Kucinich is the best candidate

[dpbrown]

Kucinich not only has the best core, liberal Democratic positions on issues I care about: ending the death penalty, universal single-payer health care, making the Pentagon accountable to the taxpayers, demilitarizing space - he also has the best chance to beat Bush by greater than the Black Box margin of theft.

Kucinich will bring with him most if not all of the Greens who voted Nader in 2000 (and the Greens likely won't run a candidate if Kucinich is the nominee). That means 3 million extra votes for Kucinich, and if nothing else changed, that would mean a 4 million vote lead over Bush in November 2004.

But the 40/40/20 rule gives us an idea of how many voters will stick with Kucinich. Forty million of Gore's votes in 2000 were "core" Democrats, according to this rule - they're not going anywhere.

Of the 10 million who voted Gore but who considered themselves "independent" voters, applying a bell curve, we see that half, or 5 million of them, voted for Gore but wished he were more liberal, or put off voting for Nader to avoid hurting Gore. So those 5 million will belong to Kucinich as well.

That puts Kucinich up against Bush with 48 million pretty sure votes, and Bush only got 50 million TOTAL in 2000 - he won't get that many again.

But it gets better - there are still 5 million votes left over THAT ALL WENT TO GORE IN 2000.

That means that to cover a 2 million vote gap, Kucinich has 5 MILLION PREVIOUS DEMOCRATIC VOTERS to do it.

Compare the other frontrunners - Dean and Clark are banking on remaking the Democrats over into blustering, militaristic "fighters" in order to appeal to the former Bush voters they will need in order to beat Bush in 2004.

Kucinich nearly matches the Bush take in 2000 at the starting gate. He could lose 1.5 million previous Gore voters and still beat Bush.

Every other candidate needs ALL Gore's votes, PLUS previous Bush voters to win.

And a tie is a loss.

Republicans have gotten better at stealing elections - 8 million or more votes will be tabulated by Black Boxes with no paper trail in 2004. And electoral votes have shifted to Bush states.

Nominating Dean or Clark is asking for a repeat of 2000 - a tie, caused by forcing the candidates to compete for the SAME VOTERS - previous Bush voters and the 5% of the electorate that voted for Gore but wished he were more conservative.

I think this is a losing proposition.

I think the most Democratic candidate will beat Bush most soundly.

I think Dennis Kucinich is our best bet for taking back the White House, and actually having a plan for what to do with it once we get it back.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

Edit: add content

[Saudade]

1. Kucinich

Kucinich is the only one who cares more about ideas than personalities (i.e., himself). He is the only truely serious person in the race.

That's why I support him, and also why he has no chance.

[booniapolis]

6. i agree...

There are two qualities that Democrats will look for in a candidate, the person with the best platform and the person most likely to win an election.
I'll admit that I agree with a lot Kucinich's platform, but I can't find the will to spend my time fighting for a candidate for whom it would be political suicide to nominate.

[dpbrown]

12. I don't think the facts back up your assessment

If Gore got 50 million, and Bush got 50 million, and Nader got 3 million (rounded numbers), then the 40/40/20 rule says that 40 million Democrats will vote for any Democrat.

Only Kucinich can take substantially all or all of the Green vote from 2000 - so add 3 million.

That puts Kucinich at 43 million to Bush's 40 million before the independents are even counted.

It's reasonable to figure the independents split on either side of the "progressive" and "conservative" bell curves, so Gore got 5 million votes from "independents" who wished he were more "liberal" - so add 5 million to Kucinich.

That puts Kucinich at 48 million.

Half Bush's "independents" were even more "conservative" than him - add 5 million to Bush's count.

That puts Bush at 45 million.

Now the race is among the 10 million who split between Bush and Gore - wishing Gore were more "conservative" or wishing Bush were more "compassionate."

Now the question to ask yourself of these 5 million previous Gore voters and these 5 million previous Bush voters is this:

Would you vote for Bush this time around?

Here's how it balances -

Kucinich - 48 million votes
Bush - 45 million votes

Previous Gore voters - 5 million
Previous Bush voters - 5 million

Even if Bush gets every vote he got in 2000 (he won't), Kucinich could afford to lose 1.5 million Gore votes and still beat Bush.

I think Kucinich will make the strongest candidate against Bush because he'll win the Greens and make the competition completely a referendum among former Gore voters on how Bush has done over the last four years.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a sure bet to take back the White House.

[library_max]

14. These are still made-up, wishful-thinking numbers.

If we nominate Kucinich, Bush will gain a LOT of the people who voted for Gore in 2000. The country isn't ready for someone as progressive as Kucinich. Otherwise, why did Nader get less than 3%? Why is Kucinich doing so badly in the polls leading up to the primaries?

It's better to look at the facts than to make up a lot of comforting numbers.

[dpbrown]

16. "A lot "is only 5 million or less under the 40/40/20 rule

Those are the numbers.

Anything else is fearmongering by "centrists" who realize their candidate has no draw with the people who've been purposefully disenfranchised by the Democratic Party while it was busy imitating Republicans and costing us Congress as a result.

Nader got people who would not normally have voted, or who decided to act out on their disappointment with where the Democratic Party had drifted.

The 40/40/20 rule, the same rule used by James Carville, tells us that 40 million Democrats are going to vote for the Democrat no matter what.

Quaking "centrists" are the ones who don't want to admit they're bucking for a tie in 2004 by once again alienating the Green vote and aiming their pitch only at former Bush voters.

That's the losing strategy with hopelessly unsupportable numbers, not the logical assessment using the 40/40/20 rule.

Kucinich could easily start the race at 48 million to Bush's 45 million before a single contested "independent" mind is changed, and he could easily lose 1.5 million Gore voters from 2000 and still beat Bush.

No other candidate can make that claim.

[library_max]

21. Any candidate could make that claim.

It wouldn't be true, but it isn't true for Kucinich either.

The 40/40/20 rule is made up and means nothing. All of your numbers are made up and mean nothing. The real numbers show Kucinich trailing almost all of the other Democratic candidates.

You want to know how people would vote? Ask them! Don't start by lumping them into arbitrary categories and then pretending you know how each category is going to split.

[dpbrown]

23. Only Kucinich can start with the Green vote advantage

Don't hyperventilate now.

The rule isn't "made up" it's the rule that election consultants use.

You haven't offered anything other than obtuse references to polls that don't mean anything, and unsupportable demagoguery lambasting the rule without proposing consideration of an alternate other than the opinions.

In other polls, the race is between Dean and Clark and Kucinich.

Alexa.com
Democrats.com
Bartcop.com
MoveOn.org

The Army Times - Clark first, Kucinich second.

The California Central Democratic Committee - real people, not "polled" people - Dean first, Kucinich second.

The only way to know how people are going to caucus or to vote is to count the votes - AFTERWARDS.

Kucinich will be the strongest candidate against Bush.

No one has been able to point to an alternative theory that shows other, more "centrist" candidates being able to get anything better than a "tie" against Bush - and a tie is a loss, just like it was in 2000.

edit: spelling

[Paulie]

26. AMEN!!!

Beautiful.... :yourock:

[library_max]

27. "40/40/20 is the rule consultants use."

Well, what do they use it for? Betcha they don't use it to predict that Kucinich could beat Bush in the general election.

As for polls, look at real polls - Zogby, Harris, CNN. The polls you are citing are either internet polls or polls of handpicked activists and not voters at large. In the real polls, Kucinich is in the single digits, behind at least five of the other candidates.

Your "theory" is pointless and useless. Take a quick look at electoral history. Every single time the Democrats (or Republicans, for that matter) have run to the base, they have lost in a landslide.

[lariokie]

122. Anything else is fearmongering?

What? Any view outside your paradigm is fearmongering? Next thing you are going to tell us is that if Nader hadn't been in the 2000 race, Gore still would have lost.

Hey, it is OK if you want to believe in fairy tales, but please don't proselytize. If "Green" voters allow themsleves to be alienated in 2004, then I would have to call them Republicans--and rather foolish ones at that.

I think I would rather see you as a Republican strategist-statistician than as one for the anti-Bush side. Even Karl Rove looks beyond the numbers.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

36. Nader would have gotten more votes

(2 to 4 times as many) if Bush hadn't been so scary.

There was a lot of talk among progressives about this very issue. Most decided to vote for Gore, although with very little enthusiasm.

[dpbrown]

42. And that's another reason support is deeper on the "left"

The left-leaning side of the "independent" spectrum is going to be the one that carries or sinks the chances of the Democratic Party this time around.

The Democrats didn't have, arguably, a really progressive and populist choice in 2000 - much of the criticism of Gore can be traced back to this not "moving" people, because he found his populist side later on in the campaign, and by then was bogged down by having the albatross Lieberman tied around his neck.

This election, the Democrats have a much clearer choice - pick the real progressive and populist candidate and win decisively, or watch the left-leaning independents they snub walk away or vote Green because this time the Democrats had a traditional progressive Democratic candidate and snubbed him anyway.

Either way, control of the fate of the 2004 election rests with the progressives.

Don't believe the hype.

Kucinich for President.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[lariokie]

121. Sure Bet?

If you truly believe Dennis is a sure bet to beat Bush, do you suppose I could interest you in some guaranteed penis enlagemnet pills?

I'm sorry to use such a crude retort, but sure things are as likely as flying horses. You're math forgets the complexity of the American psyche. It assumes the voting behavior of Americans is completely predictable. Who would have won in 2000 if you applied this same comparison logic given the Clinton electoral and approval ratings?

Perhaps Dennis could win, but to call it a sure bet is a sure way to loose big.

[newyawker99]

25. Hi booniapolis!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[JohnLocke]

38. Welcome to DU

You'll like it here. By the way, I support Edwards.

[INTELBYTES]

53. When enough people are tired of shrub

...I believe people will be looking for a new direction. I don't totally agree that Kucinich doesn't stand a chance. Of course if the news media gave him a fair chance he could get his message out and bring more people into his camp.

[JewelsforDennis]

72. A slim chance, but long shots do win...

NO chance? Couldn't you just as easily say that if the people in US awaken to what's happening and how Dennis takes these issues head on...if people began to take the job of participant in democracy (before Bush signs the last of it away in edicts)and make it work by simply voting for a change (and of course working in their state on the DRE problems, Maryland www.truevoteMD.org )that we can do what it is we need to do to make our society whole again?

Turn off your TV's and stop believing the constant barrage of lies being told to us over and over so that you stop believing them. It only takes people in action, and God knows American's have to look at other countries to learn just what that means but we certainly have enough reasons to arise now. I like to listen to people who encourage me on, not nay-sayers.

[LWolf]

95. That's exactly why

I support him; and why I think he does have a chance!

:hi:

[dpbrown]

97. Fear Ends, Hope Begins.

I just absolutely adore that motto for Dennis.

He really does represent hope.

Things can be different - and different in a way more substantial than "well, my secret energy meetings weren't exactly like Cheney's secret energy meetings."

[LWolf]

100. I've been sitting here writing letters

to Iowa for the campaign. While I say basically the same thing in every letter, I feel that burst of hope and enthusiasm with every stamp. While I was writing about 30 minutes ago, the phone rang. It was a Kucinich volunteer calling to ask for my support. I told her what I was doing, and we spent a happy 10 minutes discussing why we do what we do; work for Dennis.

We are a nation of people in desperate need of hope. There is no fiction, or science fiction, to cover the scope of what has been done to us, and where we have been taken or gone.

We are ready. And here's hoping that Dennis' timing will be just right for all of us in this election.

Here's to hope! :hi:

[lariokie]

119. Dennis

Sad but very true. Until we have Instant Run-off voting we have to live with certain electoral realities. One of those is the lesser-of-evils conundrum in our winner-takes-all ballot system.

