Breaking News! Kucinch Campaign to make deal with Edwards

[Clark Can WIN]

coming up on MSNBC

[DoveTurnedHawk]

1. Holy Shit!

This is fascinating stuff!

DTH

[Clark Can WIN]

2. I don't know what it is for sure

But they made it sound like a Braun/Dean kind of deal.

[maddezmom]

3. they mentioned this on CSPAN this am

but I really thought it was just another rumor. Wonder what they'll say....this could be huge.

[Fleshdancer]

4. ARG! Is this a normal Iowa thing???

:wtf: are we entering a new phase in politics? Extreme Voting??

[Jerseycoa]

23. Yes, it is normal

It's how caucuses work.

[Hippo_Tron]

37. More proof that Edwards is not a right wing dem...

For those who say he is.

[Clark Can WIN]

80. I guess I haven't spent enough time on Edwards threads......

So he's a right winger now too huh? Amazing.

[Waistdeep]

5. I bet it's we'll help marginally viable groups with a few bodies

if the non-viable groups go to Edwards. Everybody wins.

[in_cog_ni_to]

6. Interesting!

wonder what it is?

[Clark Can WIN]

7. Kuchinch to support Edwards!

and visa versa. Ick, I'm not sure how people will like that. Open voter manipulation. Need time to think about this.

[Tatiana]

8. Details?

Why?

[Clark Can WIN]

15. Has to do with the viability factor in Iowas caucus system

The deal is if Edwards lacks viability in some precincts, Kucinich urges his supporters to join Edwardds supporters.

And visa versa.

[arewethereyet]

16. nonsense, its the very nature of the caucus

nice try

[Clark Can WIN]

86. Uh, that's why I said I needed more time to think about it

but thanks for being sweet.:thumbsup:

[redqueen]

17. I don't see this as manipulation

I see it as strategy. These two are close, and they like each other. I can see them working together to get the best results they can coming out of Iowa.

[Jerseycoa]

26. Agree

This is what Iowa is all about. I like it. Democracy in the rough. :)

[mmonk]

101. I still prefer straight democracy

over democracy in the rough (but even that didn't work in 2000).

[Waistdeep]

19. Manipulation?

Not really. They're just codifying a strategy that can easily be followed by their supporters. People don't have to follow the strategy if they don't want.

Tonight being my first caucus, I've been wondering how marginally viable candidates could maximize their impact. This is a good example. What this will guarantee is that Kucinich gets some representation from a few precincts while Edwards gets a bump of 2-4% (I'm assuming that not every Kucinich supporter will go along with this )

[bearfartinthewoods]

67. it's the way they do it. the people who declare, in the first round for

any candidate that doesn't have the support of at least 15% of the total people at the causcus have to eihter declare that they are uncommitted or join with another candidate in the second round.

[Clark Can WIN]

81. I guess I knew that supporters talked about it amongst themselves

I just didn't know that candidates did it so openly. I thought this hose trading was behind the scenes only.

[tishaLA]

9. The C-Span discussion of this today was interesting

They read an article from a major newspaper--I can't recall which--that said Kucinich supporters shouldswitch their support to Edwards in precincts where DK had less than 15% of the caucus vote.

I think this isn't unprecidented, though.

[Clark Can WIN]

10. This is just strange.

:shrug: Anybody heard of something like this before?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

83. Yes, standard operating procedure

for caucuses.

In the Iowa system, if a candidate gets less than 15% in a precinct, the other candidates' supporters try to woo them to their side, or else the supporters of minority candidates can choose to record themselves as "uncommitted."

[JI7]

11. kucinich has always liked edwards

no surprise here. but nice news for edwards. i think it may push him to the top today in iowa.

[Cocoa]

45. big surprise here

I never would have expected this. I'm going to have to take another look at Edwards now...

[AP]

100. I totally KNEW these guys are very similar.

It makes sense. I'm surprised that Kucinich has said it out loud, but this totally makes sense in terms of political philosophy.

[citizen snips]

12. Make a deal?

What is happening?

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[Cuban_Liberal]

14. This is S.O.P. for the caucuses.

Horse-trading goes on all the time in the caucuses. I'm pleased the Kucinich people chose Edwards, although I don't think there are enough of them to make much difference in Edwards' final numbers, overall.

