Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nader: I'm surprised Kucinich endorsed Obama, the antithesis of Kucinich

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
MalloyLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:13 PM
Original message
Nader: I'm surprised Kucinich endorsed Obama, the antithesis of Kucinich
On Thom Hartmann (who voted for Nader in 2000)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. Kucinich is no Nader.
Nader never sold out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kokonoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Nader sold out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Nader never sold out because Nader never got in.
He doesn't work within the Democratic party; he just looks in from the outside and yells about how terrible it is.

What he knows about winning elections and governing is about as much as the Chimp knows about science.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
comradebillyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Nader is like a seagull; he flies in, squawks,
shits on every thing squawks some more and flies away.

Didn't realize Kucinich needed Nader's blessing on who he endorsed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #11
29. He seems to only feed every four years or so.
He's a strange bird indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. I didn't like where Nader stood, but I was certain he never flip like Dennis has.
Dennis, when push came to shove, turned out to be just another politician.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skipos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. And Nader is now endorsing a guy he worked to defeat in 2004
People change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. as a Kucinich supporter, I'm shocked too...
...and would never support Obama instead. I suppose this has something to do with Iowa caucus strategies, but I still think it's a bad idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. Exactly.
While I'm sure this is an Iowa caucus strategy, I think it's going to work against Dennis in the long run, because I agree with Nader on this: Obama IS the antithesis of Kucinich. Dennis even seems to acknowledge that with the "one thing in common" remark.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. It's a shot at Hillary.
And with the current bad blood between he and Edwards, it doesn't surprise me.

Hillary is the most un-Kucinich like candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
info being Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
18. Me too. I vow to never send any more money to DK
Too bad I did just weeks ago. Edwards is my guy now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. I finally hit the "unsubscribe" button on the latest Kucinich message in my e-mail inbox.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
5. I agree with Nadar on this point. It surprized me also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. agree. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
21. I'm not surprised. I'm shocked. Dumbfounded. Thoroughly disillusioned.
I'm beginning to think Dennis really lives in Fantasyland, and is losing all touch with reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kokonoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
25. I was in an accident in a Corvair as a child, the axle broke in half.
Everyone knew the car was a piece of shit. Everyone knew. The joke by my discovered relatives was to send my step dad on directions to see unknown family cousins. The upper michigan road drove up a hill 20 feet then down 20 feet. Up and down up and down, then up 30 feet and down. Finally the axle just broke in half. His first book that made him so popular was just an inside joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
9. FUCK NADER! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MalloyLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. What a comeback..too bad Nader is right
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Nader who? About as significant as Alan Keys in my view /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
13. Because the system is what it is, the reality is the nominee will be one of the top 3
leading Democratic nominees:

Obama, Edwards, or Clinton

Out of all those candidates he choose the only candidate in that group who was against the IWR

Yes, Edwards has come out and said it was a mistake, and Clinton is much more evasive on the issue, but the fact is, it was still a bad judgement on their part concerning a significant issue

Obama is a Constitutional EXPERT, and that may have also had something to do with the Kucinich endorsement

More likely it is due to who has the best chance to beat Hillary in Iowa though, and at this moment in time, it is Obama


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MalloyLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. OBAMA still funded the war as Kucinich criticized him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. That may be, but that would never have ended the war, not enough votes
and it WOULD be used against him with the independents

If they REALLY want to end the war, legislation should be produced to repeal the IWR, which would then cause the war powers act to kick in, and thus Congress would then have the power to remove the troops out of Iraq without cutting funding which would play as not wanting to protect the troopsl, and I am convienced that is how the MSM would play it, and the idiots in this country would believe it.

