A quick 2008 Primary note : I'm taking Kucinich to Gore

[mdmc]

Hey DU.
More then ever, we need a party and a candidate that is not completely in the pocket of the corporations.

That candidate is Dennis Kucinich.

I know the meme... he can't win. I agree.

But I have faith in his ideals. I want our party to embrace those ideals.

If our party and our candidate run on a Kucinich influenced platform, we win even if we lose.

If Clinton, Edwards, Kerry, Clark, Richardson, Gore, Oboma, or Bayh win the nomination, I would like them to run as progressive liberals. I hope to influence the party by supporting Kucinich in the primary.

So I am hoping for Gore, and I will support the Dem nominee. I will want a progressive platform in 2008.

[catabryna]

1. When Kucinich is on my ballot...

in the primaries, I vote for him, exactly for the reason you mention; his influence on our platform. In addition, he most closely mirrors my positions on the issues. Yes, I know he can't win, but he still gets my vote. And, like you, I am also hoping to see Gore jump in the race.

Edited to add: What a great picture of Andy!

[groovedaddy]

2. Work now to elect delegates to the 2008 convention

Those delegates will craft the party platform. I too, would love to see the values/priorties/ideals of Dennis Kucinich be an integral part of our platform. It's "save the republic" time folks!

[skipos]

3. I have never understood the "sending a message" vote

"I hope to influence the party by supporting Kucinich in the primary."

How did supporting Kucinich in 04 "influence the party?" Or supporting Clark or Sharpton, who did better than Kuc?

What message did Nader 2000 voters send to Democrats and how did it influence anything in a remotely positive way?

I am not trying to piss on the parade, I just don't get it. :shrug: Why not support someone who a. could actually win the primary, and b. would actually win the general election?

IMO, the more no-chance-in-hell candidates enter, the more it is going to divide up the non-Hillary vote and lead to a Hillary nomination and a GOP win.

[mdmc]

5. we ended up with Kerry instead of Lieberman

Without the Dean / Kucinich / Sharpton / Braun influence, we would have had a choice between Lieberman and Graham (or Gerhardt / Edwards).

We were able to get a liberal to represent our party.

Sure we lost, but at least we stood our ground. Kerry would be mad viable in 2008 if he had really taken on the (at the time popular) war.

If Hillary Clinton wins the nomination, and runs on a platform that was influenced by Kucinich, then we will win.

I would be very happy with Clinton running against the drug war, death penalty, and preemptive war. That would be a campaign worthy of support.

It is not that Kucinich is God, but rather his principles need to be given a voice of power. I want to give his platform support.

I will support whomever we think will do best in the general, the winner of the Dem primary (Clark, Gore, Kerry, Edwards, yadda, yadda). Until then, I will support the real liberal. If someone like Clinton, Kerry, or Gore wins Kucinich's support, then BRING IT ON! :patriot:

[JNelson6563]

17. A good summary, worth consideration

Sure we lost, but at least we stood our ground.

Let's put that on the tombstone of every purist we know. They'll be as helpful from the grave as in life with that dumbass attitude.

Julie

[Strawman]

18. How is he being a purist?

He says he will support whomever the party nominates, but wants to influence the platform and nominee's positions on the issues by supporting the primary candidate who represents his views on the issues.

You have a Dean avatar. Isn't that what the Dean people did in 2004? Dean was unambiguous on the most salient issue (the war), early on, when most others were deliberately ambiguous. That sent a message from the grassroots that moved others to more critical positions on the war. Early support for DK could do the same when our pols want to stake out ambiguous positions once again on key issues.

[JNelson6563]

19. Let me broaden that

I'd also say it is applicable to one issue voter types too.

Additionally, let me say I don't believe the phrase used by poster I replied to was truly applicable in the situation they cited. I mean really! John Kerry represented Dem unwillingness to compromise??? Um, he *was* the compromise candidate.

