In your HEART you know you really want to vote for KUCINICH

[TheBigDemo]

If you are a true Democrat you have to truly want Kucinich for President. Kucinich is the only candidate that stands for all things of the Party.

:thumbsup: He voted against the War. Kerry and Edwards voted for it.

:thumbsup: He is against the Death Penalty. Kerry and Edwards are for it.

:thumbsup: He is for Gay Marriage. Kerry and Edwards are against it.

:thumbsup: He is for a Single Payer Universal Health Care System. Kerry and Edwards are not.

:thumbsup: He is for restoring Social Security benefits to persons 65 and older

:thumbsup: He is for spending more on education from Pre-school to College.

:thumbsup: He is for withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO

:thumbsup: He is for Restoring the Kyoto treaty

:thumbsup: He is for repeal of the Patriot Act

What Democrat is not for these changes? This is considered normal policy for all other Industrialized European nations.

If you are a true Democrat, you really do believe in all of the positions of Dennis Kucinich. He is the only one that stands 100% with the Democratic Platform.

I understand fully that Dennis is too liberal for the South, and for much of middle conservative American to win the General Election. But you know what, Kerry is already going to get the nomination. You will have a chance to vote for the Kerry/Edwards ticket after the nomination process. Vote for Kucinich now, it will not change the nomination outcome. But what it will do is show the DNC Elite that there are people that believe in Progressive Values in this country. That we Democrats, understand that we must nominate moderate candidates to win the General Election, but that once elected, our candidates should be appeasing the people that voted them into office. People that believe in the Progressive Reform.

Your single vote will not change the outcome of a Kerry/Edwards ticket. But it will change the politics of the nation. So you can toss your vote to the millions that go along with the majority on the basis of "electability". Or you can vote Kucinich and have your vote actually make a principled stance that calls attention to progressive values and moves this nation away from direction that Bush has moved it over the last 3 years, not towards it.

Please vote Kucinich in 2004, it will make a difference in making this nation more Progressive.

Thank you.

FEAR ENDS
HOPE BEGINS
KUCINICH 04'

[Dookus]

1. Nope

this lifelong Democrat has no interest in voting for Kucinich.

It's possible for people to disagree on this and still be good Democrats.

[TheBigDemo]

5. If you disagree with all of them, are you still a Democrat?

I understand a few disagreements with the Democrats, but when you disagree with 95% of the platform, how are you a Democrat?

[leyton]

8. Who's to say that's the platform?

If Kerry and Edwards are in disagreement with Kucinich on so many of these issues, why is it assumed that Kucinich is the one adhering to the platform? I think if we nominate Kerry, the party is giving more weight to his platform than to Kucinich's.

[TheBigDemo]

See post 15 n/t

[no name no slogan]

37. These issues have been at the heart of the party platform for YEARS

Unfortunately, we keep nominating candidates who have NOTHING in common with it!

Anti-death penalty, pro-labor, universal health coverage, etc. have ALL been core issues of the Democratic Party platform going back as far as the 60s, at least.

Go ahead and look at the platform. If we elected candidates who agreed with more of the platform, we'd have had universal healthcare in the 70s.

[Dookus]

11. HUH?

What are you talking about?

It is NOT the Democratic party's platform to withdraw unilaterally from treaties. It is NOT the Democratic party's platform to cut and run in Iraq.

But more than issues, it's a matter of temperament - Dennis seems to believe the Presidency can be run by fiat. I think that's dangerous.

[TheBigDemo]

15. Try reading the Platform n/t

[leyton]

18. Can you point us there?

And someone enlighten me - is the platform not adopted at convention?

[Dookus]

19. Instead of that

why don't you quote the relevant sections of the Democratic party platform that

call for gay marriages

call for an end to the death penalty

call for withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO

call for repealing the Patriot Act


Perhaps you should read the platform.

[TheBigDemo]

27. More to the point, Your postions are in the Republican Platform: See link

Gay marriage:
http://www.ngltf.org/electioncenter/Rep2000Platform.htm

NAFTA:
http://www.issues2000.org/Celeb/Republican_Party_Foreign_Policy.htm


Death Penalty:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/conventions/republican/features/platform.00/

You know very well the parties have not conventioned since the passing of the Patriot Act.

[Dookus]

30. Then why did you say

it was part of the platform?

What about the other issues? I'm not even arguing any side on those issues - I'm merely asking you to back up your assertion that they are part of the Dem platform.