[Wetzelbill]

2. I love the K-Man!

[demnan]

3. As admirable a person as he is

Kucinich could not carry more than the most liberal of states or two. He might have trouble in some states even garnering the signatures.

Yet I saw a Kucinich bumpersticker a few weeks ago (I live in the birthplace of Paul Wellstone) and it made me happy. I told my friend, "Wow, surprise, there are people more liberal than me living in this county".

[Nadienne]

5. The birthplace of Paul Wellstone?

I know he crashed in the Virginia/Hibbing area... (the exact name of the town escapes me)...

Where was he born?

[goodhue]

7. Arlington, VA

Wellstone was born July 24, 1994 in Arlington, VA, where he grew up. He went to UNC where he got BA and PhD in political science.
In 1969, he moved to MN to take a job teaching political science at Carleton College in Northfield, MN. He continued as a professor at Carleton until he was elected to the US Senate in 1990.

The plane crash was near Eveleth.

[Nadienne]

9. Thank you

[goodhue]

10. where were you suprised?

If you were in Arlington, then perhaps that was a surprise, but you should not be suprised to see bumberstickers and lawn signs here in MN. Kucinich has hundreds of active supporters here in MN and had huge crowds see him speak here in August and October. His October appearance in Minneapolis as part of his annoucement tour drew over 1,200 people to Roosevelt High, the largest crowd of the announcement tour. As a point of reference, the MN for Kucinich list serve has almost 200 members. His support is not limited to the Twin Cities but includes supporters in Duluth, Mankato, Rochester and all over the state. More surprises are on the way.

Check out
http://www.minnesotaforkucinich.com/

Also, Dennis will be on the ballot in all 50 states, so I'm not certain about suggestion of "trouble" getting signatures.

Remember, the revolution will not be televised.

[no name no slogan]

20. Thanks for plugging that site goodhue!!!

Glad to see folk spreading the word about the site-- I've been busting my @$$ trying to update it in a timely manner. I've got more new stuff planned for this weekend, if everything works out right! (full disclosure: I did the site redesign and am helping Alex out with the site admin since he's been busy).

goodhue is exactly right. In "Wellstone Country" (at least, the place he represented for 12 years in the US Senate), there's Kucinich stuff everywhere!

At DK's last appearance, he drew 1400+ standing room only to a high-school auditorium on a Tuesday night-- which was a night before Al Franken was due in town, and also on the same night Howard Zinn was speaking an hour away, and three days before Michael Moore came to town, too! Not bad for all these events going on within 72 hours of each other, reaching similar auidiences!

Our campaign is growing day by day. Our regular weekly organizing meeting has at least 30-35 people at it each week, and that's only 1/4 of our hardcore activists, too. At least three of those attending it are NEW, too, and not just casual MeetUp-type supporters, either.

Our proximity to northern Iowa is also a boon for the Iowa campaign, as we have volunteers going there at least twice a week to canvass.

There's going to be a lot of suprised people on January 20th!!!!!

[goodhue]

29. no problem

The site (http://www.minnesotaforkucinich.com/) looks great, btw.

I'm glad the 10-point pdfs in Arabic, Russian, Somali, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Hmong are front and center on the home page.

I wish I was able to be in Mason City at the Rose Bowl bowling alley this Friday at 7 pm with Dennis, Iowans and MN volunteers but I'm going out of the country for the holidays.

http://www.kucinich.us/schedule.php

I was able to see Dennis in Decorah and Cedar Falls a couple weeks ago and it was a great time. People really respond to him favorably.

[Mairead]

11. "DK could not carry more than the most liberal of states"

Why is it, then, do you suppose, that he does so well in his very conservative congressional district? His re-election numbers have gone up each time, and in 2002 --10 months after his electrifying 'Prayer' speech-- he got 3 of every 4 votes.

[library_max]

15. His "very conservative" congressional district went for Gore

by about 60%, I believe.

[dpbrown]

17. And will go for the Democrat in 2004

However, Kucinich got another 15% over Gore in his district.

Kucinich: 75%
Gore: 60%

[redqueen]

19. Kucinich got 15% more votes than Gore did ....

Great details!

Thanks, Dan! :yourock:

[Padraig18]

62. It should have--- he outspent his opponent 100:1. n/t

[library_max]

28. Well of course, it's his district, not Gore's.

Did Gore even campaign there?

[diamondsoul]

31. Kucinich's volunteers campaigned

for Gore in Ohio. How is it that DK gets the votes for himself and not the candidate HE clearly supports? Could it be that they like Kucinich better than they liked Gore?

[library_max]

34. Could it be that Kucinich supporters like Kucinich better than Gore?

Gee, maybe. It's possible. So what? I will concede you that Kucinich could carry his own Congressional district in the general election. Again, so what?

And another question - who ran against Kucinich in that race?

[dpbrown]

43. Well, duh. He's a better Democrat than Al Gore was

Kucinich represents a return to the traditional grassroots foundation of Democratic politics.

He'll clean Bush's clock and win decisively.

He already takes more Democratic votes than Al Gore does.

[lariokie]

125. Huh?

Already takes more votes than Al Gore? What, pray tell, does that mean?

[lariokie]

124. Your President

What you apparently haven't heard yet is that the other "president" is poised to change the Supreme Court into the most horrific Weapon of Mass Destructtion in American History. I do hope you will wake up before the 2004 election.

[goodhue]

32. Gore lost Ohio despite Kucinich's best efforts

http://www.kucinich.us/electable.php

Al Gore lost Ohio in 2000 despite the Herculean efforts of Kucinich, as vividly described by journalist James Ridgeway in an article written days before the election: "Kucinich is a shoo-in, but hauling Gore along will be a daunting task. Shuttling back and forth from Washington, Kucinich has put together an old-fashioned canvassing operation throughout Cleveland and its suburbs that is one of the largest such efforts in the nation. By election day, 400 to 500 people will be on the streets...

