On Wednesday, one day after Berniecrat Tim Canova lost a Florida U.S. House primary to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, whose scheming to sabotage Sanders’ bid for the presidency forced her resignation as Democratic National Committee chair, Our Revolution, the newly formed progressive group created by Sanders, offered its condolences in an email.
“Last night was a tremendous night for our political revolution. Out of the five progressive primary campaigns we supported, three were victorious. But we did lose one, a big one, in Florida: Tim Canova against Debbie Wasserman Schultz,” said Jeff Weaver, Our Revoution’s newly installed president, who met Sanders in his 1986 campaign for Vermont governor.
Canova took on the corporate Democrat most despised by the Sanders legions (in June, Wasserman Schultz had tried to delay new federal regulations reeling in predatory payday loans). Backed by Bernie this spring, Canova raised several million dollars from Sanders’ nationwide network. But when Sanders launched Our Revolution last week in a national webcast, and listed some of the candidates they would be supporting this fall, Canova wasn’t among them. Sanders didn’t make any last-minute campaign appearances in Florida either, although Canova was listed among 60-plus candidates on Our Revolution’s website just days before his primary loss. Canova told reporters he left messages on Bernie’s personal phone, but got no reply.
[...] The email ended with a pledge to “take our country back from the billionaire class” and below that, a big red "Contribute" button.
Just how much Our Revolution is going to contribute to sustaining and building a nationwide progressive movement is the big question. This goes beyond Bernie believers who cringed at the last-minute distancing from Canova. When Sanders launched Our Revolution, he promised the group would be led by progressives to shepherd a continuing wave of activism to hold the Democratic Party accountable, and to elect candidates to local, state and federal office.
That high-minded pronouncement didn't come in a vacuum. It came after a majority of the new group’s young staffers—said to be among the best from his presidential campaign—quit after Weaver was given the top job. They may not appreciate that Sanders would want to have someone he trusts overseeing the most valuable mailing list in progressive politics today, the Nation noted. But in their statements they said they didn’t like Weaver's apparent plans to tap big-money donors whose names could be kept secret just like in any other super PAC, and that Weaver wasn’t cut from the same grassroots cloth as their nationwide base.
[link in original] Read the rest at Alternet. It's worth reading.
It appears Canova, like Hendrix, now is experienced. Not exactly congruently experienced, let it be: EXPERIENCED.
Hat tip to an occasional Crabgrass reader for forwarding the link. The item is not alone in documenting "Our Revolution" as "Whose Revolution" and noting its solidarity is cheese cloth.
The Alternet item is a suitable starting point for anyone's websearch.
It appears from general online coverage that the setup of "Our Revolution" as a 501(c)(4) entity for tax purposes constrains ways it may operate, and assures anonymity to big-buck donors who may, that way, have a bigger say on entity policy than one responding to the email solicitation by cutting a fifty buck check; or offering bitcoins.
Aimed primarily at a cottage industry income stream? Aimed to not really step on establishment toes; but to mine a vein of silver not concentrated but extensive, and a mailing list away? Ask that Weaver guy.
We have our own Weavers in Anoka County; but they are not progressive revolutionaries. Not one bit. Business Roundtable, Pawlenty sorts. Mining their own cash flows, at a guess. We know Pawlenty prosperity has been firmly grounded, and Tim's got a Weaver friendship reaching back to law school days.
_______________UPDATE______________
Some readers may recall an earlier post from the end of August, here, where an email thread emerged, stating in part:
From Bob - site author-
I'm just trying to promote progressive candidates - it's unfortunate that the narrowly focused new entity Our Revolution has hijacked a much more widely encompassing movement's hashtag.
My website, SupportOurRevolution.com is not affiliated with Our Revolution. Our Revolution has NOT endorsed Angie Craig. If you see I list BoldProgressives.org as the endorsing organization. I have been promoting #OurRevolution candidates on twitter (@4OurRevolution) - progressive candidates vetted by SEVERAL progressive organizations -- for MANY months before OurRevolution.com was formed.
[...] i registered as a Green on July 12 (after 39 years as a registered Dem). I was disappointed by Jill's VP pick, which, just as Our Revolution has done, narrowly focused her viability, making it impossible for her to get the 15% of the vote to qualify as a 'major party' let alone win the election. But i'll vote for her, because obviously i can't vote for Hillary. Meanwhile, will spend all my energy promoting progressive down-ballot candidates. I am also shifting my 'branding' to http://SupportProgressives.com which pisses the hell out of me, because i spent many months working 12 hour days to do the 700 memes/posts/outreach with #OurRevolution. But whatever it takes to move things forward.
[...] not sure i'm even relevant to your post as i'm not the Our Revolution folks [...] if you think my 15 month-efforts promoting Bernie and down-ballot Berniecrats/Greens/Progressives at @4OurRevolution on twitter and my website SupportProgressives.com, (formerly SupportOurRevolution.com and my reasons for abandoning it) make a good story - i guess go ahead and quote me [...]
here's an interesting blog from someone with the same questions and concerns: FromDC2Iowa ---
http://fromdc2iowa.blogspot.com/2016/08/our-revolution-yes-but-first-some.html
I am thankful for the gentleman's taking time to correspond. Readers have three helpful links from the effort.
Interested readers should also find time to read (reread) Tom Paine. I have tracked down links for online availability of Paine's writings, which I intend to pursue -- which now remains a topic for future posting. All for now.
_____________FURTHER UPDATE______________
The latest updated "SUPPORT PROGRESSIVES" endorsements for Minnesota, per the state-specific link:
http://supportprogressives.com/MN.htm
____________FURTHER UPDATE______________
Another link worth bookmarking, mentioned in the correspondence quoted, but w/o linking, this one:
 |
| quick link |
On the site each item in this screenshot is a hot link to a progressive plank in a quality agenda:
This from the website footer appears to also be a 501(c)(4) organization; in that way similar to the Sanders/Weaver disputed operation; both endorse candidates, lists do not necessarily overlap; and neither is as extensive in endorsements as supportprogressives.com
Fragmentation and lack of a single anchor at this point may not be necessarily bad. Each effort can prosper and progressives can like more than one group and website. It's not like "your party or your excommunication;" as with a prominently known establishment duopoly that shall not (and need not) be named again.