radical Muslim school as a child, liberal bloggers launched an initiative to get Democratic candidates to boycott a debate co-sponsored by Fox News and the Nevada Democratic Party. (The boycott, powered by Foxattacks.com, was later extended to any and all Fox News debates.)

The results?

...With this election season generating unprecedented voter and viewer interest, Fox News' rating bumps to date have remained underwhelming, to say the least...The problem for Fox News is that it's the Democratic race that's creating most of the excitement, yet Fox News has been forced to mostly watch the race from the sidelines.

Oh, I know, an interview is not a debate. Dems had a working, effective strategy and they just threw it away for no good reason and I guess nobody cares.  

[ Parent ]
maybe i should post the dead horse beating again (0.00 / 0)
tho i got sick of looking at that too.

no, most people don't care. and if you want to really punish fox use liberal audience numbers where you can actually hurt them: boycott the fox entertainment programming. Foxnews loves when dems boycott them, they can carry on endlessly about it.  

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

[ Parent ]
Most Dems don't care you're right. Pathetic. (0.00 / 0)
The rest of what you write is nonsense. Why boycott the entertainment division for what happens on their news division? Talk about a boycott nobody cares about. And let Fox carry on all they want about the boycott, what a yawner.
[ Parent ]
Is CNN any better? ABC? (4.00 / 1)
CNN, with Beck, Blitzer, and those other clowns, have turned into a Jeremiah Wright highlights show. ABC, with its flag pins and Weather Underground, isn't much better. MSNBC is brutal to Clinton, kinder to Obama.

So, none of these corporate networks is going to help the Democratic candidate, or even report on the issues. My recommendation is turn off your TVs for the next six months and read a book. Or, better yet, go volunteer for your candidate -- local and national ones -- blog about them, write letters, canvass, etc. The corporate media attacks are only going to get worse, and your candidate is going to need every bit of help he or she can get.  

[ Parent ]
WVWV (4.00 / 1)
i take Matt's summary of the value of WVWV at face value, as this would be a overly complex method of voter suppression. But what is striking about this whole thing is the seeming gross incompetency of the group over a protracted period this year and its inability to explain that adequately so as to protect its mission. It needs to get its shit together and get real damage control going. How did they not have someone to interview with NPR over two days, thats just stupid.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
Too busy consulting with their battery of criminal attorneys (0.00 / 0)
NPR : "Women's Voices, Women Vote did not make anyone available for comment on Wednesday or Thursday."

I don't understand this! Aren't they desperately eager to help undo the damage done by this most unfortunate but entirely unintended mistake?

I eagerly await the announcement from the North Carolina Attorney General of the filing of multiple felony charges against Page Gardner and every one of her co-conspirators.

[ Parent ]
SEIU deserves a big shout out (0.00 / 0)
and kudos to them for going after McBush it is about time...
McBush has become the gaff expert!
In light of your posts yesterday, matt (4.00 / 1)
about mob mentality et al, I'm finding this, Color of Change is demanding that Clinton not steal the election through the use of superdelegates. curious.

First. Superdelegates are not required to vote according to the number of pledged delegates in their states. They are not required to vote according to the popular vote in their states. They are required to vote their consciences. Period. So the demand by Color for change that Superdelegates must follow the will of voters is nothing more than a threat: do this or else.

It is not possible for superdelegates to "steal" an election. To suggest as much is inflammatory. Please continue to advocate for your candidate, but do it responsibly. I don't have to tell you how high passions are running. You see it here on any thread remotely devoted to this freaking primary that I wish to god was over I'm so sick of all the bs.

consciences (0.00 / 0)
Appealing to super-delegates's "consciences," your preferred criteria for votes, is exactly what Color of Change is doing.  If that is how decisions are made, you can't complain if voters speak of morality:  After all, Carville made quite plain with the use of "Judas" that codes of morality are being invoked.  

Here is the actual petition text:

DNC Chair Howard Dean, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and superdelegates:

The Democratic Party is playing a dangerous game and I'm writing to ask that you bring it to an end.

It has come to my attention that elected officials and party leaders are actually considering using their status as "superdelegates" to hand the nomination to Hillary Clinton against the will of voters, an action that would disenfranchise millions.

Following this course would be a shocking attack on voting rights and democracy. It would also give your seal of approval to an "electability" strategy executed by stoking race-based fear and division among voters. We expect that from the Republicans; we fight them on it every year. But now the leadership of the Democratic Party is poised to cosign this strategy of division and disenfranchisement. This could be the worst mistake the party has ever made, yet it's being talked about as a legitimate way for this campaign to end.

The voters who have come out in record numbers to participate in the Democratic Party won't allow this to happen, and as the most visible leaders of the party, you must reject the idea that the nomination can be won with a strategy that preys on racism, sows division, and disenfranchises millions of voters.


 

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.
[ Parent ]
Consciences are not "my preferred criteria for votes" (4.00 / 1)
they are Howard Dean's, speaking as the head of the DNC on MTP last Sunday.

I suspect that superdelegates will indeed vote very much in synch with the popular vote/pledged delegates and that is fine with me. It is completely up to them to pick any criteria they see fit to base their votes on. That's the deck they've been handed.  So sorry, but I don't see that petition as any great  call to democracy, I see it simply as a threat.

[ Parent ]
Why don't you just admit you're a Clinton supporter already? n/t (0.00 / 0)


End this war. Stop John McCain. Cindy McCain is filthy rich.
[ Parent ]
Please see Chris Bowers post (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
For the record (0.00 / 0)
Obama picked up just one super thus far today and, apparently, he was already on the DCW list, FWIW. So it doesn't change the count for those relying on DCW. Still good news to see the official announcement.
Peak Oil (0.00 / 0)
good Nation article:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/2...

If Americans are easily diverted in our Presidential campaign by non-issues, how in the world are we going to deal with a post-oil economy?

Should we all just concentrate on weaning ourselves off of our personal dependence on oil?  We talk about healthcare, net neutrality, and stopping the occupation of Iraq, but there is the potential for a lot of suffering and damage to our country in regards to our dependence on oil.  

Of course environmentalism plays a big part, but educating society about the reality of being on the downside of oil production and pressuring politicians to help find solutions seems incredibly important right now.

Great piece, huh? "The New Geopolitics of Energy" (0.00 / 0)
running alongside it at the Nation's website is an excellent companion piece, too.
[ Parent ]
An interesting place to follow Microsoft/Yahoo (0.00 / 0)
Is on MiniMSFT, run by an anomymous employee.  It's a very negative and confrontational place, but there's lots of good information and interesting perspectives.  
i read that blog (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Opening the Day: Obama Picks Up Supers | 26 comments
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox