If Kucinich was POTUS how long would it take before we will be told he isn't progressive?

[wndycty]

If Kucinich was POTUS how long would it take before we will be told he isn't progressive?

[elocs]

1. If wishes were horses, beggars would ride. Same difference. n/t

[Jennicut]

2. He already voted for the HCR bill.

[Uzybone]

25. yep, that finished him in the eyes of the pure and untouched

[Uzybone]

26. yep, that finished him in the eyes of the pure and untouched

[TheWraith]

66. Bing! You got it.

Of course, they would have said it about him long before that.

[asdjrocky]

3. Un-rec.

Why do you want to just stir up shit? Isn't there enough bad stuff going on right now?

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

5. Or the minute he reaffirmed the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith

vote.

[wndycty]

6. That does it HE IS NO PROGRESSIVE!

:kick:

[VMI Dem]

7. Maybe in the pragmatic centrist appeaser world those things are equal.

One of them happens to be bigoted to some of us.

[ProSense]

9. Is that why you referenced "his daddy upstairs"? n/t

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jonnyblitz]

8. sorry but I can't picture Kucinich escalating wars, dismantling

public education and prosecuting whistleblowers.

[FrenchieCat]

11. I can't picture Kucinich as President.

[wndycty]

13. Frenchie!

:kick:

[FrenchieCat]

14. I closed my eyes real tight.......

and still, I couldn't envision it.

Must be my fault! :shrug:

[wndycty]

15. ;)

:kick:

[POAS]

60. Dennis was my mayor

Dennis was my Rep. till I moved out of his district.

I supported and voted for him in both cases.

Closing my eyes real tight.....trying .....trying...


Nope, can't see it either!

[proteus_lives]

28. Ditto.

[Greyhound]

67. It's good to know your limits.

[dionysus]

17. and i can't picture him getting elected dogcatcher outside of his district..

aquaman stands a better chance of being president.

:shrug:

[OnyxCollie]

86. If Aquaman has a better chance of

closing Guanatamo
closing Bagram
ending the Iraq War
ending the Afghanistan War
restoring FISA and prosecuting telecoms
prosecuting bush and cheney for war crimes

than our current president, he's got my vote in 2012.

AQUAMAN in 2012!!!

[vaberella]

"The first time he compromises in order to advance his agenda."

I don't understand the people who voted the above. I say this because I thought his agenda was to promote progressive ideas and actions. So then what becomes his agenda if it was not that?!

Lastly...I thought the marking of a good leader was compromises. Sorry to say people...every politician in the past and now and the future will compromise unless they're a dictator or monarch with absolute power.

[CakeGrrl]

16. I did choose that option, because my interpretation of it

was that the President, who has a bigger picture than the blogosphere and knows better than any of us how much resistance he or she would face from Congress, would understand that they can't just go in there and "lay down the law", so to speak. And while the President understands, probably even more so than they imagined on the campaign trail, what it REALLY takes, the perception is that he or she isn't doing what they promised, hence they're failing the people who voted them in.

It wouldn't take long, because Kucinich would NOT get much Congressional support for his agenda.

Let's be real - Kucinich couldn't get elected by a majority of the American electorate.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

84. You're absolutely right

But the point of that poll option is to say that some people will push for DK (as they currently do) and then abandon him the moment he compromises even 1% on an issue in order to achieve the other 99%. I take the poll as a question for how long would it take DU to throw DK under the bus, not how long would it take DK to "sell out".

[stray cat]

12. 5% of the US would be happy with him and the other 95% would say he is anti-American

and in the meantime we would clearly no longer be democratic but a dictatorship as there is no way Kucinich would ever be elected president.

Of course, if we didn't have a congress and senate with just Kucinich's as well nothing would ever get passed.

[yurbud]

18. so the premise is Obama is a progressive superhero but we are too demanding

who twisted his arm to appoint a union-busting, school privatizing, standardized test shilling, corporate scammer as Secretary of Education?

Who made him send Rahm to do backdoor deals to weaken health care reform and financial reform?

Who forced him to fill his cabinet with 95% DLCers who represent a minority within the party and definitely only represent a minority of views of Democratic voters?

[Enthusiast]

73. Ya done good bud.

You are right on!

[TheKentuckian]

19. Other: When and if he demonstrated a regular pattern of selling out priorities

and basic principles for little or nothing in return.

I have very little compunction against busting whoever is being a sellout/whore/chump/sucka/liar/you name it if the people's business isn't taken care of.

Politicians shouldn't be trusted which kinda makes this a flawed question and concept. The fuckers should be watched, questioned, and pushed 24/7 and 365. I don't care who they are fucking or if they shit on their spouses but on the job their ass is ours.

Fuck some trust, squeeze them till they break or give. SQUEEZE.

It doesn't matter which politician it is other than the one willing and capable of serving the people well and foremost. The pol that doesn't work for the people sucks monkey ass, whatever face they come with.

These people's entire function is to be a conduit between the people, the principles we espouse, the stewardship of our land and resources, and the rule of law. The further they slip from that the crappier they get.

[totodeinhere]

20. Never, because Dennis really is a progressive.

And his actions would prove it.

[wndycty]

23. Oh yeah, right now that he has adjusted his position on abortion. . .

:kick:

[NorthCarolina]

41. Good grief. We're down to RW talking points on DU now?

[tledford]

45. What do you mean, "now?" :-)

:hi: from Greensboro...

[NorthCarolina]

46. Good point!

:hi: from Charlotte.

[frylock]

21. the moment he invited a known homophobe to pray at his inauguration..

next question.

[muffin1]

24. +1,000,000 nt

[totodeinhere]

36. By the standards that some here put up nobody is a progressive.

I don't believe in litmus tests. If he does just one thing that I disagree with that doesn't necessarily cross him off my list. No politician is perfect and I don't expect to agree with any of them 100% of the time. But overall Dennis is one of the good guys and if you go issue by issue he is much more progressive than the average Democratic member of Congress.

[frylock]

39. i'm a kucinich supporter..

some want to call him out on his views on abortion. i say he changed for the better. if people want to call that political expediency, then so be it. but at least it's a change in the right direction which i can't say obama has done.

[Phx_Dem]

22. Trick question. He would never be President.

[Dark]

27. RIght out of the gate, he'd be branded a communist. Probably a terrorist too.

nt

[WI_DEM]

29. I don't know if DK would compromise and as such nothing would be accomplished.

I know some would say good, but politics is the art of compromise at times and I'm not sure that his agenda could pass.

[Radical Activist]

30. Before taking office.

As soon as he announced a cabinet member less liberal than him. That's how it worked for Obama.

If Kucinich were President a lot of people would be thrilled by his constant battles with Congress and his dramatic speeches denouncing the corporate powers working against him. But he wouldn't have half the progressive legislative accomplishments that Obama has achieved.

[IndianaGreen]

31. Never

What you see is what you get with Dennis. There are no surprises!

[The Hope Mobile]

63. +1 He is a progressive - not just someone who claims to be. nt

[Starbucks Anarchist]

72. So him voting for the HCR bill wasn't a surprise?

[Bluenorthwest]

32. They'd shoot him prior to inauguration, like Bobby, he

would not be allowed to actually draw near the office. So the question is moot. To answer your actual, passive aggressive hidden code question, I counted Obama as clearly not a Progressive when he employed known hate preachers, including Donnie McClurkin, to be his surrogates at campaign events. Donnie is famous for declaring war on gay people, because he claims gay people 'are trying to kill our children.' Obama called him a good man, and Michelle said he is her favorite singer. Does that sound Progressive to you? Can you give some arguments? Upon what occasions would you frame slander of yourself or your community as 'progressive'? Are there times when you would do so?

[The Hope Mobile]

64. True! nt

[HughMoran]

33. The fact that 23 said never

Gave me the biggest belly laugh ever.

Some people really think they're on a team and it's "US" versus "THEM".

:rofl:

[Douglas Carpenter]

34. one cannot really know or compare with Obama because for Kucinich or someone who thought a lot like

Kucinich to be elected President, such sweeping and dramatic changes in the nation's political dynamics would have to have already occurred to such an extent that that the political culture of the country would accept dramatic and genuinely progressive changes. As it now stands, someone significantly more progressive than President Obama would be so completely marginalized by the powers that dominate the media and both political parties that they would be unable to mount a credible campaign.