"Day after day, members of the laborers, electricians, plumbers, and steelworkers unions crowd into Kucinich's tiny office on Lorain Avenue, piling signs into the backs of cars and pickups before hitting the neighborhoods. The general approach is for volunteers to use Kucinich's name to get a foot in the door, then ask for support for a Democratic judge before uttering the vice president's name."

Kucinich's best efforts couldn't win Ohio for Gore in 2000, but Kucinich can win Ohio himself if he is the 2004 Democratic presidential candidate. And in presidential politics, as Bush-strategist Karl Rove knows well: As Ohio goes, so goes the nation.

[dpbrown]

13. The 40/40/20 rule says your assessment is wrong

If Gore got 50 million, and Bush got 50 million, and Nader got 3 million (rounded numbers), in 2000, then the 40/40/20 rule says that 40 million Democrats will vote for any Democrat.

Only Kucinich can take substantially all or all of the Green vote from 2000 - so add 3 million.

That puts Kucinich at 43 million to Bush's 40 million before the independents are even counted.

It's reasonable to figure the independents split on either side of the "progressive" and "conservative" bell curves, so Gore got 5 million votes from "independents" who wished he were more "liberal" - so add 5 million to Kucinich.

That puts Kucinich at 48 million.

Half Bush's "independents" were even more "conservative" than him - add 5 million to Bush's count.

That puts Bush at 45 million.

Now the race is among the 10 million who split between Bush and Gore - wishing Gore were more "conservative" or wishing Bush were more "compassionate."

Now the question to ask yourself of these 5 million previous Gore voters and these 5 million previous Bush voters is this:

Would you vote for Bush this time around?

Here's how it balances -

Kucinich - 48 million votes
Bush - 45 million votes

Previous Gore voters - 5 million
Previous Bush voters - 5 million

Even if Bush gets every vote he got in 2000 (he won't), Kucinich could afford to lose 1.5 million Gore votes and still beat Bush.

I think Kucinich will make the strongest candidate against Bush because he'll win the Greens and make the competition completely a referendum among former Gore voters on how Bush has done over the last four years.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a sure bet to take back the White House.

[library_max]

22. Again, this post is 100% speculative fiction. (nt)

[dpbrown]

24. Your post doesn't even have text much less speculation

If you don't have an alternative theory to offer, maybe you'd like to save yourself the trouble of just repeating, "you're wrong" with nothing to back it up.

[Nadienne]

30. bang-o-rang, dpbrown!

[library_max]

41. I'm not going to waste verbiage on a rubberstamp of post #12.

Look up there if you want to find the refutation of your argument in detail.

[dpbrown]

44. I'm sorry you ran out of argument before your fingers stopped typing

Oh, well.

I offered a practical application of a well-understood and accepted electoral analysis.

You rebutted with emotional demagoguery.

I'm not convinced, but more importantly, the 40% of the electorate that is going to vote for the Democrat isn't convinced either.

And you haven't even tried to argue that Kucinich wouldn't take more of the Green vote than any other candidate.

And you've conceded that Kucinich gets more votes than Al Gore.

I think it's time to call it a day.

[diamondsoul]

57. Well, Dan, you've made it official!

I absolutely MUST take a few days off from DU....'cause I can not afford another "crush"! LOL

You're just awesome, and I mean that. Fight the good fight and at some point we HAVE to win. The law of averages is on our side.*grin*

[dpbrown]

96. Well, you know what Dennis says....

...if you never vote your heart, your heart never wins!

I'm in favor of crush - whether orange, or another variety.

;-)

[lariokie]

126. Amen/women

Give it a rest. It's all mental m-bation at best anyway. Those who are certain they can second guess the American voter invariably wake up with a bad hangover.

[Nadienne]

4. Universal single-payer health care is a big one!!

Only Kucinich and Braun will push for it. Everyone else is talking about "covering" everyone. Yay, more money for the middle-men. Am I the only one who sees the resemblance between health insurance and the "protection" racket?

[Myra]

60. I agree. Universal health care is the only way. But Clinton failed

Years ago on that, so I just dunno if it's possible for
a while.

Dammit.

[no name no slogan]

71. But look what Clinton proposed

his plan was not "universal" as far as health care: it was a hodgepodge of public/private coverage that would have left a large number of Americans uninsured/uncovered by ANY healthcare plan.

It would have handed over BILLIONS of dollars to the five largest HMOs and insurance companies in the country, while still not providing 100% coverage.

As a matter of fact, Clinton's plan was quite similar to the one many of the other candidates are proposing today-- Howard Dean's in particular.

Clinton's "plan" failed because not only was it seen as a power-grab by the right, but the left did not feel comfortable sending more of our tax money off to the big insurance companies-- and rightly so. They spend way too much on executive salaries and administration to run the system efficiently.

Over 60% of Americans favor a government-fun universal single-payer healthcare system. The chairman of Ford recently made statements that they can't afford to compete in America anymore because of the skyrocketing costs of health benefits for employees. 8,000 physicians in the American Medical Association signed on for universal, single-payer healthcare.

THIS is the plan that America wants AND needs-- not more of our tax dollars sent down the corporate healthcare sinkhole.

[dpbrown]

94. Clinton's wasn't universal single-payer - and the industry sunk the law

Two key differences between what Clinton tried and what Kucinich and more than 8000 doctors supported recently in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

First, Clinton's plan wasn't universal single-payer, and he and the Congress invited the private insurance industry to "help" write the law - so it sunk under its own weight in pork.

Secondly, times are fundamentally different from that time. The "middle class" is losing real money wages every year, because no matter what their raise, insurance (and in states like Minnesota with a "no new taxes" Republican Governor - the additional fees, assessments, and property tax hikes) costs are eating away at their quality of life like never before. Baby boomers especially like a "medicare-style" single-payer plan, and if a candidate with that plan is put in front of them in an honest contest next year, they've vote for him or her in droves.

The time is right for universal-single payer - one pool for all, with costs contained at what we're paying now. As Dennis Kucinich says, "We're already paying for universal coverage, we're just not getting it."

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[goodhue]

8. I agree!

Thanks for the analysis.

