Cheerful boos for Hillary

At the YearlyKos convention, the mixed reception for Hillary Clinton is more evidence that the liberal blogosphere might not take sides in the coming Democratic primary.

By Michael Scherer

Read more: Democratic Party, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Dennis Kucinich, Politics, Ralph Nader, Bill Richardson, News, John Edwards, Michael Scherer, bloggers, Barack Obama, 2008 election

AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., enjoys the applause during a breakout session of the YearlyKos convention on Aug. 4.

Aug. 6, 2007 | CHICAGO -- The most self-controlled figure in Democratic politics, Hillary Clinton, seemed to know from the outset that she was walking into a trap. The cavernous ballroom of the Hyatt Regency was filled with about 1,500 liberal bloggers and activists -- the so-called Kossacks, the former Deaniacs, the people-powered Joe Lieberman-bashers who helped reshape the Democratic Party for the 21st century. So when the loud boos finally arrived, a full hour into the Democratic presidential debate at the second annual YearlyKos convention Saturday, and two hours after her arrival at the convention, all she could do was smile. "I've been waiting for this," she told the crowd. "This gives us a real sense of reality with my being here."

Then something happened: The crowd started to laugh. Then it cheered. Then the cheering grew even louder than the booing. Up to that moment, the debate audience had been voicing their disapproval of Clinton for defending Washington lobbyists, whom she allows to contribute money to her campaign unlike her top two rivals, Barack Obama and John Edwards. "A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans," she told them. But now they were voicing their approval, and not because they suddenly agreed with her. Any poll of YearlyKos attendees would almost certainly place lobbyists in a circle of hell just a step or two outside the ones reserved for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Fox News talker Bill O'Reilly and Vice President Dick Cheney.

They were cheering because Clinton had, in her way, acknowledged the views and the legitimacy of the blogging community. This had been her mission from the moment she arrived in Chicago. "Don't tell anybody, but I actually read the blogs," she had joked about an hour before the debate, during a breakout session with hundreds of bloggers and activists. "Don't share that." It was a modest step, to be sure, but it was pitch perfect given the current state of the liberal online community.

The so-called netroots is undergoing a transition of sorts in the wake of the 2006 Democratic victories, when the party leadership effectively adopted the message and tactics of mostly liberal online insurgents. For the first time since the invasion of Iraq, Democrats spoke with a muscular voice against Republican rule and the misbegotten war overseas. Two Senate candidates who garnered early online support, Jim Webb in Virginia and John Tester in Montana, won upset elections that changed control of the legislative branch. The community's chief punching bag, Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, was forced to leave the party. Now, with the most costly Democratic presidential primary in U.S. history on the horizon, the same blogging community finds itself in uncharted territory. Once the outsiders, the lefty bloggers and readers who gather each day online have now become an unmistakable part of the Democratic family. Every presidential candidate, save Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, attended Saturday's YearlyKos debate in Chicago. Democratic Party leader Howard Dean gave a rousing keynote address to the convention Thursday. Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin delivered a video message to the opening day crowd. He declared, "If it weren't for the progressive netroots, I wouldn't be assistant majority leader."

At the same time, much of the frustration that once led Democratic bloggers to wage fierce intraparty battles appears to have dissipated. In its place is a sort of cautious elation at the direction of the country's politics, especially when the topic shifts to the coming presidential election and the Democratic candidates. "I feel no compulsion to pick anybody," confessed Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, the proprietor of DailyKos, the largest liberal blogging community, "because they are all so great."

His broad confidence papered over the many substantive differences that divide the Democratic primary field. Clinton and Obama, for example, appear prepared to leave residual U.S. military forces in Iraq for perhaps years, while Edwards and Bill Richardson seek a more prompt withdrawal. Edwards believes the "global war on terror" is an empty "bumper sticker" phrase, while Clinton embraces its rhetorical value and maintains that America is safer now than it was on Sept. 11, 2001. Obama harps exhaustively on Clinton and Edwards for their initial support of a resolution allowing the Iraq war, which he opposed. He has also recently announced his willingness to preemptively attack Pakistan as part of the effort against al-Qaida. All of the candidates have announced, or will announce, different approaches to establishing universal healthcare.

But with only rare exception, these differences have not become flash points on the liberal blogs, a marked contrast to 2003, when the nascent blogosphere heartily rallied behind a single candidate, Howard Dean, in the primary. Even some of the netroots founding members have begun to take notice. "The bloggers are I think in many ways taking themselves out of the debate by not participating in it," explained Jerome Armstrong, the proprietor of MyDD.com, who co-wrote a book with Moulitsas on Democratic blogging. "They are becoming sort of conflict avoiders in the primary."

Next page: The only candidate who was booed louder than Clinton at Saturday's presidential debate was Dennis Kucinich