[TheBigDemo]

32. Well for starters if your postions are printed exactly the same as in

the Republican Platform, it goes without saying that you are most likely not a real strong Democrat. Second, many of the positions in general, not exact wording, are in the Democratic Platform. Third, you have no real concept of the terms Democrat and Republican mean if you are arguing that Democrats are the ones pushing for the Patroit Act. They are not. Democrats push for Equality Issues.

If you think that Democrats are Conservative and back the positions of the republicans, your point is excepted. But I believe most Democrats are less like Zell Miller and more like Ted Kennedy.

[Dookus]

33. Don't change the subject

Show me where those items are in the Dem Party platform.

You can't. You made it up.

Saying that refusal to agree with YOU on every issue makes one less of a Democrat, is just wrong.

YOU brought up the platform as the definition of who's a Democrat, then you quote a bunch of things that aren't in the platform.

You made it up.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[Dookus]

36. None of your damned business

where I live, but I can say it's one of the most liberal towns in America.

However, you continue to evade the subject.

Show where in the DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM the issues I listed above are.

[TheBigDemo]

38. Read and you shall find:

Sorry, if you refuse to read, I cannot make you do that. I provided like 4-5 links for you. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make them drink.

Salt Lake is not that Liberal. LOL

[Dookus]

39. You're being obtuse

I've not even offered opinions on most of the issues I mentioned - you don't know WHERE I stand.

You have failed to show where the issues I listed above are listed in the Democratic Party platform.

You made it up.

You created it out of whole cloth.

You pulled it out of your ass.

And all the other way of saying that thing I'm now allowed to say outright...

On edit: To refresh your memory, here are the issues I mentioned

call for gay marriages

call for an end to the death penalty

call for withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO

call for repealing the Patriot Act

[redqueen]

59. By voting FOR the Patriot Act, they voted AGAINST the party

From the platform:

Battling Terrorism. Whether terrorism is sponsored by a foreign nation or inspired by a single fanatic individual, such as Osama Bin Laden, Forward Engagement requires trying to disrupt terrorist networks, even before they are ready to attack. We must improve coordination internationally and domestically to share intelligence and develop operational plans. We must continue the comprehensive approach that has resulted in the development of a national counter-terrorism strategy involving all arms and levels of our government. We must continue to target terrorist finances, break up support cells, and disrupt training. And we must close avenues of cyber-attack by improving the security of the Internet and the computers upon which our digital economy exists.

As President, Al Gore will tolerate no attack against American interests at home or abroad: terrorists must know that if they attack America, we will never forget. We will scour the world to hunt them down and bring them to justice.

While fighting terrorism, we will protect the civil liberties of all Americans. Our justice system must guarantee fairness with procedures that protect the rights of the accused, even under the unusual circumstances of the investigation of threats to our national security. We must avoid stereotyping, for it defeats the highest purposes of our country if citizens feel automatically suspect by virtue of their ethnic origin. The purpose of terrorism is not only to intimidate, but also to divide and fracture, and we cannot permit that to happen.

[leyton]

16. Exactly.

With regards to "cut and run" - some will say that leaving the UN in charge is not cut and run. I think it is, because we took the responsibility of nation-building upon ourselves when we started the war. Just because a new President will come to power doesn't mean we can reverse that - just like Bush shouldn't have withdrawn from the Kyoto Accords.

[GreenArrow]

22. "we took the responsibility of nation-building upon ourselves"

"when we started the war" Kind of like a not-to-be named dictator of the last century who invaded Poland and a bunch of other countries.

He had no legitimate business being there, and we have no legitimate business in Iraq.

[leyton]

24. Nation-building

I don't know the relation between Hitler and nation-building. But I think some good can come of this - we can set up a stable democracy. But I think we have to be in it for the long haul. Perhaps we can relinquish some control to the UN, but relinquishing all control is to me out of the question.

[GreenArrow]

25. considering that we went in illegally, were uninvited,

are currently unwanted, are using heavy-handed tactics to despoil the country, kill and poison its people and steal its resources, I don't think that we will be able to affect any real positive change in that country. It looks like we'll be there for the forseaable future, though, so I guess time will tell.

[Vas Liz]

55. I hate to tell you this

but you can not bring a stable democracy at the point of a sword. It just doesn't work.

[KittyWampus]

2. Exact Oppostie For Me. As Time Goes On

I become less likely to ever want Dennis to be President.

Have lots of respect for him though.

[jenk]

3. nope

he's actually starting to agitate me a little. he's getting the nader "ego thing"

[leyton]

4. Er...

"If you are a true Democrat you have to truly want Kucinich for President."

I don't believe you get to define who's a true Democrat and who isn't. I'll choose my party for myself, thank you.

"He is for a Single Payer Universal Health Care System. Kerry and Edwards are not."

