The Left Splits: Writers Flee DailyKos Over Clinton-Bashing

A writer's strike at DailyKos is the latest symptom of a fast-moving infection in the progressive blogosphere - the all-too-real political fissure driven by online bullying that shows no signs of healing by August. Does this virtual walk-out presage the real thing in Denver? Too early to tell, but the real anger among Democratic bloggers who do not ardently support Barack Obama swats down the dismissive conventional wisdom of "they'll come back in the end" - at least for now.

DKos blogger Alegre led the walk-out with a passionate diary that expressed the deep disappointment many Democrats who dare to support Clinton over Obama feel during this long and tumultuous cycle:

I’ve put up with the abuse and anger because I’ve always believed in what our on-line community has tried to accomplish in this world.  No more.  DailyKos is not the site it once was thanks to the abusive nature of certain members of our community. 

I’ve decided to go on "strike" and will refrain from posting here as long as the administrators allow the more disruptive members of our community to trash Hillary Clinton and distort her record without any fear of consequence or retribution.  I will not be posting at DailyKos effective immediately.  I will not help drive up traffic or page-hits as long as my candidate – a good and fine DEMOCRAT - is attacked in such a horrid and sexist manner not only by other diarists, but by several of those posting to the front page.

The resentment among non-Obama backers is growing rapidly - you can see it in the comments here, and I can see it in my emails. There's a real split among party activists, and it's getting wider. Some of it is motivated by the media's love affair with one candidate - and hatred for the other; Keith Olbermann's embarassment drove many over the edge. But much of it comes from boorish, Stalinist behavior online - the kind of "you're either with us or against us" attitude we saw so much of when the Bush crowd was flying high. It's disturbing, particularly because so many of the targets are women. This is not the Democratic Party many of us have worked for; this is not the progressive blogosphere we've supported. Without blaming the worthy candidacy of Senator Obama in any way, this is not a progressive movement - it's a harsh, echo-filled politburo bathed in faux post-racial hosannas and the gauzy camera lens of "hope."

This is also the time to note the lack of leadership in the party. Howard Dean's no-so-subtle lean toward Obama is troubling; the empty coffers of the DNC are alarming. Chairman Dean's inability to lead real primaries in Florida (which now appears lost to McCain) and Michigan (which took matters into its own hands) shows a true dearth of leadership. Even with the incredible excitement over our candidates, he has failed the party's greater ambitions.

Sadly, the very comments on Alegre's strike post over at dKos - where leader Markos Moulitsas has become increasingly harsh in his attacks on Senator Clinton - prove her case for the walk-out. And thus far, 68 Kos writers have joined the strike (something of euphemism, since they don't get a share of the BlogAds take a the site).

Mark Ambinder and Jake Tapper have more. And don't ignore the mirror post at MyDD, where many of the ex-Kossacks have decamped for more balanced discussions.

Comments

[Micheal Wynn]

Freedom of speech is a must. But should we draw a line somewhere? Is that the need of the hour today. And if yes, then where does it stop being speech and begin to be a nuisance?

[Mark]

OhMyGod --- Howard Dean! What an embarrassment the second time around. Time to get him an ambassadorship to some remote island that doesn't have any link to the outside world. He needs to do what he does best... not think clearly, somewhere where it won't hurt anyone. And, to think I caucused for him once upon a time... ohmygod...

You want to take a look at Obamabullying stats, just take a look at the differences between caucus results and primary results in states that had both. For instance, Washington State. The primary was very close Clinton 45.7% and Obama 51.2%. The caucus results Clinton 32.2%, Obama 66.7%

There were hundreds of complaints about the caucuses in Washington State where the estimated turnout was 250,000 (the primary turnout for Democrat voters was 691,000). I won't source the complaints but you can find them quite easily at various blogs related to the Washington State Caucuses.

Caucus results are no MORE valid than the results of the Michigan and Florida primaries. Caucus results are skewed and don't even come close to the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy. It is time to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida AS IS. Sure, they are flawed, but so are caucuses EQUALLY FLAWED. Either seat the delegates, or nix all caucus results.

This primary campaign has revealed the flaws in the primary process as much as the 2000 election revealed the flaws of the general election process. It is TIME TO REFORM the primary process and make it a one-day, nation-wide, primary election. No caucuses, and no states battling for the influence... what a concept, democracy?

You can't even come close to the one-person, one-vote principle of democracy if your vote in the primary doesn't count for much, because, IMHO, that is the most important part of the process, for godsakes. It is time to kick the "old-school politics" right out of the DNC.

