techPresident - netroots - Comments

The Movement

Seanny53 — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:24:42 -0500

I was saying all along, "It ain't the man, it's the movement."

Obama's campaign gave a tremendous boost to organizing. It's now up to we, the people, to keep that going. It needs to be "Yes WE can," not, "Yes, Obama can." If a large organization of ordinary citizens can add a much greater democratic influence on a non-democratic government, then maybe things change for the better. If, on the other hand, we all relax and stop working because "victory" has been achieved, then Obama's presidency will be the same old slightly lesser evil that we've gotten from every Democratic president.

"liberal blogosphere" != "netroots"

JonPincus — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 02:16:54 -0500

Excellent post and discussion ... One of the things I notice is that the discussion here seems to equate "the netroots" with the liberal blogosphere, and so ignores the role of social networks and the black blogosphere. In fact, I'm increasingly thinking that what's really going on here is a realization of the power shift of power within the netroots -- away from the "liberal blogosphere".

I agree with Micah that there are huge lessons in the Join the Impact post-election LGBTQ rights protests. Nancy Scola's and Tom's posts here made some very good points and are well worth checking out ... links to those posts and others in my post Join the Impact: taking social network activism (and LGBTQ rights) to the next level.

jon -- http://talesfromthe.net/jon

Not a monopolized movement

Jonathan Baird — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 21:15:37 -0500

I like the points that have been made so far and would like to put in my own thoughts.

I am a big fan of DailyKos and the Netroots movement. They have done great work in many pursuits including, but not limited to, the election of Barack Obama. Still, I feel uncomfortable at times with those on the side of that movement that feel like they have sole ownership of the win. This does not describe many of the people involved, but I have noticed some who might feel extra-entitlement towards their agendas following Obama's electoral victory.

I left my home in Texas at the end of November 07 and drove to Iowa to volunteer for Obama. I ended my campaigning after the Texas primary in March when I had to return to work. In my travels, I met thousands of people supporting the now president-elect or working for his campaign. Some were dewy-eyed, some were extremely liberal, but most of the people on the ground and in the houses were largely centrist in nature. Their work also paved the way for the Obama Presidency. To most of us, Barack Obama is doing the job we sent him for and laying the groundwork work for a competent government that allows for both liberal and centrist progress. I sleep better at night knowing that the netroots movement is out there pushing for progressive change, and I respect much of what they're trying to do, but meanwhile I'll be rooting for a competent and grounded administration that will deal with the most pressing issues in domestic and international policy that allow us to work towards our more progressive goals.

Moving Left

Tom Watson — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:52:34 -0500

I accept Micah's premise - the country is moving left. Heck, the Bush Administration moved well to the left of itself just in the last few months.

In terms of big social issues that used to divide into cultural left-right, the changes are also evident: all the research shows that this next generation (born after 1980) is far more tolerant of what used to provide the wall between liberals and conservatives. That's not led by Obama - that served Obama well and allows him to be a "centrist" and "moderate" on the next iteration of areas like gay rights.

But there was this element of "revolution in the making" fervor among netroots folks (not all, by any means) that is now leaving some of them disheartened.

The big question may be not whether Obama is a liberal or not (and he's certainly the most liberal president since Bill Clinton!) but whether his "movement" - more socially-wired than ideological - is allowed a share of the power it fought for.

A few thoughts...

Luigi Montanez — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 14:02:34 -0500

A few thoughts:

1. Obama was not, is not, and never will be a president the Netroots can call their own. The McCain campaign did a much better job at outreach to established online activists and bloggers than the Obama campaign did. The Obama campaign simply created their own movement of online activists.
2. Netroots activists should spend the next few years building up and installing progressives to higher and higher places within the Obama administration and within other parts of both the federal and state governments.
3. Obama is choosing established centrists because the number of competent, established progressives is very small. We have a few Senators, a few Representatives, a few academics, and a few labor leaders. And none of those potential candidates really seem to want to work in an Obama administration. Simply put, we need more progressive leaders.

Leftmost Bit

On labels, the netroots and a mobilized citizenry

Micah L. Sifry — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:32:06 -0500

I would like to humbly suggest that the liberal vs centrist debate needs to be recalibrated for two reasons. First, it seems pretty clear that the mythical "center" of American politics has moved left if an incoming president who is calling for massive public works spending to create millions of jobs, a green retooling of the economy, some form of national healthcare, and an orderly withdrawal from Iraq is labeled a "centrist."

The second reason is more subtle, and goes to the heart of the moment. It isn't just that we have a new Administration coming in. We also have a new people coming in. And I don't mean new staffers, I mean a newly mobilized citizenry that with each election since the dawn of the Internet age has been learning how to self-organize. If you add to that swirling mass the thousands of Camp Obama graduates and Obama Organizing Fellows and MoveOn house party organizers, you begin to see a phase shift in what may happen.

