ERIN NEFF: Democrats and the blogosphere - Opinion

SAVE THIS

EMAIL THIS Print

PRINT THIS Popular

POST A COMMENT

Sep. 27, 2007
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

ERIN NEFF: Democrats and the blogosphere

ERIN NEFF
MORE COLUMNS

Republicans like to view Democrats as the party of MoveOn.org -- a lumping of leftists from George Soros to Howard Dean and the blogosphere.

Although the fundraising and noise from this umbrella of progressives is noticeable, it has yet to post any real election victory in Nevada or anywhere else.

Most Popular Stories

EDITORIAL: If only we could tax more

LETTERS: With economists like these, who needs enemies?

J.C. WATTS: Sonia Sotomayor and bootstraps

LETTERS: Brace yourself for coming tax hikes

LETTERS: Nuclear power could be the answer for Nevada

EDITORIAL: Firemen's pensions past due for reform

EDITORIAL: Education 'consultants'

EDITORIAL: Hoe, hoe, hoe

EDITORIAL: Internet sales taxes

LETTERS: So now you're in favor of regulation, eh?

Of course there was Ned Lamont's win in the Connecticut Senate primary two years ago in the effort to unseat Democratic incumbent Joe Lieberman. Yet it did not result in a Sen. Lamont.

In New York Times reporter Matt Bai's book "The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics," it's readily clear the Internet movement that fueled Dean's 2004 candidacy still hasn't gone beyond the screaming.

"If (MoveOn) had taken over the party, there wouldn't have been an (Iraq) funding bill," said Hugh Jackson, a local blogger and founder of lasvegasgleaner.com. "If they had taken over the party, then Dennis Kucinich's single-payer health care for all would be on an agenda."

Bai has followed liberal grass-roots organizations for several years, from the $30 million Soros plunked down trying to defeat George Bush in 2004, to the inaugural YearlyKos convention last year at the Riviera. One of his most consistent themes is that these progressives know they don't like Bush in particular and Republicans in general. Beyond that, though, there's as much vitriol for Bill Clinton, centrist Democrats and anyone who dares support a candidate who could win a general election.

The major impact of the blogosphere so far has been to steer the party away from the center, a position from which Democrats actually won two presidential elections (not to mention the South).

One of the most telling passages depicts a scene in which an operative managing a progressive campaign fund has a conference call with staffers of Democratic leaders and organizations. It's the fall of 2005, and the operative, Rob Stein, is hoping to clarify his group's mission for the pile of cash donated by Soros and other progressive benefactors.

Several staff members request money to defend Democratic incumbents in the 2006 cycle.

"I understand the need for a long-term infrastructure," Nevada Sen. Harry Reid's chief of staff, Susan McCue, is quoted as saying. "But I have races I'm worried about right now, in 2006."

"I can see how that would make sense from your narrow perspective," Stein replied, according to Bai's book.

McCue replied: "I'm not getting anything out of this call," and hung up.

If MoveOn and the blogosphere were "organized" beyond getting people together for a house party, they'd actually have the type of netroots that could eventually become a core constituency of the Democratic Party. Jackson, for example, doesn't consider himself part of the netroots because his site won't link to fundraising solicitations (unless you buy an ad).

Myrna the Minx, the blogger and founder of Reno and Its Discontents (www.renodiscontents.com), says she also doesn't fit neatly into netroots. "I don't have a membership card and I don't belong to MoveOn.org, for instance," Myrna said.

A majority of her site's readers describe themselves as liberal, and Myrna said she straddles a line between new progressive politics and the Democratic establishment.

She does think the blogosphere is an active player in both national and Nevada Democratic politics, citing the cancellation of the Fox News debate earlier this year as "a good example of what can happen when local bloggers support the same issue the national netroots are working on."

Of course, the pressure from MoveOn.org, which led presidential candidates to pull out of the scheduled debate in Nevada, wasn't supported by Reid and the local Democratic Party. And at the end of the day, the campaign was more about opposing "centrists" who believe the party needs to reach out with its message.

Neither Myrna, who blogs anonymously from Reno, nor Jackson, has been courted by any of the presidential campaigns in Nevada for endorsements. The campaigns are in fairly regular contact with Jackson, and he's interviewed Barack Obama and John Edwards, thanks in no small part to the fact that he shows up everywhere the "established" media does.

Eventually, the blogosphere will deliver votes in an election. And then what? Do they actually join the establishment they rail against so readily?

During the MoveOn flap over the Fox News debate, it was estimated the organization had 10,000 members in Nevada. The debate flap probably helped them reach more and raise more. MoveOn often grows thanks to an issue that runs counter to the party's agenda. So to be the party of MoveOn isn't exactly a plus.

Erin Neff's column runs Sunday, Tuesday and Thursday. She can be reached at (702) 387-2906, or by e-mail at eneff@reviewjournal.com.

Share & Save

Leave Your Comment	11 Reader Comments
Terms & Conditions The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor. Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Please enter your name Name: Please enter your email Email: Please enter a comment COMMENTS : (word count limit is 300) You have reached the maximum number of words allowed Current Word Count: Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background. Patel1946 wrote on September 27, 2007 10:15 PM: This is one of the less erudite examples of journalism that I've ever seen. I wonder who much research Ms. Neff did into this article? She didn't even mention a single national blog in her entire article! If she thinks MoveOn.Org is a blog...then...um...well...um, well. I don't know what to say, really. John F wrote on September 27, 2007 05:04 PM: Whoa, Nelly! Calm down there, Steve. Relax. Name calling does not represent a coherent argument. Put one together and then come back. We'll all be here to listen. Steve wrote on September 27, 2007 04:14 PM: Progressive = Extremely radical, extremely left-wing, extremely "real life" stupid individual. oldlawdawg wrote on September 27, 2007 12:52 PM: I worry that Erin over intellectualizes because she just read a book on the subject that is already dated compared to the enertia of presidential election year political fundraising, and money is where it's at. Don't underestimate Soros, MoveOn and the far left -- Hillary doesn't, and no mater whatever else you might call her, she is neither stupid nor naive when it comes to campaign politics and funding strategy. DaveR wrote on September 27, 2007 08:50 AM: cas127, I always want to cry when I hear that the congressional approval is "low", yet everyone is happy with their elected offical. If we want a change we have to do something other than re-elect incumbants -didn't someone call this the definition of insanity, using the same inputs and hoping for a different output?- and yet, here comes Hillarity, sure to win the nomination. Now we'll have a Bush/Clinton executive team running America from 1980-minimum of 2013! (GHWBush was VP and was no potted plant in Raygun's White House). Doug wrote on September 27, 2007 07:51 AM: cas127,you hit the nail on the head with your post.At last 'W" will have a true legacy.One he will not be able to shake.Now he can be a lame duck,and we can move on. Ted wrote on September 27, 2007 06:58 AM: As long as the RJ insists on having a left wing radical, union loving socialist as a columnist on it's payroll, at least it could hire some one with a modicum of writing ability and a working knowledge of the english language and definitions. cas127 wrote on September 27, 2007 06:50 AM: Whoa, nelly - your establishment Democrat Op Ed is going to get flamed big time. Even with the worst Republican president since Herbert Hoover (and I think GB is going to beat Hoover handily in the end) the MoveOn crowd is fighting two massive facts that their ideology insists that they ignore: 1) People get more conservative as they get older - they've seen the government circus and its elephants and they know that mostly what gets produced in practice is dung... 2) The level of governmental distrust (a lot of which I would argue is due to insane fiscal irresponsibility) has led to 10% approval ratings of Congress. How much of a democracy are we (and how much government will we continue to believe in) if only 1 in 10 people (an all time low) believes that Congress is worthy of its role? However f'd up the private sector is, there is less appetite for voluntarily handing over more money and control to the City of Marble Tombs (DC). I don't care how many ads AARP and its minions run promoting more fiscal pedophilia, the American public barely trusts DC more than it trusts Iran for chrissakes... John F wrote on September 27, 2007 05:18 AM: Battling definitions time! progressive: 1 a : of, relating to, or characterized by progress b : making use of or interested in new ideas, findings, or opportunities Progress, I believe, is the key word here. Reminds me of Ambrose Bierce's definition of a conservative: someone who prefers existing evils, as opposed to a liberal who wants to replace them with new ones. gary wrote on September 27, 2007 03:58 AM: Well, shoot, the definition was lost due to brackets used in the definition - the HTML of the RJ's web site stripped some text. Trying again with parenthesis. . . Progressive: a : increasing in extent or severity (a progressive disease) b : increasing in rate as the base increases (a progressive tax) Read All Comments