They believed the crap about bush protecting the U.S. from another 9/11, they would also believe the crap that Obama or whoever voted against "troop funding" was trying to not protect the troops

Yes, I know the reality is that bringing them home is the WAY to protect the troops, but until we have full control of Congress we don't have a chance, and the stupidity of the American public has turned enough yet. Hopefully 2008 will represent that shift


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. And Edwards is the antithesis of Nadar. So what? I'm not a bit surprised that
Kucinich asked supporters to cast their second round vote for Obama in the event that he doesn't make the cut (15%) in a given caucus.

Dennis is trying to get into that top 3 position. His most likely rival, in terms of voters, is Edwards, they are fighting for the same voters in much the way that Obama and Clintion are fighting for the same voters.

I don't see it as any big thing. It's the exact same reason Nadar endorsed Edwards. Think about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. I am not sure if I agree that Edwards or for that matter Obama is the antithesis of Nader
I thought on environmental issues they are all pretty in sync

Other issues are debatable, but I don't think antithesis is necessarily the right way to describe the differences


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MalloyLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #28
32. Nader sure tihnks Obama is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Le Taz Hot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #13
27. I am sick to death of the
"Obama was against the war from the beginning" crap. He wasn't even in the Senate at the time and his mentor is Joe Lieberman, for goddess' sake. I don't, for one second, believe he would have voted "No" on the IWR. He sure as hell keeps voting to continue funding. This guy is getting his orders from the DLC and if you think the DLC gives a shit as to which one of their patsies gets the nomination, I have news for you, they don't!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. You don't believe for a second he would have voted "no" on the IWR? He critisized it at the time
Edited on Wed Jan-02-08 01:33 PM by still_one
Why would he critisize it unless he was against it?

Removing funding is political suicide. The way to end the frickn' war is repeal the IWR, which right now doesn't have the votes, as does removing funding for the war.

If you can't get the majority in Congress and the White House, then it is a moot point

If you are upset with the top three leading candidates then vote someone else, but the reality is that the nominee WILL be one of them, and it will come down in 2008 between one of them and the republican candidate, and if you don't think there is a difference between ANY of our candidates verses the republicans, then you should vote for another party

Incidently, he didn't vote for the Iran War vote because he was campaigning, but said he was against it. You probably don't believe that either

The fact is Obama is Constitutional EXPERT, and knows that the IWR was a violation of the War Powers Act, and gave the power to wage war to the executive branch with no Congressional oversight. The crap about Congress can stop funding, would NOT stop the war, that is a joke.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RufusTFirefly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
17. I'm surprised (and disappointed) too
No doubt it's some arcane political calculus. And it may even work. But it doesn't look good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IronLionZion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
19. What were Kooch's reasons? I missed it.
Anyone have a link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaptBunnyPants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
22. It makes tactical sense.
Edwards is the most liberal choice of the front runners. If he doesn't win Iowa, he probably can't win the election. Kucinich wants to knock Edwards out now in order to gain the votes of people who would otherwise vote for the more "electable" choice. He did this the last election too, throwing his support to a more conservative version of Edwards in 2004 to eliminate the Left-wing darling Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knight_of_the_star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. It didn't work then though
And I doubt it will work now. For all the tactical maneuvering Kucinich may have attributed to him now his lack of campaign machinery and ground game in Iowa is going to leave him out in the cold no matter what he does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
24. Nader, the most single-handed person to get Bush elected, (twice)
and this putz listens to those who dictate to get him him to sway a vote!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ronnykmarshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
31. Oh NO!
Dennis has upset the all self important Santa Ralph!

He going to send a caravan of Corvairs to follow Dennis' every move!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stop Cornyn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 02:16 PM
Response to Original message
33. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-02-08 07:52 PM
Response to Original message
35. Didn't look like "endorsement" to me. (We both want change..)
Not: "I support him" not: "I endorse him" Just, we both agree on ONE POINT.

Yes, he did strongly go on to give Obama second place to himself, an arguably strategic second vote for which Dennis could get onto debates and could place him in position to win, if if if...

I would love to have seen Edwards/Kucinich. Who knows. Time heals. We'll see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Czolgosz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-03-08 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
36. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC