« Votes for the Lazy, Stupid....and Fraudsters... | Main | French Shepherd and German Poodle (Global Test Proctors) »

Soros's Army Of Losers

If you think you've heard the last of MoveOn.Org, you're wrong:

After President Bush won re-election, many political observers expected MoveOn.org to move into retreat. The sentiment surrounding the liberal online powerhouse was neatly summed up by the satire publication The Onion in its spoof headline: "MoveOn CurlsUp InCorner."

But on a Sunday night just two weeks after the Nov. 2 election, the group was back - hosting 1,600 house parties across the country where some 18,000 members gathered to vent and vote on how MoveOn should refocus after such a decisive Republican victory.

"With 56 million people not signed up to the Bush agenda and the Democratic establishment in exile, people are looking for ways to move in another direction," said MoveOn founder Wes Boyd. "In the current circumstances, we are more needed than ever."

Equally as distraught over the election results as they motivated to continue their battle, they certainly are putting a lot of thought into their future plans. Their message was an anti-war message, and even Democratic consultant Bill Carrick notes the flaws of that approach, "We got all the votes of people who were against the war - what we didn't get were the votes of people who were for the war ... Bush got the votes of people like married white women and Latinos who, despite their affinity with Democrats on other concerns, believed Bush would be stronger in the war on terror. And that wasn't really MoveOn's agenda."

Of course he also failed to note that MoveOn was merely "anti-Bush" and not "pro-Kerry."

But no worries everyone, MoveOn has plans for the future...

MoveOn plans a formal announcement in the next few weeks to lay out its agenda for the coming year. But at the November house parties members voted to prioritize efforts to remove barriers to voting, such as requiring electronic voting machines to produce paper receipts. They also vowed to pursue ways to create a media counterbalance to right-tilting Fox News.

"Our whole approach was to take people who are online members and get them into off-line activity," said Adam Ruben, MoveOn's field director. "We can get a lot done on the Internet but we know that to reach beyond the choir, there are essential parts of political activity we can't neglect."

Should be a fun four years ahead of us.

Matt Margolis blogged for Bush at 11:12 AM in category Loser Watch

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
mt/mt-tb.cgi/3094

Comments

"They also vowed to pursue ways to create a media counterbalance to right-tilting Fox News."

Huh! So I guess just having CBS, CNN, ABC, NBC, NYTimes, LATimes (just to name a few) in their pocket doesn't count?! If the MSM leans any more to the left they're going to fall over.

Posted by: Reed at December 2, 2004 11:36 AM

Emphasis added:

MoveOn plans a formal announcement in the next few weeks to lay out its agenda for the coming year. But at the November house parties members voted to prioritize efforts to remove barriers to voting, such as requiring electronic voting machines to produce paper receipts. They also vowed to pursue ways to create a media counterbalance to right-tilting Fox News.

See the previous entry on this blog ("Votes for the Lazy, Stupid....and Fraudsters...") or, as the PM says to the House of Commons questioner, "I refer the right honourable gentleman to the answer I made some moments ago.."

Why, exactly, is the failure of a voting machine to produce a receipt an obstacle to voting?

Posted by: k6whp at December 2, 2004 12:00 PM

"Create a media counterbalance to Fox News."

What, CBS and CNN aren't good enough for them?

Posted by: Carstairs38 at December 2, 2004 12:02 PM

The Law of Mission Creep: "Any organization tends to acquire new missions rather than go out of business when its original purpose is fulfilled or no longer possible."

In the same way "Blogs for Bush" is morphing into "GOPBloggers", "MoveOn.org" has morphed first from its original purpose to oppose Clinton's impeachment to getting GWB thrown out of office and now on to restoring the Democrat Party to the majority. They have lots of Soro's money left over, an organizational structure, and huge mailing lists of volunteer activists.

They'll keep going until they run out of money. Fortunately many of these attempts to morph run out of money and die (ref: "United We Stand") so with any luck we'll see the end of Moveon.org in the next couple of years.

Posted by: Orion at December 2, 2004 01:28 PM

"people are looking for ways to move in another direction"

Hmm.. how about moving... ON!!!!

Re: Fox
Most people beat me to this one.
Don't forget the NYT.

I have a friend that even refuses to read the Chicago Tribune! Man, that paper is right, but barely. These people are just too bitter and full of hate.

What really pisses me off is so many people I know are so anti-free speech. If you don't agree with their liberal agenda, it is "hate speech" or "uninformed" and I should shut up. Witness MoveOn filing a complaint with the FCC re:Fox News and the ridiculous equal time law they passed in the 90s that thankfully was overturned.