[Lobo_13]

18. The question is

will Kucinich supporters who are by and large against the IWR actually hold to that deal.

[ulysses]

20. depends on the deal, I guess.

I can't for the life of me imagine what a Kucinich/Edwards deal would be, but hey...

[Waistdeep]

21. And conversely

Will those Edwards supporters who support Edwards because he is cute be able to stand in Kucinich' corner? B-)

[Lobo_13]

24. I'd like to think

that the IWR issue might have a little more weight than looks.

[Waistdeep]

28. It does for me

You recognized my comment as a joke, yes?

[Lobo_13]

33. It's sometimes difficult to tell

around here.

[Waistdeep]

35. That why I put on my shades

when I said it. B-)

[spooky3]

27. they can certainly choose Clark or Dean if they are uncomfortable.

[lurk_no_more]

22. If Edwards or Gebhardt wins Iowa

This could help Clark in NH, Interesting, Edwards, Kerry, Gebhardt, dean?


And then there were none!
” JAFO”

[Kathleen04]

32. I'm not so sure..

their wins could possibly launch them ahead of Clark..which would be more likely to happen if Edwards wins than Gephardt. My guess is that if either of them win, then the race in NH will become as tight as this IA race has become.

[arewethereyet]

38. An Edwards win hurts Clark, Gephardt not so much

Edwards has the south coming up fast and it will make him sizzle back home. At Clark's expense.

[TexasSissy]

41. Not so, grasshopper. Not so. As a Clark supporter, I'd much

prefer an Edwards win in IA to a Dean or Kerry win. Gephardt would be better, but Edwards will do.

Also, should Edwards win the nomination, he's someone that I would switch my vote to w/o hesitation. Not so with another one or two of the candidates.

But of course, I believe with all my heart and being that Clark will win.

[Kathleen04]

56. If Edwards wins IA..

how do you see the February 3rd states going, between just Clark and Edwards?

I'm thinking maybe:

Arizona-Clark
Delaware-Clark
Missiouri-Edwards
New Mexico-Clark
North Dakota-Clark
Oklahoma-Edwards
South Carolina-Edwards

I think this race coming down to Clark vs. Edwards would be exciting and a win win situation.

[Clark Can WIN]

87. I agree Clark vs. Edwards is very much

a win/win.

[stickdog]

106. For Bush, the DLC and the corporate media. (nt)

[arcos]

94. Dean is not going away...

he has a lot of money.

[arewethereyet]

63. your sentiment is at the heart of it

seems like many Clark supporters like Edwards. If Edwards come home a winner, Clark support could switch quickly as it was likely the result of fears of Edwards being an also ran.

But lets let our friends in Iowa have their day and their say !

[aquanut]

89. If Clark supporters like Edwards it may be...

...because he's the only mainstream candidate that hasn't called Clark a Republican (or worse).

The two campaigns have remained on good terms for most of the primary season (with the exception of the Shelton exchange back in November).

[bearfartinthewoods]

44. the talkin heads seem to think Edwards will skip NH and head south

[Kathleen04]

50. If he wins IA, he might

be able to get a bounce in NH without having to spend too much time there. It might make sense for him to spend time in SC and OK. He could split his time in both though.

[Jerseycoa]

54. He'd be smart to do it, too nt

[Nadienne]

25. Links, anyone?

To an article anywhere?

(It would make for an interesting read, I'm sure.)

Thank you.

[Jerseycoa]

29. It's breaking now

On MSNBC.

Noting: Kerry was taken by surprise, they say.

[citizen snips]

31. This is surprising

Kerry was speechless.

[Nadienne]

34. Thanks

[Tesha]

42. You mean to tell me that neither Kucinich nor Edwards phoned Kerry?

> Kerry was taken by surprise, they say.

You mean to tell me that neither Kucinich nor Edwards phoned
poor John Kerry?

I though that sort of behavior had been deemed an Emily Post
mortal sin here just a few weeks ago. :)

Tesha

[Cocoa]

53. hahahaha!

all that "endorsement etiquitte" stuff was so silly. :-)

[Feanorcurufinwe]

30. How can DK make this announcement without seeming 'unviable'?

Isn't this like an admission, before a single vote is cast, that he has no chance?

[SEAburb]

36. It is a two-way deal

Edward supporters will back Kucinich in precincts Edwards doesn't reach 15% threshold.