[campskunk]

there was a LOT of ugly stuff that precipitated this walkout. administrators on Kos have stood by while Obama supporters tried to find out real life information on Hillary supporters- like their real names, where they lived and worked, etc. normally, RL info snooping or posting is grounds for instant banning (at least that was what the FAQs said), but the person who did this is still a member in good standing of dKos. hmmmmm.

when i protested about someone commenting about a "death wish" in a thread about hillary, the administrators warned me, not the person posting the secret service bait! i guess it was gauche of me to point it out or something- that one truly, truly baffled me. basic legal liability considerations have been ignored by the administrators at Kos in their zeal to support Obama.

i hope nobody gets hurt as a result of this, but it's not a safe place to post anymore the way things are now.

[Susan Nunes]

You know, Kos has a private site. If he wants it to be Obama Central, he has that right.

All you have to do is create your own blog, and therefore you control your own content. You don't even have to have comments on your blog, although this will hurt your hits.

But getting worked up over a site full of anonymous posters is really dumb. If you don't like it, create your own blog. You may not have the hits, you might even be blackballed like I was when I told the truth about Howard Dean back in 2004 and not ever be linked to or have the hits by the mostly ignorant Big Bloggers, but at least you have your dignity intact.

[grlpatriot]

Tom, you've nailed it. Excellent writing, BTW. One expects discussion and heated disagreement at dKos, but denigration and intimidation is something entirely different. This is just not the type of behavior one would expect from a "progressive" blog. Maybe from the Bushies and guests of CIA interrogation rooms, but not from a "progressive" blog. On balance, Clinton's supporters have smacked back (mostly out of necessity IMHO). I'm not saying that it's right, but you can only get "hit" so many times before you leave the jerk(s) hitting you.

[Tricia Spiegel]

Thanks so much for expressing our concerns so well. As an older women who supports Hillary Clinton, I have endured insults that far surpass what I experienced as a young feminist during the "second wave." It's no longer, "Your bra wouldn't make much of a fire," but "Who cares what an old woman thinks?" I hope in the end that a lot of people at least respect what we think.

[joeysky]

It’s time we take a stand. It’s OK to support different candidate. But it’s not OK to attack and dehumanized the supporters of the opponent candidate. DailyKos has allowed the abusive behavior to go uncheck, and it has become a norm.

When Obama supporters went as far as saying that the poor people in Ohio didn’t have enough food so their brains lacked oxygen and hence they voted for Hillary, I knew that there is no rhyme nor reason left at DailyKos.

[Palomino]

Maybe it's time to stop referring to Barack Obama's "worthy campaign." It's one thing if his success so far has depended largely on his ability to control caucuses in small "red" states. That's a clever strategy, and fair is fair. But has anyone here heard reports about tech-savvy "progressives" engineering illegal takeovers of local/county parties in those same states, ousting elected party chairs, holding illegal meetings, and creating fake "Democratic Party" websites, all under cover of Howard Dean's "50-state strategy"? (No one, as far as I know, has suggested that Dean himself has sponsored or approved such tactics.) If these reports are accurate (apparently there have been complaints from party officials in Texas, in particular), then it's clear that Obama is benefiting from what would have to be characterized as an undemocratic and, frankly, un-American program of bullying and hijacking local party organizations in small states where there are few Democrats, and where older, more traditional, non-tech-savvy party officials remain clueless about the coup until it's too late. Again, can anyone substantiate these reports?

[Susan Nunes]

In fact, Obama's "success" is largely due to caucuses and primary states which allow crossover voting, and therefore the Republicans and independents have been manipulating our primaries and caucuses for their own not-so-subtle ends.

Howard Dean needs to go. He has screwed this primary season up royal.

Even if Obama withdrew now, Hillary Clinton has been so damaged from the filth his campaign has hurled her chances of winning are even more remote than they were previously. Her chances were never good in the first place, but the party hacks and the donors thought Democrats had it in the bag for the White House and forced far superior candidates like John Edwards and Joseph Biden out.

It's disgusting. We could have won this race, but now it's basically over unless the party rejects both remaining candidates at the convention and puts in someone else.

[Sherry Russell Shirk]

As one of the writers who walked out with Alegre I have to admit it was with a heavy heart. DailyKos had been my virtual home for three years and until it was overtaken by Hillary haters I thoroughly enjoyed being part of the community. I should point out that even before our walkout, many of the best thinkers and talented writers had already disappeared to be replaced by the barely literate.

[judith]

Now I will tick somebody off for sure. I was never much of a poster over there, but I did read there a few years back. I stopped reading after the sick and vicious posts about Judy Miller which included rape scenarios and other anti-female violence. Nobody stopped it or seemed too complain much and I thought - why read a site with people like this? Now of course there were many very worthy bloggers there but once I got a taste of that I was done. So I have to say - the people who didnt stop the filth then have little recourse (in my opinion) to get pissed off just because it is now pointed at them.

Dont worry - they will turn on each other as well...mobs always need new victims.

