Veganism is essentially an effort to reduce harm to animals within reason. It's not perfection, but people who use that label try to reduce harm to other beings within reason.

I personally think that it is a mistake by the vegan community to dilute this argument. They will have more success by sticking with is line of thought. A direct approach.

Apologies, should read:
a lack of stated clarity concerning what the actual outcome is for veganism - Is it specifically targeting "meat eating" or the "mass production of meat" OR are meat eaters being used as pawns in a battle with mass producers of meat?

To answer the part about them being used as pawns. I would say.. Yes probably.
Just a comment on this,

I think by making meat eaters unwilling participants in this cause could be counter-productive to your objectives. Let look at the results of this contest thus far - 80% of the participants were alienated to the cause and there your target market walks away.

Depends on who you talk to. There's a lot of different kinds of vegans.

This isn't unfortunately does a lot to undo the hard work you guys put in as it dilutes the animal rights side of things.

At the end of the day, we're talking about an immoral act here,

Define immoral act - What are speaking about? Unfortunately this also very loosely defined.
Is it eating meat?
Is it commercial production of meat?
Is is the act of purchasing mass produced meat?

And taking it a step further why is it not immoral for vegans to support outlets that stock mass produce meat or meat per se depending on your definition?