[diamondsoul]

49. No, not at all.

It's a way to ensure each of them have a better chance of gaining some delegates.

It's an admission that both men have some counties where they won't have enough support and they've worked out a way to mitigate that shortcoming.

[DjTj]

71. It will be great for both of them...

...Since they don't have big ground operations, this gives them both a little edge using their best group troops - the Iowans themselves.

[jenk]

52. Kucinich isn't dumb

He knows he's not going to win the Iowa caucus, so now he's suggesting somebody else the kucinich crowd can go to.

it doesn't make him any less of a man

[TexasSissy]

39. Wow! This could push Edwards over the top.

I didn't see this coming at all. I thought DK supporters would go to Dean, although some DK supporters have said that DKers don't like Dean.

I didn't suspect Edwards. Of course, will they do what DK requests? Very interesting and exciting!

[wheresthemind]

40. I don't think this is the kinda deal we expect....

Not a Carol-Dean deal, but maybe something like encourage their supporters to pick eachother as their second choices?

I think Dennis intends to stick around awhile longer...

[rucky]

43. How does this help Kucinich?

not to start any rumors, but I would not scoff at an Edwards/Kucinich ticket.

[diamondsoul]

55. Like I just posted upthread-

What is hoped is that counties where Dennis has a decent number of supporters and Edwards is short on them, the two groups will combine to boost the guy with the strongest showing and give them a better shot at delegates. You have to remember how Iowa Caucuses are conducted, county by county, and with that many counties, it's obvious none of the candidates are going to have great showings in ALL of them. This arrangement will give Kucinich and Edwards the strongest possible showing in each of the counties they do well in.

Kucinich and Edwards are friends, and I'd go for a combo ticket between them either way, in a New York minute!

[JohnKleeb]

60. please lol

I would like that.

[bearfartinthewoods]

75. an example....

in precinct 717, edwards has 37% of the caususers support and DK has 5%. the rules say that any candidate that doesn't reach 15% cannot be "certified" to get delegates. some of the Edwards people stand for DK so he can get delegates because they have more than enough to be certified. in another precinct, the DK folks will help supliment the Edwards people by standing with them.

[rucky]

78. Oh! This is AWESOME

i didn't know you could switch groups before the first count.

[Waistdeep]

85. I doubt it would work quite that way

Because the delegates are apportioned to the candidates on a precinct-by-precinct basis, the Edwards group would generally not ever give DK as much as 10%, because they might end up with one fewer state delegates that way. A few percent, one or two bodies, yes.

[BigBadDaddy-O]

46. How sad, they get along, and we freak out.

What a long strange trip it's been.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

47. A deal with the devil.

My respect for Kucinich just went down a notch. Making a deal with a pro-war candidate doesn't sit well with me.

[jenk]

58. Edwards? The Devil?

c'mon get over the vote thing already.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

66. Perhaps you can "get over the vote thing" but there are

thousands of dead and maimed people who can't. Neither will Edwards get over it. I don't expect much in the way of ethics in politicians but I draw the line at voting to have thousands of people killed.

[citizen snips]

61. That is not what the deal is based on.

They both have been running positive campaigns.

[GreenArrow]

64. it doesn't sit well with me either

Edwards is not only pro-IWR, he's also pro death penalty, pro drug war, pro nafta, and so on. I don't like the deal on non-policy issues either. I don't care for Edwards' phoney baloney aw shucks "charm"; and I don't trust hiim as far as I could throw him. Yuck.

From the political angle, I'm sure it can be beneficial to both men.

[Bombtrack]

65. it's sad what obsession with anti-war propaganda can do to people

Edwards isn't any more "pro-war" than Dean or Carol Mosley Braun. People here need to educate themselves about the IWR and Edwards stance.

He is not "cut and run" like Kucinich, so he's less anti-occupation than Kucinich

[GreenArrow]

72. what's even sadder is what pro-war propaganda can do to people

The Iraq war was and is BULLSHIT on every particular. And that includes both build-up and occupation.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

92. He voted FOR the war in Iraq.

23 other senators voted against it.

"Cut and run". Seems like I heard that phrase before. Oh, yeah, by a failed Democratic President named Lyndon Johnson who continued the slaughter in another third world country that was painted as a threat to America's "vital interests".