[Kat]

Tom, I'm de-lurking to say this is an outstanding piece. I think framing this as a split among progressives is fair, and something I've been noticing in the works for some time now. I'm a progressive (Kucinich and Edwards had my support) who does not want to be associated with the ugliness and narcissism of the "Obama Movement." We are facing some hard times ahead and there's no room for the preening and self-referential "Obama campaign as wondrous phenomenon." The good thing is, for the first time in a long time, we know we're not alone and we seem to have found our voice, so to speak. I agree, the Olbermann embarrassment proved to be a watershed. The omnipresent accusations of racism were a crossing of the Rubicon, from what I've seen.

I am less generous than you, however. The Obama campaign bears blame here -- the Obama candidacy was deliberated framed as a movement, so the movement itself does reflect on the candidate. Moreover, that hazy lens of "hope" was another deliberate frame to prevent a discussion of actual issues, so Obama could present himself as an empty vessel, all things to all people. It was a strategy that had entirely foreseeable consequences. In the absence of substance -- I mean, for pity's sake, this primary should be all about the spiraling economy -- the turn to a rigid cult of personality echo chamber was predictable.

Come together in the end? I'm honestly not sure how this will play out. I think that until very recently, the Movement was unaware of the seeds it was sowing -- it was unthinkable that their slash and burn movement could be rejected, in their own minds. I think it was taken for granted that Hillary Clinton could be the endless target against which Obama supporters could create their superhero. Turns out they were wrong.

[daria g]

Kos and some of the other admins talk up the value of the community when it suits them, but when it comes time to take a stand in support of community, they say "who, me? I'm not responsible." Some liberal values.

The "strike" only happened because the environment made it impossible to have a conversation - insults and thuggish behavior took over. I don't see how a progressive community can survive, but again, the response was for one of the admins posting a diary saying it's not a real strike and who cares, and Markos' own words echo that.

If the community matters, the admins should treat it like it matters, but whenever the chips are down they say "who, me? I'm not responsible, go somewhere else." I think a majority of the folks still there are actually libertarians who've only been voting Democrat because Bush is insane and treat politics like a sporting event.

[T. Barr]

Finally, Hillary supporters are as fed up as I am with "the movement.!"

[John]

Damn obamaniacs

[Hector]

Thank you for this. I, as well, am fed up with all the trash talk.

[Buddhist Jihad]

"Hillary Clinton has been so damaged from the filth his campaign has hurled her chances of winning are even more remote than they were previously."

I completely disagree.

Taking all this crap for all this time, all these years, and still going strong?

A real live "never give up, never surrender" totally sharp Wonkette?

Are you kidding? She looks awesome.

[joe]

Very good,informative post.
it's true that every person who puts himself up as leader (markos)will be tempted to be as bad or worse than the one being rplaced(bastards in Whitehouse!)
keep up the great work,

Joe b. musician Seattle

[little nemo]

The boorish behavior was indulged by the campaign from the beginning. When that 1984 ad came out, I seriously (and mistakenly) expected Obama to distance himself from it and disapprove. That didn't happen. I was shocked to see otherwise worthwhile bloggers, like Josh Marshall, falling for it - I believe he assessed it as "clever". Obama claimed they knew nothing about the ad's creation but eventually it was revealed that the creator not only worked for one of the Obama campaign vendors but was also a former roommate of one his spokespeople - I forgot which one. The guy got fired from his job allegedly, but Obama didn't take the kind of stand one would have expected a progressive to take when the first viable female candidate was accused of being a fascist on behalf of his nomination. I was pretty shocked.

What this decentralized campaign strategy encouraged was thuggish behavior. Brooklyn Badboy, over at Kos, bragged about how the campaign allowed him to present Obama as he chose to locals in Brooklyn. That created an atmosphere where harassing Clinton supporters became regarded as acceptable. I keep pointing out that no one has needed to shut down comments because of Clinton fans. However, Digby, Ben Smith and Taylor Marsh have all had to shut comments down because of Obama supporters. Neither have pro-Clinton sites routinely suspended the posting privileges of Obama supporters who generally behave themselves as Kos and HuffPo have both done to worthwhile Clinton supporters.

I have never seen a candidate face the kind of wall that she has faced. I'm staggered by what she's gone through and the fact that she is still standing. This campaign has been a real lesson in just how deep misogyny runs and how acceptable it remains in even progressive circles. It's also been a real lesson in how tough a human being can be and remain connected, vital and moral.

[Gregoryp]

Tom, love your blog it is very insightful and interesting. Just want to ask two questions since I have refused to donate to the national party for some time now due to their incompetence. Just how low are they on funds? Shouldn't they have thought of all the unintended consequences when they decided to cherry pick states to punish? Seems kind of amazing that a national party who wants to run the country can't even manage to run their party.