Anyone who had their eyes and ears open at all, knew from the very beginning that candidate Obama was a centrist, "DLC-lite" type candidate. What on earth did people think he meant way back in 1984 when running as a candidate for the U.S. Senate when in his national debut, he spoke of "no red states, no blue states"?

"Hope and Change" are hardly specific proposals like slashing the military budget and implementing single-payer health care for all. Except for some vague and nondescript rhetorical flourishes that career politician have always employed, candidate Obama never really pretended to be anything but a career, establishment Democratic Party career politician. This was always crystal clear to all but the willfully blind.

I supported Obama in 2008 - not because I thought for one single second that he was going bring social democracy to America or even reestablish the Great Society and the New Deal - or because I thought that he would bring a just and lasting peace to the Middle East or alter the fundamental nature of American Power or challenge the power of the corporations and the banks - Frankly, I find in awesome to imagine that anyone could possibly have been that naive. I supported Obama because the alternative was to have the country run by a party now dominated by people who think a lot like the crazies on Fox News and that was certainly far, far worse and apocalyptically dangerous.

[suzie]

55. +1

[Lydia Leftcoast]

81. He never had me fooled

Sarah Palin was the main reason I voted for Obama.
Otherwise, he always seemed fake to me.

I kept saying before the election, "We need an FDR, but we're getting a Tony Blair."

And I was right.

[TriMera]

35. Unrec

Pathetic :puke:

[HughMoran]

49. Lord Kucinich

How dare they!!11!!one!11!

[salguine]

52. I think using the little animated barfing guy is pathetic, myself.

[mmonk]

37. Why Kucinich?

[Catherina]

38. The difference between Kucinich and Obama

is that Kucinich has a long progressive record and there's never been any confusion about Kucinich being a member of the DLC.

Obama, otoh, was never one of the progressive politicians. He came out of nowhere with a long record of voting *present*.

Once a progressive, always a progressive. Kucinich is a principled politician with a long record to back up his words with action. It's unfortunate he caved to Obama a few months ago and I hope he never does so again. Shame on you.

[HughMoran]

44. a long record of voting *present*

Here we go again with the Republican talking points from a so-called 'progressive'. :eyes:

Kucinich caves ANY time he needs to actually get something done! :rofl:

[Enthusiast]

74. It is a word for word

Republican talking point and this is coming from a Kucinich supporter. Come on, Catherina, you know better than to spread the right wing lies, I mean talking points.

[Arkana]

47. Oh lord.

You're not fucking serious, are you?

[HughMoran]

48. Skinner flipped out on another poster using right-wing talking points the other day

What's with this shit?

[frazzled]

50. A long progressive record that includes ...

voting against abortion rights for many years? I don't mean equivocally: until he decided to run for President he voted 100% with the right-to-lifers, believing (as a Catholic) that "life begins at conception."

I know he has changed his position, but one can't consider that he has a "long progressive record" on all issues.

[Enthusiast]

75. Love that Zappa quote.

And damn, does it ever seem appropriate today, maybe like never before.

[tranche]

79. When you say "long record to backup up his words", does that include an actual bill by any chance?

[martymar64]

40. Jeez, more push polling?

You guys must have a real hard-on for anybody left of your "moderate" little world to play these silly little games as much as you do.

Get a life.

[NorthCarolina]

42. I sincerely wish we had been given the opportunity to find that out. eom

[tledford]

43. yep, that finished him in the eyes of the pure and untouched

I'm not sure posting that twice was enough.

[salguine]

51. if he "compromises to advance his agenda", it's no longer his agenda, it's someone else's.

[howaboutme]

53. Kucinich and Nader and Sanders

are not korporatists, and korporatism my friends is where the real threat originates.

