One of the coolest things about Take Back America last week was the deep sense of cooperation on display among the various factions of the progressive movement. In past years, getting liberal interest groups to see beyond their own issue-oriented goals to work together has been likened to herding cats, but in 2008, with a newfound sense of solidarity as a result of having been together in the wilderness for 7 years as well as matured political and technological organizations, we are now seeing unprecedented cooperation among several groups all of which are devoted to mobilizing voters in unprecedented numbers in November.

At a press conference on Tuesday, Robert Borosage of Campaign For America's Future introduced an impressive array of progressive leaders who outlined their goals for the coming campaign season. Borosage put the amount these groups intended to spend in 2008 in the $400 million range, an unprecedented mobilization of forces on the left in a single election season.

Borosage included in his calculation Rock the Vote and Women Voices-Women Vote, which promote voting by young people and unmarried women, respectively; ACORN, which advocates for expanded housing opportunities; and the National Council of La Raza, which backs Hispanic causes.

Those groups are barred by their nonprofit tax statuses from backing candidates or engaging in partisan politics, but Borosage said they intend to spend a combined $75 million registering and mobilizing voters.

Then there are labor heavyweights SEIU, Change to Win and the AFL-CIO. They can spend money on both mobilization and partisan politicking. Plus, a Supreme Court ruling last year granted them more flexibility in funding and airing often hard-hitting issue ads right up until Election Day. [...]

As for MoveOn.org, which has endorsed Obama, Hogue said it would enthusiastically unite with the other groups behind Clinton if she carried the nomination into a general election showdown with the presumptive GOP nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain.

What's different this year than four years ago? For one thing, election law is a bit looser allowing more groups to coordinate with each other, while still not able to coordinate with candidates. But also, the political environment is much different than it was in 2004.

"In '04 the right mobilized its base and its resources," Bob Borosage...said in an interview. "Liberals mobilized, although we were still building at the time. Well, we've continued to build and expand and gotten more enthusiastic and more mobilized and their coalition has collapsed." [...]

"The progressive infrastructure was really evolving in '04," said Iliyse Hogue, campaign director for MoveOn.org Political Action. "Now what we've got is not only really good establishment roles, but also the kind of relationships and trust and confidence in each other that comes from working together in the trenches."

While the level of cooperation among the groups is impressive, each of them fills its own niche with its own set of goals. Some highlights from the press conference:

The AFL-CIO plans to focus on mobilizing 13 million union members in battleground states. They intend to spend $53.4m to fund a communications effort with union members to get across the message that John McCain represents Bush's third term. To that end they've launched the excellent McCain Revealed campaign. Promised Karen Ackerman: "Everywhere McCain goes working Americans will be there to confront him on his economic policies."

Women's Voices Women Vote plan to focus their mobilization effort on unmarried women who now make up 26% of the voting age population. For the first time ever, single women make up the same share of the population as married women and they are overwhelmingly pro-change and pro-Democratic. As Paige Gardener put it: "Unmarried women will be to Democrats in 2008 what evangelicals were to Republicans in 2004."

Rock The Vote, as you can imagine, will be targeting young people with a goal of registering 2 million new voters between the ages of 18-29. Registration is the biggest barrier to this group's voting; 82% that are registered actually do vote in the presidential election and to that end, Rock The Vote has launched an easy to use online reg tool, which users are offered the moment they hit the homepage. So far in 2008, we've seen unprecedented participation by young people; in state after state, youth participation is either doubling, tripling or quadrupling that of 4 years ago. Rock The Vote is uniquely qualified to tap into that excitement to translate to Democratic victory in November.

There's more...

People appear to have developed a collective amnesia about the AUMF vote. Not only have they forgotten about the situation in the country at the time but have also forgotten that they supported a candidate four years ago who not only voted for the AUMF but was also insisting that "had he known then what he knew now" (2002 and 2004) he still would have voted the same way. Remember Kerry sent out James Rubin to peddle this line.(Contrast that with Hillary's response to Pumpkin head Russert at the time" Tim had we known then what we know now there would have been no vote) The irony is that not only did we enthusiastically support Kerry  we now want to put weight on his judgment re Obama.
 Let us just revisit 2002-at that time the conventional wisdom in Washington was that Saddam had WMDs. This could have been debunked by our friend Rockefeller and company of the intelligence committee by holding public hearings on the issue and inviting experts(Remember Daschle was the majority leader at the time.)There was no need for Graham to make a big speech all he had to do was what is expected in a democracy-  hold hearings where everyone would have learnt what the UN knew - that based upon the interviews of the Hussein son in laws , Iraqis had destroyed their weapons stockpile . The UNMOVIC was unable to certify this because the level of proof was not high enough.
  In 2002 a large majority of the US citizenry was demanding metaphysical certitude that Iraq had no WMDS which required intrusive inspections. Under the circumstances it was politically  untenable for a senator from New York to go against the President without public proof of absence of WMDS. A reading of the NIE in private would not have provided her constituents that comfort( incidentally it did not help Rockefeller who wants us to trust his judgment now). At the time the White House arranged special meetings between Condoleeza Rice ( Again this was before she became known as Kind of lies a lot Rice) and Clinton. As Biden has said the President also undertook to come back to the senate for a second vote.
  For a former first lady it was inconceivable that a US president would act the way Bush did. If you guys read her speech given at the time of the vote, it is clear that she thought that she was creating a situation for the inspectors to get in . Dont take my word for it . Read Hans Blix.
 Dont take any one's word about the Levin amendment- read the motion. It clearly cedes US authority to the UN.
 Clinton is to be faulted for trusting that the a President would act in such a reckless manner.Nothing more

There's more...

Move On is joining Edwards and Dodd in calling on Sens Obama and Clinton to show leadership.

Eli Pariser, the group's executive director, told ABC News on Friday that MoveOn.org will expect Clinton and Obama to once again vote against any Iraq war funding that does not include a timeline for withdrawal.

What's more, this time, MoveOn.org wants the top Democratic presidential contenders to speak out "sooner and more vocally."

"People are looking for leadership," said Pariser. "People are happy that they voted against a blank check last time. This time, we want them to speak out sooner and more vocally."

I find it amazing that Obama has let Edwards become a stronger antiwar leader. What the hell is he thinking?

There's more...

[Crossposted at What's the Point?]

During the 2004 election season, a campaign by MoveOn.org, Arianna Huffington, and Joe Trippi implored John Kerry to "go big."

The kick-off email began...

Dear MoveOn member,

As George Bush's poll numbers drop, John Kerry is facing an important choice — perhaps the most important choice he'll make in his campaign. He has to decide whether, as some consultants will urge, he should be cautious, or whether he should present a bold agenda for change and rally all Americans around a common vision for our future.

Throughout his life, John Kerry has made a practice of standing up for bold initiatives to provide health care, protect the environment, and guarantee truth-telling in government. Together, we need to let him know that we want him to be his best, boldest self — to go big, ask more from us, and power his campaign on the politics of hope and progress.

[How this relates to Obama, below the fold...]

There's more...