Here's an article in Rolling Stone (not exactly a triumphalist Republican magazine) about Moveon.org, explaining why the Democrats will remain electorally impotent for the foreseeable future:

For a political organization that likes to rail against "the consulting class of professional election losers," MoveOn seems remarkably unconcerned about its own win-loss record. Talk to the group's leadership and you won't hear much about the agony of defeat. Wes Boyd -- the software entrepreneur who used his fortune from creating the Flying Toaster screen saver to co-found MoveOn -- blithely acknowledges the need to produce some electoral wins "in the classical sense." But he sees the rise of MoveOn's progressive populism as a moral victory in and of itself...

...Boyd is a whip-smart man with a deep passion for populist democracy. But speaking to him about MoveOn's constituency is like speaking to someone who spends all day in an Internet chat room and assumes the rest of the world is as psyched as he and his online compatriots are about, say, the Lord of the Rings trilogy. He seems to conflate MoveOn with the rest of America. "We see ourselves as a broad American public," he says. "We assume that things that resonate with our base resonate with America."

In fact, there appears to be an almost willful ignorance about who actually composes MoveOn. "We're pretty light on the demographics," Boyd says without apology. "It's funny, when we talk to people in Washington, that's the first question we're asked." He adds with note of self-satisfaction: "We've been largely nonresponsive."

Not to mention non-successful. There's a term for people who gain "moral victories." What is it again...? Oh, yeah--"losers."

I remember getting into long discussions with a single issue (abortion) conservative about 10 years ago. He was content to win "moral victories" by opposing candidates who didn't march in lockstep with his issue, even if that resulted in liberals winning elections. It was absurd. There's a name for those who win "moral victories." They're called "losers."

By withholding supports for conservate candidates who didn't agree with their single issue, they effectively helped elect candidates who would actively work against their issue.

Well, this MoveOn guy, Mr. Boyd sounds a lot like some religious leaders. They would be massively inconvenienced if their divine being of choice actually came by. In a similar fashion, it sounds like MoveOn is happy making "moral victories" rather than actually contributing in any substantial way. What would MoveOn do if Kerry actually got elected? I guess they'd have to disband and Mr. Boyd would have to get a real job.

Larry, your single issue conservative may have had a point. Ie, they only care about opposing abortion. If the Republican genuinely won't contribute to opposing abortion, then there's no real reason to support that candidate. Voting against the candidate is a punishment. Spite can be effective.

OTOH, by electing the liberal, the abortion situation may be made worse which strengthens the abortion issue in the next election cycle.

Still it sounds to me like this guy is just a wee bit nuts. If I were a republican running for election, I couldn't count on him because sooner or later he'll flip out (perhaps over some minor mistake or speech of mine) and vote against me thereafter.

This is classic. The left always seems to believe that average Americans want to overthrow capitalism or support whatever other nutbaggery is on offer from their corner despite massive evidence that hardcore leftism is a one or two percent fringe political persuasion in these United States. I used to be involved in Libertarian politics, which is similarly fringy, but also pretty much free of the delusion of mass popularity. There's something fundamentally delusional about the left-wing mindset, I guess.

I'm reminded of a post-election headline in The Onion:

MoveOn CurlsUp InCorner

"We assume that things that resonate with our base resonate with America."

Said like a true narcissist. When everything you do is based on a fantasy foundation, is it any surprise that their success is also a fantasy?

As for the all-or-nothing anti-abortion true-believers: these people are too stupid to realize that once you get 40%, the remaining 60% becomes much easier to attain, and may be the only way to get to 100%.