So whether that poster is any kind of purist is anyone's guess, that is immaterial IMO. The phrase they used is still a perfect sentiment for the tomb of a purist.

Julie

[Strawman]

20. Who's "they"

I can't find that phrase you say "they used" in any of mdmc's posts unless I'm just missing it. I also can't find where mdmc says "John Kerry represented Dem unwillingness to compromise???"

But I can find this:
"If Clinton, Edwards, Kerry, Clark, Richardson, Gore, Oboma, or Bayh win the nomination, I would like them to run as progressive liberals. I hope to influence the party by supporting Kucinich in the primary."

and this...
"I would be thrilled if we are represented in 2008 by Gore / veep (hell, even Joementum!), running on a progressive 2008 platform."


Again, how is that being a "purist?" Note the willingness to support "even Joementum."

I suspect you just want to label all Kucinich supporters as uncompromsing, irrational "purists" regardless of their actual expressed rationales for supporting him.

[JNelson6563]

21. Your suspicions re: motive trip you up

I have know idea where you pull the ASS-umption regarding Kucinich supporters....talk about talking it personal on a new level!!

"The phrase" I was commenting on is the one I cited in my original post in this thread.

Quit trying to make my post into a personal attack, buck the current DU trend!

Julie

[mdmc]

24. actually, i is better to lose, then to win alla Zell Miller

Just cause you win, doesn't mean that you actually win.

When the corporations own all, true change is a beautiful, rare thing.

If we wanted to win in 2004,we could have easily cross endorsed Bush / Cheney. We definitely would have won then.

[sandnsea]

25. What kind of platform is that

I cannot figure out how anyone could think a Presidential campaign that will be labeled as 'pampering criminals' would win. Honestly, where do you live?? Do you pay attention to ANYBODY outside your own circle of friends? I just don't get it. People are concerned about health care, jobs, environment, and terrorism - even a recent DU poll didn't have Iraq as the #1 concern, let alone the drug war or the death penalty. How could you possibly think that would be a winning platform?

And I'll tell you what else I don't get, Kerry did have Kucinich's support, for one. He was also against the death penalty and preemptive war. He did speak of changing drug policy, providing treatment instead of prison, etc. It didn't matter to anybody on the left. They all dissed him as if he was as right wing as Joe Lieberman.

Makes no sense to me at all.

[mdmc]

26. The true progressive vision might not be popular

but it still deserves consideration. The neo-cons were popular in 2004, the DLC in 1996. Perhaps America is ready for liberals.

"Pampering criminals" is what we have now.

[sandnsea]

27. That isn't any progressive's platform

You just pulled some stuff out of thin air that very few people in this country are even concerned about. You may as well say someone should run on saving fairy shrimp and needle exchange. See how ready America is for liberals when you give them choices like that. Good grief.

[mdmc]

28. well , feel free to do your own thing

I'll be supporting the liberal. Peace and low stress. I hope we get to run Gore!

[mdmc]

6. or to put it another way

I will be pissed if we are represented in 2008 by Gore / Lieberman, running on their 2000 platform.
I would be thrilled if we are represented in 2008 by Gore / veep (hell, even Joementum!), running on a progressive 2008 platform.

[mdmc]

7. I think that Hillary can win with a Kucinich inspired platform

:patriot:

[Strawman]

16. Those are misinterpreted empirical examples

Because progressives were divided between multiple different candidates, diluting their influence. In 2004, Dean started early and was the standard bearer, but even then the liberal vote was splintered between Dean, DK, and Michael Moore types who went for Clark under the "most electable closet liberal strategy" he espoused.

And I think Dean's early momentum did in fact translate into influence within the party. Who's the chairman after all? He influenced Kerry and he could have had more influence in the primary process if people like me had only not listened to "electability" arguments and panicked after "the scream" and jumped ship to Kerry. In alot of ways though, Dean was a bad fit as a liberal standard bearer. But his campaign showed liberals the kind of grassroots internet based strategy they could employ. I'd love to see Kucinich perched in the place where Dean was in January 2004 with early money from small donors and early buzz from liberal internet activists.

I think Dennis can bring the left-wing of the party together and even bring back some Green defectors if he gets out in front very early as he is attempting to do as the liberal standard bearer. Last time he was "drafted" by people like Studs Terkel later in the game. By that time Dean had gotten alot of traction with people like me, who should have been for Kucinich.

If liberal Dems split between Kucinich, Edwards, Obama, Gore, or go Green, etc., as they have in the past, you're right, they won't have any influence again.

And if Dennis doesn't use his capital wisely, if it appears that he cannot win himself but can stop Hillary Clinton or someone on the center-right by throwing support to one of the more liberal candidates who are still viable in the race and fails to do that, then it may be a wasted opportunity as well.

But at least this gives us a chance. Liberal bloc unity is really the only strategy that might actually give liberals clout against the Wall Street interests that call the shots in the party. And unlike the others he will not sell us out. You won't see him going and campaigning for Joe Lieberman like Obama did. You wouldn't see him caving on his vote on the Iraq war like Edwards did. And you won't see him cheerleading the Eisenhower Republicanism of the Clinton administration like Al Gore did or nominating Lieberman as his VP like Al Gore did. All the other candidates that the liberal bloc might unite behind are compromised.


The question becomes then who to unite behind. I say unite behind the guy who won't sell out our principles. The risky assumption here is that he will be skillful in using the political capital that liberal bloc unity could give him rather than stubborn and quixotic. I think there is some reason to believe that he will play the influence game rationally. He has forged alliances in the past with other candidates e.g. with Edwards in Iowa. And he was a team player for Kerry during the general. Also the question is will that unity remain if Dennis decides to endorse someone else at some point in an anybody but Hillary or Bayh type of race? But having Dennis decide how to make use of that kind of clout would be a nice "problem" to confront that can be dealt with later on.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

4. Kucinich should be president

he grasps what is needed in the world today. Too bad cynics automatically decide that he can't be elected, and don't even listen to his ideas. This is one reason we keep on having the same old same old.

[impeach them]

12. He speaks to the majority

I don't understand who gets to decide he is not electable.

So far only he and vilsack are running and no one is talking about Vilsack.

Dennis was right about the war in Iraq from the beginning.

He is for Universal Health care- this issue affects so many. The majority are for Universal Health care, and with people choosing between food and medicine, I think people might go to the polls based on this issue alone.

[LittleClarkie]

14. If he speaks to the majority

Why can't the majority ever remember his name?

[rinsd]

36. "who gets to decide he is not electable"

When a guy's best performance in the last primary circuit was 26% when he was the only candidate to even visit the state, the people have decided he is not electable.

[MOB]

8. Kucinich is in the pocket

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Kucinich is totally playing the same game as Kerry, Gore and Edwards specifically. He's their biggest friend. If he runs, Hillary, Barack and Dean cannot claim that they are "most liberal candidate" - just like what happened to Dean in '03/'04.

[LWolf]

9. Er....

I'm searching my thesaurus for a more acceptable term than the one floating in my head.........

here are some: unconscious, uninformed, unaware of who Kucinich is, what he stands for, or his motivations.

I hope you get a chance to meet and chat with the man sometime, and get to know him a little better.

Meanwhile, welcome to DU!

[MOB]

10. Huh?

scuse me, is that directed at me?

You know, even if you work for some one like Kerry or Hillary this year, it's pretty hard to make the argument that Democrats are the party of fiscal responsibility with Dennis the Menance in the race.

Organizer: "yeah hey vote for Kerry. He's fiscally responsible."

Swing voter: "but isn't Kerry in the same party as Kucinich?"

Organizer: "yeah, so what?"

swing voter: "well didn't Kucinich nearly bankrupt the city of Cleveland?"

Organizer: "well, yeah, I guess he did, but what does that have to do with Kerry?"

voter: "how can Kerry claim to be fiscally responsible when such a fiscally irresponsible leader like Kucinich is in his party?"

[MOB]

11. Just think...

Im not exactly against Kerry running again, I just think Kerry should be a man and be upfront and honest to the public about the people who are working for his cause in the primaries.

[TahitiNut]

34. "I just think Kerry should be a man" ... God forbid he be a woman, huh?

The tombstone is so richly-deserved ... and should be automatic for such mindless rhetoric.

[mdmc]

38. silly

how are you still here bro?

[TahitiNut]

13. Right-wing canard.

The city was already headed toward bankruptcy when Kucinich took office, and financial advisers were telling him to sell the city-owned electric company to stave it off. He refused this power play and the banks called in the city's loans, triggering bankruptcy. But the utility remains public, and, according to a study by Cleveland magazine, the utility's low rates saved customers about $195 million over the past 10 years. In fact, he got back into Congress in 2002 campaigning on the success of his effort to keep that utility.

http://www.realchange.org/kucinich.htm

I personally regard that as a "Profile in Courage" ... he did the right thing.

[LWolf]

22. Yes, that's directed at you.

I think I've moved beyond needing to moderate my impressions, lol.

:rofl:

That argument has gone beyond ignorance, moving into willful deceit.

Trying to paint Kucinich as fiscally irresponsible based on his performance as mayor of Cleveland is laughably nonsensical. Trying to suggest that "swing" voters swing on the issue of fiscal responsibility is, as well. The republican party is notoriously irresponsible when it comes to the federal budget.:eyes:

I have no idea how Kerry manages to come into the conversation at all. :shrug:

[cooolandrew]

30. Kucinich ' I'm rady, I'm ready right now' if your mind can conceive it you can achieve it...

[helderheid]

40. Oh brother. Have a nice stay.

:hi:

[mdmc]

15. Welcome to DU

Kucinich is progressive. I have nothing against Kerry Gore Edwards et al. No bubble burst here.

[Radical Activist]

23. Do you have any evidence to back that up?

The corporations weren't exactly lining up at his door to give him money.
Dean on the other hand...

[cooolandrew]

29. Kucinich ' I can win without outspending, this time it's not about money it's about the truth'

[mdmc]

31. the truth will set you free

:kick:

[madokie]

32. I like your way of thinking

Dennis would be good paired with Big Al. Dennis might me small in size and I learned early in life dynamite comes in small packages. I keep reading that Dennis is unelectable and all that but I wouldn't rule him out in his own right, hes a fighter and a winner.
And he is smarter than a whip and he has a lovely wife. :-)

[mdmc]

33. I just got an email from her

:kick:

[TahitiNut]

35. I'll vote for Kucinich whether on the ballot or not.

I regard the "unelectable" meme to be despicable ... it's cowardly and unprincipled. If, after eight years of appalling fascism and Quisling appeasement, the Democratic party couldn't get even a ham sandwich elected to the Presidency, then they're not even trying to offer an alternative. God forbid the 'bar' should ever be set any lower - the public perception of the GOP is lower than at any time in the last 60 years. What's truly appalling is that the alternatives are not presented in a clear and unambiguous way. Kucinich is that alternative. That he's treated as a leper by even those who give lip service to the same values and principles is an indication of deep-seated hypocrisy and moral cowardice on the 'left,' imho.

[mdmc]

37. well, well, well

:hi: TN
:kick:

[helderheid]

39. You took the words out of my mouth. Recommended!

edited to add

Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours

[Crazy Janey]

41. Gore is the only Dem. who would win

We need Gore to run. No one else has his experience, knowledge, wisdom, or intelligence. He's already proven to us that he can win. Let's do what we have to do to get him to run.

[mdmc]

42. Welcome to DU

how do we get Gore to run?:kick:

[mdmc]

43. I am not too sure any more

:shrug:

[mdmc]

44. kick

for my growth