[GreenPartyVoter]

18. Nodoubt about it

he's tops!

[stickdog]

33. Kucinich has the best platform.

But he's one of the worst candidates.

The message needs a better messenger.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

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

[Hippo_Tron]

35. If America were DU...

Kucinich would win the election without question. You have to remember that the right will steal the moderates by demonizing him as a liberal nutball.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

37. Kucinich is not as demonizable (is that a word?) as some of the

other candidates. He's not an "out of touch rich kid." He's not "beholden to special interests," unless by "special interests" you mean everyone who's not a Repubican. He isn't "bought." He's not "blow-dried anchorman slick." He doesn't "waffle" or say what he thinks you want to hear. He doesn't act as if he needs permission from the Republicans to express his views.

[LWolf]

39. Good points, all.

I especially like this one:

He doesn't act as if he needs permission from the Republicans to express his views.

[library_max]

40. Most of your criteria apply to Bush himself

and are therefore irrelevant. Do you think the Bush campaign can hurt the Democratic nominee for being an "out of touch rich kid"? Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

Kucinich is left of the country. It's that simple. He doesn't need to be "demonized." He just needs to state his positions on the issues to lose the election.

I'd be happy if Kucinich were President, but it's never gonna happen. We have to reach for what we might be able to get, not reach for the moon.

[eridani]

49. Nonsense

Kucinich is left of the country. It's that simple.

If 86% of Dems and 51% of Reps prefer universal health care to the Bush tax cuts, howthehell can you get more mainstream than that?

The majority does not like jobs leaving America for good.

80% support marijuana decriminalization.

Iraq? How 'mainstream' he is 8 months from now depends on what happens there between now and then.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[dpbrown]

45. Most importantly, he says, "We HAVE an alternative to Bush"

Kucinich lets us deride, undermine, and berate everything the BFEE has done to the nation and the world since Reagan, while clearing painting a practical and desirable alternative.

One thing you'll probably never hear from Kucinich (and something that you heard from Al Gore and quite a few of the aspirational nominees this time around already) is, "I agree with George Bush" on this or that issue.

It's time to take back America for progressive values.

It's time for Kucinich.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[eridani]

50. Here's a clue for you--

--the right will demonize ANY Dem nominee as a liberal nutball.

[lariokie]

127. What about Kucinich supporters?

This is certainly true. But so, it seems, will the Kucinich supporters I have heard on this board demonize any other candidate besides Dennis. You cats need to tone it down and chill out. If the Greens and Kucinich supporters are saying "our way or the highway" again, then we may as well give the election to Bush now and save the heartache.

[diamondsoul]

55. Really? And what do you suppose will happen to

the Moderate Dems? Hmmm, maybe something a lot like 2000 because the difference isn't enough to create a decisive count that can't be stolen?

Naaaah, we're all too smart for that, right? :eyes: *glances at 2000 newspaper declaring Bush the President*

[JewelsforDennis]

74. If that's all America has, then it deserves what's coming

Can you look past the crap yet? Thank God I'm to the point of being able to make decisions based on my carefully thinking about what's important to me, and not what a bunch of liars would have me believe.

[letthewindblow]

46. Agreed. Kucinich is the most electable candidate.

Kucinich will also atract new voters, people that usually don't vote and young people. Possibly millions.

[tinanator]

59. and Republicans come November

dont fool yourselves. he was what it takes to do that.

[JewelsforDennis]

75. How are you helping?

I live and breathe talking issues, how are you helping get the word out? I want people to know what the media and corporations don't want them to know--THE TRUTH.

[Nederland]

47. You are double counting leftists

When you talk about the 40/40/20 rule, that rule addresses ALL voters, not just Democratic and Republican voters. Therefore, Nader's 3 million are part of the 20%, not seperate as you are suggesting in your calculations.

[dpbrown]

48. I think they are independent of the two major parties

And that's how I understand that it works.

As I interpret it, Gore got the 5% of the independents who were interested in voting for him but who wished he were more liberal.

Nader got people who wouldn't have voted for the Democrat, so were outside the equation.

Similarly, although a high number of people voted in 2000, there were 80 million people who didn't vote.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[JewelsforDennis]

77. Still talking about Nader and the election?

Come on you all know that thousands of voters in Florida were illegally taken off voting rolls and that combined with other fraud is how Bush got into his position?

[lariokie]

129. Nope

That's how you would like to bleieve it works, NOT the way it actulally works. You want it to be that way so your "math" equation comes out for Dennis. It works that way in fantasy, but not in reality.

Sorry to disillusion you. Thank goodness we truly do have the most important thing in common--that we will vote for the winner of the Democratic primary, right?

[lariokie]

128. Thank You!

Finally someone throws a much needed monkey wrench into the wobbly math of the Kucinich zealots! I truly love Dennis, but I have such a difficult time with his promoters. They seem to think they are alchemists who can turn fantasies into reality. I know most are recycled Greens who apparently are still living the fantasy of Nader as the savior rather than the spoiler.

Who do they think Dennis will support if he loses the primary--Nader?

[DemBones DemBones]

51. "It's Beginning to Look a Lot Like Kucinich,"

"Everywhere you look!"


I trust you all know the tune!

[dpbrown]

52. Check out this flash website!

http://www.kucinich.us/greeting

A seasonal greeting by Dennis, and a chance to spin the globe to see how Kucinich's plans will have world impact.

[DemBones DemBones]

61. Thanks, Dan! It's great and I'm glad

you linked it here for anyone who doesn't get DK's e-mailings.

[LWolf]

65. It sure is!

Here is the passage that caught my attention today:

What if government had the balance of ballet? What if it had the grace?" Kucinich asked the crowd of about 30 people gathered to hear him speak on Friday, Dec. 19.


"What we have now is a very heavy-handed approach to government. Like an elephant in a tutu, but this elephant is on a rampage."

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=10707408&BRD=2041&PAG=461&dept_id=338010&rfi=6

It was especially appropriate, since I got a message from my rep in the House, Howard "Buck" McKeon, referencing me to this site:

http://www.buckmckeon.com/campaign_news.htm

[Myra]

54. Kucinich is the best candidate

Totally agreed.

[tinanator]

58. absolutely 100% right

absolutely on the money.

[jsw_81]

63. absolutely 100% wrong

The fact is that for every formerly Green vote we'd get with Kucinich, we'd lose two, maybe even three other votes (including among Democrats) because the vast, vast majority of Americans see Kucinich as nothing more than a shrill, fringe candidate.

And you're absolutely clueless about American politics if you really think that Kucinich would be a strong candidate against Bush. Believe me, Kucinich would get creamed. I would bet $1000 cash that the electoral vote would be 535-3 with Kucinich taking D.C. and losing everywhere else.

[tinanator]

64. what are your qualifications?

for making such nonsensical sweeping predictions?
Based on your tenacious consistency, there really isnt much need for you to carry on with the same old dire warnings, we surely know what you think by now, dont we? And even more clearly, we overwhelmingly think YOU are wrong. BIG TIME.

[JohnLocke]

68. Right on!

Why anyone would support Kucinich rather than Edwards is beyond me. :yourock:

[no name no slogan]

91. 1) Experience. 2) PROVEN record in office. 3) Voted against IWR

Here's THREE big ones:

1) Experience. Edwards is a first-term Senator. Kucinich has been a city councilman, mayor, state Senator, and successful four-term congressman. Kucinich wins on experience.

2) PROVEN record in office for standing up for the people. He stood up for Muny Light in Cleveland, stood up against BushCo and its warmongering in the US House, and stood up to Diebold and its election-stealing machinery just last month.

3) Voted AGAINST the Iraq War Resolution. Not only that, he LED the House opposition to it. NOBODY else in this race has cast a vote against IWR and BushCo's imperial designs on the middle east.

That's just three to start with, but I can come up with more. Don't get me wrong, I like Edwards myself; however, I don't feel he has the experience, the record, or the plans to bring about real change in this country.

Of course maybe you're just a troll posting flamebait too but I digress...

[MidwestMomma]

70. Many Americans see your candidate as a shrill, fringe candidate..

In fact, isn't that part of his campaign...being the 'angry outsider'?

Why is okay for your guy to be an angry outsider but the same qualities make DK a 'liberal nutball'?

How come in the beginning of the primaries, Dennis K was 'too angry' for the masses but now Dean's anger is legit and reasonable and one of his biggest selling points?

How come it's great campaign strategy for Dean to YELL "You have the power" but Dennis K is a lefty loony cause he gets excited and loud because he is so impassioned by the issues?

And how in the heck did Dean steal the mantle of representing the Democratic wing of the Democratic party from Dennis K.

note: My apologies to the Dennis Kucinich supporters for polluting this positive thread about the candidate with my ire. Just couldn't let the shrill comment go unchallenged.

[JewelsforDennis]

80. Lame interpretation of issues...

Once again, you need to look a little deeper into politics. The DLC is just doing what the Republicans are. They're turning our democracy into the best money can buy also. You let others interpretation of issues turn into the focus. Your name calling is just a waste of time. Focus on issues. Research the issues and then decide who actually works on solving them.
Who the hell isn't angry at what's going on? Dennis is just brave enough to show it. And if you were educated on half of what really is going on you'd be a little angry too. Having feelings is part of being human...big deal.

[MidwestMomma]

82. When I said 'your candidate' I was addressing the Dean poster, not DK

Sorry if my post was that unclear. I was trying to compare Dean and Kucinich and show that Dean had co-opted many of DK's issues/strengths. Me, post a pro-Dean thread? Don't think so.

I greatly admire Dennis Kucinich....

[LWolf]

83. So do I,

Midwestmomma.

Dennis is out of the gate lengths ahead of everyone else on every issue.

[MidwestMomma]

84. Doesn't it make your blood boil that it's okay for Dean to be angry

but that's why they tagged DK as unappealing and still do? What kills me is when DK gets worked up and loud, it's while making impassioned statements about issues he feels strongly about. And that's bad? But when Dean starts shouting "You have the power", that's inspiring?

I said at the beginning of the debates that I thought DK would be better suited leading us in the streets if the revolution ever happens.

However, I'm starting to think he'd do just fine leading us from the White House.\\

[LWolf]

86. From both. Or either.

Or where ever he happens to be; he is a leader.

I'd like him to be leading our country from the WH!

[Mairead]

88. " DK would be better suited leading us in the streets"

Funny you should say that, MM. I was just thinking that I'd bet serious money that if the GOP try another coup next year, Dennis will call for us to take it to the streets! Unlike Gore, DK is an activist -- fearless, tough as nails, and focused like a laser on our taking back the nation.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

85. right on MWM!!!

Oh and I think Jewels replied to the wrong post. Probably meant the same one that you replied to.

Anyway, great post!!!

[hippywife]

109. I get what you are saying, Momma!!

Dennis speaks to our issues not just to our anger!! :)

[JewelsforDennis]

78. no fear here...

Obviously your opinion is yours, you can keep it. What Dennis stands for makes Dean look petty. Dennis is 5 steps ahead of Dr. Dean.

[MidwestMomma]

79. Delete by me...

Responded to wrong post. So sorry.

[mermaid]

66. Oh, The Irony!!

I love it!! When someone like me accuses Nader of losing the election for us, the Greens all say, "no...that isn't Nader's fault...all those voters would have stayed home if Nader hadn't run...they wouldn't have voted for Gore!!"

Yet, in the very next breath, here are these same Greens, claiming that Kucinich would get 3 or 4 million extra votes from Greens!

So which is it, Greens?

I caught ya with your hand in the cookie jar. Are you FINALLY ready to own up to the fact that YOU caused Bush?? That, thanks to Nader, we have now the worst President in the history of the nation??

%*$*&*%$^##%#%^ Ralph Nader anyway!!!