Right now, the netroots progressives may be fuming and the DC villagers may be smugly enjoying their restoration...but consider what the post-election Prop 8 protests tell us. (This post by Markos Moulitsas goes into more detail on the same theme.) In a matter of days a massive grassroots movement mobilized itself, using online tools to coordinate an ongoing series of local protests and creative media interventions, and in direct opposition to the insider strategy pursued by the "official" leaders of the gay community, the DC-based Human Rights Campaign. Yes, there are a bunch of reasons why the gay rights movement has always had a strongly networked and decentralized grassroots component, but I have a feeling this is not the only arena where we are going to see challenges to the establishment from below in the next few months and years...

Did we get a liberal president?

Freedomfighter — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:07:10 -0500

Tom, your article here goes to the center of what scares the hell out of people about Obama. When the crowds said "Yes we can", others said "yes we can what?". People can dismiss the turn on the words but it shows Obama may have outflanked the progressives to get elected. There are plenty of examples of Obama double-speak to concern everyone.
However, the passage of bans on same-sex marriage in California and Florida, states won by Obama, prove the Obama voters were not just left-wing willies. Other sources shows one out of every five conservatives voted for Obama. The Obama team is aware of this and are likely to try to prevent a backlash from the center and right, but that may just anger the left. Obama may be banking on strong support from African Americans and minorities to back him up. Hope everyone supporting Obama realizes, dissent is not racism.

Thanks Micah...

junothiall — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:31:27 -0400

I couldn't find it even with a search yesterday. I wait with baited breath to see if Sen. Obama does stand firm.

Not true about MoveOn backing down

Micah L. Sifry — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:07:26 -0400

See http://pol.moveon.org/immunity/080621obama.html. I must have put up a bad link in my original post. Looks to me like this campaign is still very much kicking.

MoveOn.org has deleted its page on taking Obama to task

junothiall — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:53:14 -0400

Interesting, eh?

WHAT HAVE THEY DONE?!

thegreathal — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 05:20:43 -0400

No, freedomfighter, you're teaching the Obamacans the wrong message here. I believe full well that if Obama didn't flee his original position on civil liberties, he would benefit in the polls, or at least not lose the election--though he will strand his supporters.

It's that Obama chose to lie about FISA anyway is the lesson on how politics works for Obamacans. While in many cases having an actual candidate that's directly inside government is infinitely useful to a group or movement, if you're going to blindly dedicate yourself to a candidate, make sure s/he halfway believes in your issue (or in Obama's case, any issue) before it's too late to withdraw your support. Their dedication becomes the selling out of their own beliefs, and while it's good that Obamacans are just now learning how to criticize, their end result will be electing a Bush Democrat with utter contempt for the Left to the White House.

Also, please fix the broken link and missing sentence in the second paragraph, please!

so the Obamanians are upset with Obama

Freedomfighter — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:04:32 -0400

Obama took positions on issues he can not deliver on. He will either abandon the positions and turn on his supporters who have no where to go, or he will be brought down by the voters. Looks like the Obamanians are beginning to understand how politics works. If you like an issue, stick with it and build a movement, not a candidate, for it.

Obama and the Netroots

Luigi Montanez — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 14:18:35 -0500

It's definitely true that Obama hasn't courted the Netroots, hasn't needed the Netroots, and if he wins tomorrow, won't need the Netroots moving forward. It's also true that his campaign has built a much more broad, and powerful, coalition than the Netroots can ever hope to be.

But the problem I see, as a partisan Democrat and a small-dollar donor to the Obama campaign, is that while Obama has positioned himself to take down the Clinton machine and obliterate McCain come November, he's not leaving behind any coattails behind for the hundreds, even thousands, of down-ticket Democrats that will be on the ballot with him.

True, it's still the primary season, and the Obama campaign has every right to focus on their candidate rather than the party. But at this point, they've shown no hint that they at all care about party building if they were able to finally put down Clinton. Movement building? Definitely. Party building? Not so much.

"love" and "funny"

Joshua Levy — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:50:47 -0500

To be clear, I wrote that I "love that name," not that it was funny. But you're right that we shouldn't single out peoples' names based on how where they come from.

That said, I don't think I questioned Mr. Tobaccowala's achievements or made fun of him; in fact, I called him an astute observer.

funny names

Peter Pasi — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 12:47:15 -0500

Not to be a killjoy, but I really see nothing funny about Mr. Tobaccowala's name. If someone were named "Baker" or "Shoemaker" or "Carpenter" we wouldn't make fun of them. But wait, those are European names, and Rishad is just a South Asian who has distinguished himself as a very smart and accomplished person in his industry. So it's OK to make fun of him.