[Hippo_Tron]

74. Joe Lieberman is the only "pro war" candidate...

Edwards and Kerry were pro resolution which wasn't supposed to be a big green light to invade Iraq. Although Kerry and Edwards made aweful judgement in trusting the Bush administration, they were not necesarilly for the invasion of Iraq.

[deminflorida]

48. If Kerry moves his people, with the Veteran Support he has....

VFW's, American Legions, etc....

This could lead to a Kerry, Edwards, Dean/Gephardt - Gephardt/Dean

Finish...

I'm serious....The weather is not that bad in Iowa today....people are going to the show in record numbers.

What does it mean for Clark?...well it could mean a tough fight against Kerry in N.H.

But South Carolina is still wide open and Edwards would be a tough foe, but the National Security issue would probably trump him and give that state to Clark...Kerry will have a tougher time in South Carolina but he will do well because of the number of retired veterans in that state. Those Southern Vets could very well split between Clark and Kerry.

But it does throw open, Missouri, N.D. (Remember the McGovern endorsement comes in play here, even though he's from S.D.), Arizona, and New Mexico, where the states most important paper endorsed Clark this A.M. and finally Oklahoma...

Chances for a clean sweep for Clark on Feb. 3 are starting to emerge.

[Khephra]

51. Kucinich is my second pick (sometimes tied with Clark)

And I can tell you that this doesn't make me any more likely to support Edwards than before, even with Kucinich's backing.

The reason: the war. That's the reason a HELL Of a lot of people support Dean/Clark/Kucinich. Putting his backing behind Clark or Dean would have made more sense than Edwards.

Kucinich, the one guy who said he'll remove our troops from Iraq, putting his support behind one of the people who helped push the damn bill through the Senate.

I'm VERY disappointed in Kucinich at the moment. VERY.

[JohnKleeb]

57. I see what you mean by the war Khep

but
I think he has disagreements with Dean like on domestic issues, and those frankly are important too and with Clark, well ya see Dennis opposed the war in the Balkans and guess who the CO was, one Wesley Clark. Edwards has moved up on my list since the winter began.

[Khephra]

62. I like Kucinich

But be prepared for people with less tact trashing him from going from an anti-war candidate to supporting a pro-war candidate. It's not going to be pretty, John. Not at all. Remember the grief he got when he modified his abortion stance? This may be worse than that.

[JohnKleeb]

68. Looking at what the other DK supporters are saying

Seems to be positive. Groan yes I remember the grief. I don't know really. I still like and admire the guy. The others seem to be cool with it.

[Khephra]

73. hehe just wait a while

It's always calm before a storm.

;-)

[diamondsoul]

93. Actually, Kheph,

I suspect you may be missing the reason for the collaboration.

Like JohnKleeb said, Kucinich is more concerned with domestic issues, and the impact this pointless war and occupation are having on those issues. Kucinich and Edwards are on friendly terms and have been from the outset, which isn't to say they agree on everything, but think about it for a second- who is in the best position to influence your view of the world and what needs to change in it, a friend or an adversary?

Kucinich's disagreements with Clark and Dean have led to anger on all their parts, I think- possibly not Clark, but I don't think Kucinich will ever let go of the Balkan war because it's a personally painful event. What that means is that he doesn't trust himself to be objective with or about Clark- it's an admission of his own weak spot. He and Dean have been outright angry with each other and are likely to run into the same thing if they were to try to work together.

Meanwhile, he and Edwards have been able to talk and relate even while they disagree vehemently. They'll be more likely to reach compromises beneficial to both sides, if they team up, because they don't allow a disagreement to reach a level of anger and divisiveness between them.

[Khephra]

97. Nope, not missing it at all

I just happen to know a more than a few anti-war Kucinich supporters. The main reason they joined on to Kucinich instead of Dean was that they felt Kucinich was the TRUE ANTI-WAR CANDIDATE (that's how they'd say it). People who are that hard-core anti-war will not compromise. They're not going to sit down and talk about domestic issues. It's the war that means the most to them, and that's why (the people I've talked to) have supported Kucinich.

[diamondsoul]

103. Well, and the thing is

that's perfectly FINE with everyone involved! There's no law saying they have to switch to caucusing for Edwards, but I don't think they should be offended that others are willing to do so, or that Dennis would make a strategic arrangement to boost his chances in Iowa with another Dem he stays on friendly terms with.