[JewelsforDennis]

81. Lack of appreciation for democracy

Don't put blame where it doesn't belong. What caused Bush is people who don't participate in democracy. Don't get on Nader because he is a full (except when the two party system kept him from debating-or rather even attending the debate when he had a ticket)participant in our failing democracy. Get over it...and get to action. Learn from the past and move one please.

[lariokie]

131. Good Advise, "Learn from the past"

Why not practice it?

[Mairead]

89. No, there's no irony

Kucinich is miles different to Gore, incomparably better.

I'm a Green who voted for Gore, but after he sold us out I vowed never again. So if, Goddess forfend, something should happen to DK and AS before the election next year, you won't see me voting for Dean or whoever it is. I'll sit home in lieu of being able to check off 'none of the above'. Because none of the others merits my vote and I refuse to hand it over to another 'lesser evil'.

[mermaid]

107. In My Humble Opinion

It is people JUST LIKE YOU who will allow Bush to get re-elected. Thanks a lot!

[Mairead]

108. Please check your facts

It's people who turn their backs on the good to embrace the lesser evil who are the enablers. If you want my vote, then help provide a real choice. If you're not willing to support the best candidate yourself, then don't complain.

[redqueen]

112. This is why Democrats lose lose lose

Keep marching after the right's votes, Dems. We're losing seats everywhere! Keep expecting a different result - let us know how that works out. (I think most of us saw the writing on the wall plainly after the '02 midterms.)

Many of us haven't yet been taken for granted and insulted enough to go Green... yet. But keep it up... keep moving to the right. See where it gets the party. If you like you can blame the people that give up on their party. Or don't blame them. Doesn't matter who you choose to blame, because it won't change anything (although it may make you feel better about your choice to vote for the lesser evil).

Trying to find a solution - now that would matter.

[lariokie]

132. No irony?

"I'll sit home in lieu of blah,blah....and vote for King George Bush and his new Nazi Supreme Court by default!" she/he exclaimed as she/he cut off her/his nose to spite her/his face. And the next five generations of Americans were cast into the furnaces of the fourth Reich, so she/he could be "righteous" and vote for no one but Dennis.

And did she/he ever learn?

[lariokie]

130. Yup!

You nailed it mermaid. I never cease to be amazed at the power of needing to be "right". The Greens are now poised--as DK supporters this time--to do it again! I wonder what twist of logic they will use as an excuse this time?

[sweetheart]

67. does kucinich not also win already in a 50/50 district?

I do not know much about his district, but i hear that it is very moderate, and he has a strong track record of delivering in a moderate climate, despite the haters.

He is coherent and makes sense in his policies... amazing how folks who do not make sense call themselves moderate... and people who are raving loonies call themselves conservative... geesh!

I want to hear more about the polls where kucinich has won, as i think he already has a significant track record of winning in precisely the kinds of polls we are up against.

Dennis is the best... i'm glad he's out there.

Go Kucinich!

[LWolf]

69. Yes.

http://www.kucinich.us/electable.php

If any Democrat has a history of attracting swing voters and "Reagan Democrats" in winning elections against better-funded Republican opponents, it is Dennis Kucinich. He has repeatedly defeated entrenched incumbents. He beat a Republican incumbent for mayor in 1977, for state senator in 1994 (overcoming the national right-wing tide) and for Congress in 1996.

His Congressional district includes the suburb of Parma, Ohio, described as "one of the original homes of the Reagan Democrats." An Ohio daily calls it a "conservative Democratic district," which he carried by 74% in 2002. Being a success there may be a better predictor of national success than holding statewide office in a liberal stronghold like Vermont or Massachusetts.

Kucinich is a winner because he builds Wellstone-like grassroots campaigns against bigger-spending opponents. He is a winner because of his blue collar roots and populism, reflected in his battles for heartland voters against unfair, corporate-friendly trade deals.

He is an unabashed progressive who wins because swing voters who don't agree with him on every issue still see him as a fighter for their interests, as someone who will put the interests of workers and middle-class consumers ahead of big-money interests. No Democrat is better positioned in 2004 to attract 'Reagan Democrats' and swing voters with a frontal attack on how Bush policies hurt them and favor the rich.

Republicans use "wedge" issues to pry away traditionally-Democratic white working class voters -- a tactic that has not succeeded against Kucinich. In '96, for example, Republicans used his support of gay rights as a wedge, and he stood firm and triumphed.

On the other side of the spectrum, no other candidate can attract disaffected voters, 3rd party voters and Ralph Nader supporters to the Democratic column like Kucinich. Across the country, Nader 2000 voters and Green Party sympathizers are joining his campaign, as are other 3rd party supporters.

<snip>

[Cocoa]

76. I think any dem will get the Nader voters

me, for example.

But I agree about him being the best on the issues.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

92. I don't see it across the board..

A close friend of mine said to me the other night.."If Kucinich is not the nominee I am voting Nader." I have heard similar sentiments from other people I know that voted Nader in 2000.

Frankly, I have not ruled out voting for Nader either, if he runs. There are probably 4 candidates that I would vote for before Nader in the GE at this time. The others have not gauranteed anything.

:shrug:

TWL

[dfgrbac]

87. Don't forget the millions without healthcare!

Last I heard, 44 million Americans were without health insurance. If half of them (I don't know the real statistics) are children, then you still have a voting block of 22 million voters looking for universal healthcare. That's a significant number!

[Scott Lee]

90. I admire Dennis Kucinich. He's one of the good ones.

Just wanted to bop on over to this thread and give props to Dennis K. and most of his supporters who are really classy folks.

Keep up the good work.

[Zorra]

93. Agreed.

DK has the platform I would have if I were running for Prez.

[CivilRightsNow]

98. I am leaning towards Kucinich

Thanks for your appraisal. My gut feeling is that either this party remembers its roots and gets some balls and is actually democratic...

Or republican lite becomes a reality that will be increasingly harder to correct, if not completely devastating.

Give peace a chance, man.

If not now, when? ;)

[Zomby Woof]

99. ZombyKick

[redqueen]

101. "The question is do we have the political will and leadership?"