[denimgirly]

54. One thing about K. he doesn't sell out the people. Sadly the rest of Dems and all Repubs have.

That is one thing i respect about K. and about 3 other democrats who are true progressives...they actually care about moving the country forward...the rest are just identical to republicans -- selling their vote for $$, and that includes the WH sadly. What is frustrating is that K stands no chance to get into the WH because he wont sell out. Shame. I understand why Obama has to sell out to the right (which is Corporate america) all the time but it gets frustrating when you just want some useful scraps for the rest of us. I just wish he would fight genuinely instead of prefuming up for another speech. Here is hoping K, or Weiner, or Grayson run as a challenger in '12....but i also understand when they get into the WH they too must ocmpromise their values but at least with them they wouldnt sell out entirely...my thoughts are Hillary probably wouldnt sold out as much as Obama but most definitely she would have giving to corporate america on more things than these genuine big 3 progressives. America is broken and the suckers are us: "Privatize the gains, and socialize the losses" -- endorsed by the Right and eagerly accepted by the left.

[suzie]

56. Kucinich sold out to the Catholic Church for years so that he could be elected.

Then suddenly, he wants play like he's running for the presidency and overnight he sells out the Catholic viewpoint so that he can go out and speak before Democratic audiences without being booed or picketed.

And people want to say he won't sell out?

Dennis Kucinich's photo should be next to "sellout" in the dictionary.

[mix]

57. u r a one trick pony nt

[Whisp]

58. I will always love thee, Denny

People don't realise that there is a huge machine that rolling along for a long time now and no matter what the best of intentions are stopping it with one person is just not possible.

the only way for true change is for torches and pitchforks, out in the streets screaming your heads off. Thats the only thing the great powers behind thrones and presidents are afraid of... us.

[JVS]

59. Probably after his chief of staff calls progressives "retards"

When do you think that would happen?

[great white snark]

68. "When do you think that would happen?"

Maybe after a liberal blogger questions him on his abortion flip-flop?

:shrug:

[depakid]

61. You know, the fact that lame rationalizations like this are even posted

shows any astute and objective observer that the administration's got a problem with its constituencies. The fact that they're posted by some of the more diehard, do no wrong sorts of supporters only accentuates that the issues are serious enough to be causing consternation.

This is pretty basic stuff that anyone can pick up in psychology, sociology or cultural anthropology classes.

You don't see these sorts of things with movements, groups and factions that are gaining support, increasing in cohesion and/or on a roll- but they're very characteristic of groups that are splintering or in the midst of some decline.

[Forkboy]

71. Whenever Obama struggles they bust out the DK whipping posts.

Obama gave a speech last week that fell flat with a lot of people, so diversion is a must. It's not even a conscious thing with many of them, which makes it even sadder. It's so obvious that I'm embarrassed that a couple people I like in this thread can't see this, so blinded are they in their own Obama infatuation. This thread is the online equivalent of a bunch of kids trying to act cool in the high school cafateria. :)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

82. You've noticed that pattern too?

Heh-heh.

[Enrique]

62. regardless, Obama isn't progressive n/t

[skipos]

65. Would Ron Paul be his VP (as Kucinich said he was thinking about in 2008)? nt

[wndycty]

69. Sunday morning kick

:kick:

[treestar]

70. It would not take long at all

He would still have to deal with Congress.

It would be come apparent he is not a dictator either, and that just bullying from the pulpit does not turn the POTUS into a dictator. He would be trashed for not being a "leader" with the same rationalizations.

[quaker bill]

76. Before inauguration,

He would recommend someone for a position somewhere who did not pass the progressive test.

[KoKo]

77. LOL's "wndycty"...I didn't vote in your poll because you've NEVER been a Kucinich Supporter

...and in fact have always supported views that were the TOTAL OPPOSITE to Kucinich!

GOOD LUCK WITH THAT HACK POLL! :rofl:

[wndycty]

78. SInce you know me so well. . .on what issues am I opposite Kucinich. . .

. . .you made the accusation now back it up.

[KoKo]

80. Anyone can Google you on DU to see your post history...

You've never been for Kucinich. You've not posted anything against him...but have supported every DLC'er who is in our face. You are DLC. And, that's your right to be that...but to post about Kucinich is low...since you've never supported him like many of us here on DU.

It was FLAME BAIT...but I didn't alert the mods...because frankly, it wasn't worth it.

[Forkboy]

83. There must be some, or no need for this thread in the first place.

:shrug:

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

85. This couldn't be less true.

So unless you'd like to cite some evidence, I'm going to have to completely disregard your comment.