I'm hearing a lot of what you're talking about, and frankly it smacks of the "with us or against us" nonsense to me. There's nothing at all wrong with disliking the arrangement and refusing to go along with it. There is something wrong with bashing Kucinich and other supporters because they're willing to compromise in a single instance to keep the field fluid.

[TreasonousBastard]

59. Well, there go your polls...

that didn't mean much anyway.

Heard this earlier, and figgered there would be a hundred posts by the time I got across the room. The two are old friends, and this gives both of them a leg up.

I hear Dennis actually has a few districts where he can pick up some delegates and outpolls Edwards. This reduces the probability that Dennis will wind up unviable and get no delegates, and increases Edwards' delegate count. Win-win for both, although Dennis does seem to see the end of the line, unfortunately.

The war is suddenly less relevant when survival is on the line.

OK, now, all of you new at this and jumping up and down at those bash threads--

this is the way it's really done. Whoever makes the best deals get the job. Deals for money, deals for support, deals for any advantage you can get.


I got the popcorn. It's gettin' to be a good show.

[CMT]

69. I'm not sure how this will go over with DK's true believers

To support a DLC, NAFTA supporter, Iraqi War resolution candidate may backfire. I point this out not as a hit on Edwards, who I think is running a good campaign but that some of the idealistic supporters of DK may not follow him.

[MuseRider]

76. There are many things

to consider here. I am a die hard Kucinch person but there are a lot of things to like about Edwards. Influence from both sides could make a huge ticket, moderating stances where needed to get the job done. DK does not waver so I am wondering how he might handle this, perhaps it is just for Iowa to assure that they both stay in the race. Who knows at this point but for now I am going to give DK the benefit of the doubt, he has not lead me wrong yet.

[Snivi Yllom]

70. Edwards-Kucinich?

Why not..

[bread_and_roses]

77. Words like these from Edwards

"Edwards slammed the Special interests in Washington vowing to build one America. Edwards charged that there are currently two Americas, one for rich and powerful and one for the rest us. He vowed to put us all under the same tent.

The Senator also said that the would ban corporations from donating to political campaigns and bid for Government contracts. He pointed out that Halliburton, Bechtel and the whole list of companies that are getting contracts in Iraq gave lots of money to George Bush."

from campaign log at:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/Iowa_Caucus.shtml

may help explain why DK is collaborating with Edwards.

Class warfare, YES, I say! Tell it like it is.

Another poster here (mbali, hoping I am spelling that correctly) directed me to Edwards proposed plans for addressing the third world conditions in our inner cities. I was impressed that he at least sounded knowledgable about some of the core issues that need to be addressed in that area. I confess to not following him much other than that, but will now take a closer look.

(edit - and again- to indicate quote)

[GreenArrow]

82. if Edwards really wants to help eradicate 3rd world conditions in US

he can rethink his postions on NAFTA, the death penalty and the drug war for starters.

[bread_and_roses]

96. You are 100% right

and I absolutely agree. I am continually distressed at how little play the candidates stand on the drug war gets here at DU, since I regard it as the primary tool of assault on civil liberties and of racial oppression by our corporate masters.

I think I just get so excited when ANY of the candidates speak in a way I can relate to...it's been a long black time, easy to willfully mistake a faint glimmer for a starburst.

[spooky3]

104. taking these one at a time, what problems do you have with

his positions on drugs (from his website):

"Expand Drug Treatment for At- Risk Youth
Edwards will expand drug treatment for at-risk youth. When drug-addicted criminals do not receive treatment, they are more likely to commit more crimes to keep paying for their habits.

Improve Drug Sentencing
Today, a drug user with the same amount of cocaine is punished very differently depending on the type of cocaine - for crack cocaine the penalty is 100 times greater than for powder cocaine.

This disparity is not justified. Edwards will address this disparity while at the same time imposing harsher sentences on drug crimes involving weapons, violence, or other aggravating circumstances.

Fight Methamphetamine Production
Methamphetamine is destroying many communities, especially in rural America.

Edwards has supported measures to stiffen the penalties for manufacturing methamphetamine and to give law enforcement more help in fighting “meth” manufacturing and trafficking."