[Tom]

I started paying attention to this race in about Mid-November after the October debate in which everyone piled on Hillary. Until then, I was quite neutral on this race. I had positive views about Obama and Hillary both. I started visiting the liberal blogs. I noticed the uniformly negative comments about Hillary. Not only were the comments negative, they were also quite personal, mean-spirited, and vicious. I have overall good views of the Clinton era (sans the 1998 happenings). I like both Bill and Hillary clinton. What I saw in these comments shocked me. Instinctively, I rose to Hillary's defense and started arguing with the commenters about the good things that happened in this country during the Clinton era. To no avail. I saw the unfairness, the misogyny, and the boorishness towards Hillary. I also started noticing the media bias against Hillary and all the cheapshots Obama was taking against Hillary. Slowly, slowly, my preference for Hillary hardened and now I am a strong Hillary supporter. When Obama said after Nevada that Hillary supporters would support him but his supprters would not support her I found that extremely insulting. Obama was taking my vote and my support for Hillary granted.

If Hillary is not the nominee of our party, I will write-in her name in the GE. I will never, ever vote for Obama again. I live in Illinois and if he were to run for the senate again, he will not get my vote. I will not donate any money to the DNC. After the way this party has treated the Clintons, I am seriously questioning my ties to the Democratic party.

Kudos to the Hillary bloggers at DKos for going on a strike. I don't visit these sites anymore. I also don't watch MSNBC. I am very disillusioned with the Democratic party for the way they have treated Hillary in this campaign.

This Jeremiah Wright story has reinforced all my fears about Obama. If the party nominates him then they both will deserve each other and the landslide loss to the Republicans sure to follow.

[Beth]

Okay, I'm a Republican and a grouch ("age and guile beat youth, innocence, and a bad haircut"), but I chalk the internecine warfare up to youth and/or immaturity, and the nature of the internets. Weren't you ever ambushed by rabid Paulbots? Huckabots? These kids (dammit, get off my lawn!) were raised on the internets and are used to the tone of online conversation--and online conversation just plain sucks, compared to real life dialogue, where basic manners and courtesy are usually extended. People have become accustomed to Jerry Springer-style ambush shouting and rudeness. It's a product of our time, our disconnected monkeysphere culture.

Believe me, I empathize with you Hillary supporters, even though I have no intention of voting for her. We've all felt shouted down, marginalized for not falling in lockstep with what's Officially Acceptable. To put it simply, we Republicans/conservatives are used to it. Pissed that you're called racists and that the Clintons are called racists for not loving teh Obama? I hear you. (And frankly, despite my opinion of Bill Clinton, the idea that he's a racist because he called Obama's campaign a "fairy tale" is patently absurd.) I know why you aren't voting for Obama, and it's part of the reason why I'm not voting for him (besides the issues)--he's a neophyte. He's not ready to lead the most powerful nation on earth, and not ready to take the reins in the war. I'm sure there are some racists who wouldn't vote for him because he's black, but I know that's not why at least half of America (and for now half of Democrats) won't. He *is* untested and unready. Voting for him is voting for symbolic reasons--"change" and "hope" and all his magniloquent prose.

Susan Nunes: I assure you, Republicans are NOT crossing over to vote for Obama as part of some sooper-seekrit Rovian plan. Not a chance. If *anything*, Republicans are crossing over to vote for Hillary because frankly, she's seems to be a less-dangerous potential President than Obama is. Either way, it happens every election, and analysts always say it makes little difference.

To "little nemo"--People don't oppose Hillary because they're misogynists any more than (in fact, likely less than) people oppose teh Obamessiah because they're racists. Everyone has his or her own reasons, and I think the reasons why each candidate has certain groups of supporters are really pretty simple. But accusing others of misogyny for opposing her is, frankly, counterproductive and somewhat contrary to her sober message of experience and judgment. Or maybe you're just talking about some of the language used about her, which would be par for the course on the internets--and yes, "even" on the left side. (I see it all the time on the left, but that's because it's apparently okay to denigrate Republican women. YMMV.)

[Beth]

Tom:
"After the way this party has treated the Clintons"

Yeah, you know, that's what shocks me, and I've never been a Democrat. For God's sake, Bill Clinton WAS the President, and he WAS a popular President. It's mind-boggling.
Of course, McCain supporters like me know what that's like--he hasn't exactly gotten a big booster squad on our right flank, to say the least. (Don't even get me started on that shyte!)

[Rusty]

Finally a place for Hillary folks. I am a progressive who feels pushed out of places I used to love to visit: the Daily Kos, Huffington Post, and Air America. I've stopped visiting those sites and listening to Air America because I can't take the Hillary bashing. Thanks.

[Radiowalla]

Count me as another ex-Kossack who just pulled the plug on a site that I had been visiting regularly since 2003. The constant harassment of pro-Clinton posters has become the norm there and there is no longer any place for anyone who isn't enraptured with Barack Obama.

So be it. As Markos said "the internet is a big place." Bye-bye.