I believe Kerry and Edwards do have health care plans. Are they simply not valid because they are not Kucinich's, or what?

"He is for withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO"

I firmly believe that there are solutions - such as enforcing the fair trade clauses of NAFTA. We can't just turn back the clock, because globalization is not going to go away, no matter how much you hope for it.

A lot of people here, and that includes many Kucinich supporters, get irritated when they are asked to start supporting Kerry because he's presumed to be the nominee. Well, there are those of us who get tired of being told we're not true Democrats because we don't support Kucinich. So please, stop.

[no name no slogan]

40. Nobody says "turn back the clock" on trade

All we're saying is that NAFTA is a flawed agreement, and that according to WTO rules, it CANNOT be changed by us. If we do try to change it, we can be penalized substantially by the WTO.

I myself and many other DK supporters support globalization; however, we do not support it as outlined in NAFTA, FTAA, CAFTA, etc. These agreements were created by corporations, for corporations and at the expense of workers rights and human rights.

Nobody is saying that Edwards' and Kerry's health care plans are not valid. However, they are not single-payer universal plans like the ones in other western capitalists democracies (and ones favored by 70%+ of Americans, according to Pew). Incidentally, single-payer universal healthcare has also been a plank in the party platform since at least the Great Society days-- Medicaid was only the first step.

[RichM]

6. I agree with you 100%.

Excellent summary of the main points. :thumbsup:

[union_maid]

7. Not me either

I do support most of the things that Dennis Kucinich supports, but I don't prefer him as president, because he couldn't deliver them in a million years. There would be zero honeymoon time and every initiative would be crushed, and what's worse, discredited, before it got off the ground. He'd be a lame duck before the first anniversary of taking office. I'd much prefer incremental change to more regression and people like Kucinich can do a lot more good out there in the country popularizing some of those causes and bringing them into the mainstream than he would as an isolated president.

[TheBigDemo]

12. I don't think you get my point

I know he couldn't be President. But by voting for him you do popularize his progressive positions and make it easier for those incremental changes to happen. The Republicans are making incremental changes in the opposite direction. We need to balance things out again.

[MurikanDemocrat]

9. I'm a "real" Democrat, and really don't want to vote for Kucinich.

[welshTerrier2]

10. Death Penalty

of course, this issue is not particularly relevant to a presidential race, but since you brought it up, my understanding is that Kerry is a long-term opponent of the death penalty ...

he did indicate in the debate yesterday, that he would support the death penalty for people convicted of terrorism ... i don't agree with him on this exception ...

i'll be voting for Kucinich tomorrow in the massachusetts primary ... i'll be working for Kerry and voting for him in November ...

[wyldwolf]

13. Your Jedi mind tricks won't work on me!

[arewethereyet]

14. I don't think so

He voted against the War. Kerry and Edwards voted for it.
As America agreed that they should have.

He is against the Death Penalty. Kerry and Edwards are for it.
Only Edwards is for it, as is America is and he should be.

He is for Gay Marriage. Kerry and Edwards are against it.
As America is and they should be.

He is for a Single Payer Universal Health Care System. Kerry and Edwards are not.
Edwards has a plan that is actually attainable.

He is for restoring Social Security benefits to persons 65 and older
Great, lets make an insolvant plan MORE insolvant.

He is for spending more on education from Pre-school to College.
As is everyone.

He is for withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO
As would kill the American ecomony.

He is for Restoring the Kyoto treaty
As noone should be. Its goal was to enrich the third world, not manage pollution.

He is for repeal of the Patriot Act
Adjustment maybe.


Its perfectly possible to be a democrat and not agree with Kucinich. The textbook democrat JF Kennady would not have agreed with him and neither do I.

[TheBigDemo]

21. Where do you exactly disagree with Bush?

Just curious.

[arewethereyet]

46. where it matters, on how you manage the economy

[RichM]

47. This is the most hilarious example of rightwing drivel I've seen all day -

and that's saying something, because there's a helluva lot of rightwing drivel on DU. But this post - this is really something special. The colossal ignorance on display here just boggles the mind.

I love this repeated refrain of "As America is and they should be." I think Bush could use it in his campaign.

I love this "Democrat" who feels hostility towards Kyoto, on grounds that it would "enrich the third world." Whatsamatter, those Third World countries getting too much money for your tastes? Yeah, you're right, those welfare queens are living too high on the hog. We should really put the screws to 'em, & keep 'em in their place. :eyes:

[arewethereyet]

49. so you would prefer to ignore the will of the people ?