[spooky3]

105. and what is wrong with these trade positions?

He was not in government when NAFTA was passed.

This is from his current website:

"Establish Strong Labor and Environmental Standards in New Trade Talks. The United States is currently pursuing two trade deals with Central and South American countries. The Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) would enlarge NAFTA to include five new nations and will be wrapped up this month. The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), involving 34 nations, is scheduled to conclude next year. President Bush has not advocated strong labor and environmental standards in trade agreements, and CAFTA and FTAA likely will not include these standards.

John Edwards believes that trade deals without strong labor and environmental standards are bad for American workers and bad for workers overseas. These weak deals encourage a corporate “race to the bottom” in which companies go to the countries that treat workers and the environment worst. Senator Edwards would only enter trade deals that protect labor rights and the environment. He would: (snip)"P

[spooky3]

107. re: death penalty

see comments at:

http://www.johnedwards2004.com/crime-and-justice.asp

[Jerseycoa]

79. COMING UP again on MSNBC now nt

[Tinoire]

84. After skimming this thread- I don't understand the big deal

This doesn't seem to be an endorsement- it seems to be more of a strategic manouver that will guarantee each the 15% they need by redistributing these combined forces where needed.

Just seems they're making sure they both have enough people on the surrounding hills to take the city, even if they have to re-balance their teams up to do it.

Another example of what a game this whole thing is.

[MuseRider]

88. Yes, you are right.

I think some people perhaps thought that DK had no chance and now know that he does have good support in some places, now possibly more if Edwards is doing well where he is not and visa versa. This just makes them both more sure to get the percentages that will take away from others. I could be wrong but you are right, it is a big game.

[depakid]

90. Strengthening Edwards is not a good development for Clark

Assuming (and it's a big assumption) that Kucinich supporters do in fact throw the majority of their support to Edwards and he takes second- or even wins, that's going to bolster a strong Southern candidate who will likely pull Southern undecided voters into his camp. That's not something I'd be crowing about if my candidate were relying on winning decisively in that region. Moreover, the perception of another viable Southern candidate cuts into Clark's available fundraising resources- and Edwards showed early on that he had considerable skill in raising money.

In addition, if (again a big if) Kerry comes in 3rd in Iowa due to Kucinich's move, that will not bode well, since he's been touted as leading in the polls the last several days, which would make splitting the southern base even more critical, because Dean will take the Northeastern States (maybe even Massachusetts with Kerry weakened) and California on March 2nd.

Whatever happens, it'll certainly be interesting to see whether the pro war Edwards actually gets a bounce out of this from the decidedly anti-war Kucinich supporters.

[Bread and Circus]

91. If Kucinich endorses him, then I say kudos to both!

Yay for both folks. I predicted this sort of thing should happen
about two threads ago.

[Tinoire]

95. This isn't an endorsement from what I see - it's a strategic collaboration

Just like the army does on it's exercises... I'll lend you a few cooks for Area A if you lend me a few mechanics for Area B so that we can both cover what we need covered.

Edwards supporters and Kucinich supporters teaming up to make sure the playing field remains fair. A very smart strategic move.

Thank you Edwards supporters for covering our weak spots as we cover yours!

[Bread and Circus]

99. Good for them, either way at least they are not lying about each

other's past history. I am so fed up with that.

[Tinoire]

102. That is one thing I like about them

I am not in agreement with Edwards' politics but he always comes across as a real gentleman, a sincere one. He is still an enigma for me though.

This will all be over soon. I hope we get through it in one healthy piece. All of us.

[AP]

98. This means so much to me, I can't even put it in words.

I love Kucinich. This makes so much sense. This is hugely important to me (to the extent that this is even about me -- which it isn't, but it tells me that my sense of what these men are all about was exactly right).

[DisgustedDemocrat]

108. Wow, this is one exciting horse race!

[WhoCountsTheVotes]

109. Edwards/Kucinich 2004!

Edwards has been my second choice for a while now. This is great news. The major issues I have with Edwards is the IWR and the PATRIOT Act (and the Bankruptcy bill I found out recently). On economic issues, Edwards is the most progressive of the "mainstream" candidates.

Every candidates supports the war, except for Kucinich, so I guess the best we can hope for is to work together on economic issues. The two candidates most concerned with keeping the corporations in check - this is good all around!