"The question is do we have the political will and leadership? And that's where I come in. I intend to make this the defining domestic issue in this election and by doing that I will demonstrate to the American people that if they will follow the same lead that the people in 1932 gave this country when it gave FDR a mandate for sweeping economic change by electing 88 new members of the House and 13 new members of the Senate to create the context of the New Deal, I will ask the American people give me a Congress that will give you health care. That's the way that we challenge the insurance industries who have a, a stranglehold on our political process. We can make this an issue in every congressional district. And I'm ready, I'm prepared to do that."
transcript of LinkTV interview

Answer: right now? no, we don't.

Kucinich is the one to lead this country in the opposite direction, away from this march toward the right.

[dpbrown]

102. Proof of theorem here, using 2000 exit polling data

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=38328&mesg_id=38736&page=

This data shows that the battle, with Kucinich as the standardbearer, is almost exactly where I said it would be using the 40/40/20 analysis, namely a fight for 5 million voters who already voted for Gore once.

Kucinich is the best candidate to beat Bush, and all the numbers back it up.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[adadem]

103. I wish Dennis could win

I wish I could vote for him in the caucus
So when I vote, Dennis will be in my heart.

[dpbrown]

104. Do you not have a caucus?

Be assured that anything you can do to help Dennis become our next President will be well worth the effort.

Thank you for the kind words.

[mvd]

105. I agree!

I will not mind voting for Dean if Kucinich drops out, and I will get behind our nominee, but I'll support Kucinich to the end. I think he is only too extreme by the confines of what America has been made into - not at all overall. Why should we not want a better life for as many Americans as we can give one to? And for doubters of the Department Of Peace, would you rather have the Department of Homeland Security? I don't think it has done much to help. And the world has changed so much that a new department is not a silly idea. Go Kucinich!

[belab13]

106. Dennis has more vision in his pinky than most of the other

candidates combined. Just my 2 cents.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

110. that was worth more than two cents.

:)

TWL

[redqueen]

111. Yep indeedy

I see it as the Kooch is more of a fighter than a businessman. I perceive most other candidates as businesspeople. They're cautious, and don't take risks unless there is some big benefit to be gained.

The Kooch sees an opening in his opponents' defenses and attacks it. No consulting the polls... no checking the focus group data... he knows what's right and goes after it. ($87 Billion, Diebold, etc.)

Then later, some other candidates may decide 'hey that's playing well with the people, let's do that too!' But again, they're using the cautious business model of waiting to see if it's successful before they even bother to try.

I want a fighter who will take the offense and not wait to be led by others, but will lead the charge for the people. That's what I get from Kucinich, and that's why he's got my vote.

And today, after reading the latest 'dean's lying again' thread, and even though I can't really afford it, more of my money. :D

[dpbrown]

113. Good point - time for a pre-year end contribution!

https://www.kucinich.us/contribute.php

The BFEE is the problem - Kucinich is the answer.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[dpbrown]

115. I snuck $50 right under the 2003 wire!

https://www.kucinich.us/contribute.php

The BFEE is the problem - Kucinich is the answer.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[LWolf]

123. You're right.

He is a fighter.

And I've seen other candidates come in later with positions that he's already laid out. Which is fine. I want people to know where they originated. I want Dennis to get the credits, and the votes, that he has earned. But I also want the nominee, no matter who it is, to build a platform I can work for.

[dpbrown]

114. A kick for public financing!

Because Dennis and not any other candidate, gets more of his contributions from small donors, he qualified for the highest percentage of matching funds of any candidate running.

Go Dennis!

[TexasSissy]

116. I support Clark, but I think Kucinich is a remarkable person.

I would never vote for him because of some of his views. But he is a captivating speaker who seems truly concerned about the issues.

The country could do worse for a President (and has!)

[dpbrown]

117. I think DK represents the real remedy to the damage the BFEE has done

That's one problem I have with some of the other, more prominent candidates - it's almost like they're in denial of how bad things have gotten - with health care, with real wages, with job loss, with deteriorating schools, with fundamentalism, with military adventurism.

The "top tier" candidates, to me, represent too great a belief that the "status quo" is alright, or it can be "tweaked" to make it right.

They're wrong, and Kucinich is correct.

In my opinion, of course.

https://www.kucinich.us/contribute.php

The BFEE is the problem - Kucinich is the answer.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[lariokie]

118. Kucinich is too much like me

I share your enthusiasm for Dennis's positions, but he is too much like me (and you), and there is no question that neither you nor I could possibly win against Bush.

I'm sorry, but we simply must be realists this time around. Having cut off my nose to spite my face (Nader) in 2000, I no longer have a nose to cut off--thank goodness--in 2004. Dennis is great, and probably everyone you know would love to have him as president. Alas, probably everyone you don't know would not vote for him. We must have as our candidate, someone who those folks we don't know will vote for. These folks are afraid of their shadows and simply will not go too far out on a limb. That limb is where you and I (and most real progressives) live. Look around a the number of people who shop at Wal-Mart. Are there more of them than of us? Its a pretty good bet, wouldn't you say? Do you see them as the Dennis Kucinich type?

It is sad that this winner-takes-all charade we call American electoral Democracy requires us to chose between what we perceive as the lesser of evils. But what's a girl or guy to do? We have to beat Bush, and that means getting those Wal-Mart shoppers to vote against him. Who best to pull that off? I don't know for sure, but I don't think Dennis is the best bet.

[redqueen]

120. That's the whole thing, he's not 'out on a limb'

Sure, if you single out the Dept. of Peace, he looks way out there.

But getting out of Iraq ASAP? That's getting more and more popular every day.

Ending free trade? That's a Republican plank of the party platform here in Texas. Many, many voters would vote for Kucinich over bush on that issue alone!

It's easy to bury Kucinich in a field of nine, with most of the nation not even really paying much attention.

In the GE, it would be a whole new ballgame. Given the close quarters combat that bush would face with the Kooch, I'm sure Kucinich would win in a landslide. :D