-----
PlutosDad,
http://eyesontheball.blogspot.com news satire that's "right" for you

Posted by: PlutosDad at December 2, 2004 01:42 PM

hey I know, the morons, er...moveons could be extras in mike al-moore's next crockumentary.

u know like mindless zombies stumbling around, (ala "body snatchers") wearing tattered rags & weird hats blankly staring at the sun due to arsenic in the water...cause it's all bush's fault!

oh wait...that's the deaniacs who are trippi'ed-out.

Posted by: OhioOrrin at December 2, 2004 02:01 PM

I find it most amusing that they are using one of the most successful methods employed by the Bush campaign during the campaign; that of the use of "...hosting 1,600 house parties across the country..."

Hey, at least we taught them a new trick!

Posted by: DagneyT at December 2, 2004 02:11 PM

k6whp Wrote:
Why, exactly, is the failure of a voting machine to produce a receipt an obstacle to voting?

Answer:
Nothing but is an obstacle to recounts and to confirm that a vote is acurate in my option.

Posted by: Robert M at December 2, 2004 06:08 PM

Apparently Soros and company are forgetting that the fat moujik from Flint is on their side. But at least this is a confession that ABC, CBS, CBN et al are increasingly ineffective anachronisms. The sooner they are consigned to the scrap heap, the better.

Posted by: Tannenberg at December 2, 2004 06:16 PM

Robert,
FACT: These machines have been allowed by the courts. Thus, they're legally acceptable, and this therefore means (since recounts are a part of the voting system) that these machines have been determined to be legally acceptable in terms of recount adequacy. Try again.

Posted by: pd at December 2, 2004 07:34 PM

...and to confirm that a vote is acurate in my option.

Fortunately, it matters little whether a vote is accurate in your opinion.

Posted by: Scaramonga at December 3, 2004 10:53 AM

pd,

Wrong I have seen the one system in action. As a system admin I can tell you several weak spots in the system at least how it is setup in AA county MD. 1st You go in and confirm you name and address for the county by paper they write a vote number and give you a piece of paper to sign and confirm you are this person and that is the correct address. You get handed a memory card then you go to a voting station. The stick the card into the station and vote. It pops back out the card and you are supose to give that card back to county but no one was checking. I could have walked out with that card no problem. If there is a question on the master count they go back to those cards to confirm that the vote is right but if 1 Card is missing then the numbers wont add up. All the votes recorded on that card can't be verfied. So if the main system has hardware problems and they go to the cards for the votes all of those votes stored in the stolen or lost card are gone.

The cost diffence is very small for have a system with a paper output into a secure part of the site compared to those memory cards the are easy stolen and can be reused and sold for money.

I will say that they are better then some of the past systems but I still think the optical are overall better because you can at least go back a have a human read them. Some of the computer based ones did it right have a printout that comes out as people vote and have the abilty for a hand count. Some didn't let fix the ones that didn't.

The fact that the gov't aproved it doesn't mean anything. The gov't has made mistakes in the past in my view it made a mistake in those systems.

Robert

Posted by: Robert M at December 3, 2004 12:32 PM

Nothing but is an obstacle to recounts and to confirm that a vote is acurate in my option.

Really. if the failure rate of the machines to record a vote electronically is 0.0001% (and it is about that) and the failure rate of the mechanical device to accurately record said vote is ~1% (and it would be, being mechanical), which would you trust to give an accurate tally of votes cast?

See, that's the problem. We've moved AWAY from mechanical voting machines precisely because electronic devices are so much more accurate and easier to use. Worse, it's not all that hard to forge a few dozen vote receipts and claim the machines are rigged because the numbers don't match. Even though the receipts are far less reliable and tamperproof they'd tend to be believed over the electronic records.

Another and more important point, in my mind, is that we moved away from vote receipts in the early 1900s and to true anonymous voting because of all the fraud and abuse these led to. Party bosses could find out how you voted and use that against you, intimidate you into voting "the right way". It was a *huge* problem in the old days, compared to altering the ballots after the fact.

Posted by: Orion at December 3, 2004 01:28 PM

Q: Why, exactly, is the failure of a voting machine to produce a receipt an obstacle to voting?

A: Nothing but is an obstacle to recounts and to confirm that a vote is acurate in my option.

Real A: Dems can't manipulate or otherwise selectively deface or destroy an e-vote, like they can with paper.

Q: How many Dems and other Lefty fellow travelers would even be concerned with this if their boy had won?

A: (Answer is self-evident)

Posted by: Bill OH at December 3, 2004 01:49 PM

Post a comment