Reply #49: Not really. [View All]

[K-W]

Funny, I wonder how Dennis couldn't even get past Al Sharpton in Delaware...Dennis couldn't even break double digits in his home state of Ohio. It couldn't be that even those who admire Dennis didn't think he was presidential timber, could it?

You mean the swing state of Ohio, where by and large progressives were voting Kerry to try and unseat Bush?

As meaningless as the sharpton kucinich comparison is, I will point out that Al Sharpton was a nationally known figure who was prominant in the media, and is a master of self promotion.

Regardless, you cant possibly derive the conclusion you derived from those numbers, your methodology is rediculous. If Kucinich and Sharpton were the only ones in the race, and each was given an equal opportunity to reach voters and each were given equal party support, then you would have a point.

"the single biggest factor in elections is media treatment and media advertising."
Good thing that's changed since last election, then. Oh, wait.

No, it hasnt changed, which is why progressive candidates will continue to be at a severe disadvantage in elections as long as the party establishment prefers to marginalize them.


"Im sure the corporate media did a bang up job of presenting Kucinich and Nader to all Americans as viable candidates"
Jeeze, the "had they but known" factor.

Wow, cheap rhetoric in place of a substantive response... Im shocked.

Are you seriously trying to argue that the level and quality of information the voters have on the candidates doesnt effect the results?


"one has to completely ignore everything we know about elections in the US"
Geeze, some people sure want to ignore election results and the success Nader had splitting the Democratic vote.

So if I dont prescribe to YOUR interpretation of the election results it means I am ignoring them... right.

As far as Nader splitting the vote, what on earth does that have to do with this discussion?