We're here to select a nominee for president of the United States, not just Liberals. When this party forgets that, we end up with Michael Dukakis. When we remember it, we end up with Clinton and Carter.

If you want to do something about pollution, then don't set up a scheme where polluters have to buy dispensation from non-producing nations. No change to the environment, goods cost more. Its a terrible idea.

You may want to consider taking off the rose colored glasses once in a while.

[RichM]

53. So, you think the problem with Dukakis was that he was too "liberal," &

that Carter won his one term because he wasn't too liberal? Is that what you're saying? Well, no surprise here - but you're dead wrong on both counts.

FYI, Dukakis was not particularly liberal. He didn't have a single policy position in 1988 that anyone remembers today. He himself refused to call himself liberal, saying instead, "This election is not about ideology; it's about competence." He didn't lose the election because of policy or ideology; he lost because he was incredibly dull, stood for nothing in particular, & didn't know how to fight back against dirty attacks.

Carter just barely won his one term in 1976, and this was ONLY because of Watergate. It had nothing to do with his ideology. In fact, Carter campaigned as being more liberal than he really was, making several left-leaning promises he never kept -- such as his proposal to cut defense spending. Mondale, in his VP acceptance speech, stressed themes of disarmament & nuclear weapons control.

PS - Do you even know what the expression "rose colored glasses" means? I suggest you look it up in a dictionary.

[arewethereyet]

54. no

Carter and Clinton won because they were able to deliver a positive image of an administration led by them.

Dukakis lost because he could not.

Turns out Carter could not deliver on his promise so out he went. Clinton did so he got his 2nd term despite "it all".

You would need to turn to literature for the definition of rose colored glasses. I've read it, have you ? You are certainly dismissing the reality of recent elections so I'd say its apt.

[RichM]

57. Let's compare your SocialSecurity comment to today's Krugman piece-

To attack DK's position, you call Social Security "insolvent."

Today, Krugman comments on this very subject:

"...You see, although the rest of the government is running huge deficits — and never did run much of a surplus — the Social Security system is currently taking in much more money than it spends. Thanks to those surpluses, the program is fully financed at least through 2042..."

Do you notice any conflict between his view and yours? What does that suggest to you, about the quality of your criticism of Kucinich?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/02/opinion/02KRUG.html?hp

[John_H]

17. Yup. But my head knows that not enough people agree with the ol' ticker

for Dennis to get within thirty points of the Chimp.

[TheBigDemo]

20. Do you really think voting for Kucinich will get him the nomination?

It won't, but it will show your true voice.

[doc03]

23. I will vote Kucinich in Ohio

I know he has no chance of winning but I have to vote my conscience.
He is the only one that is against NAFTA/WTO and the war in Iraq.
For me those are the most important issues for America. There isn't a dimes worth of difference between Kerry, Edwards and Bush on NAFTA/WTO. Kerry and Edwards both voted for the war.

[Dookus]

26. BigDemo...

please come back and show us where all those items you listed are in the Democratic platform.

[TheBigDemo]

28. Please see post #27 n/t

[Dookus]

31. In which you changed the subject

and totally failed to show where all your items are part of the Democratic platform?

I read it. I remain unimpressed.

[OhioStateProgressive]

29. people who disagree should be flogged

quite frankly, no, if you don't support Kucinich, you aren't a real Democrat or Progressive

I am sad that only 10% of the people actually want a better America

[HuskerDem]

48. Ah, I see.......... Only 10%> are as progressive, enlightened and all

around nifty as you are? How progressive of you, and enlightened too.

[BradCKY]

58. Is that the DU's new motto

Crush all dissent and indepedent thought, if you don't agree with the far left and follow the DU line on all issues, you are a traitor to the democratic party.

Great approach, I'm sure its very effective in convincing people.

:eyes:

[corporatewhore]

34. He aint too liberal for the south texas gop agrees with him NO NAFTA/WTO

they have a plank to withdrawl

[HuskerDem]

41. If I don't........... does that make me some kind of rat bastard or

something? Or could we just dissagree on the best candidate? I don't think Kucinich would make a great president. He's a great guy that brings important things to the table and a very admirable and committed heart. Just not my first choice.

[LWolf]

42. No.

It doesn't make you a rat bastard. It makes you free to exercise your right to vote for whomever you want. I agree to disagree; I think Dennis Kucinich offers what this country needs to cleanse and heal what we have become, therefore making him a great president, and a great choice in this election.

If the majority don't agree, I'll continue trying to survive in corporate America. Just like I am today.

[InhaleToTheChief]

43. If you share Kucinich's beliefs...

...then vote for him in the primary, regardless of whether or not you think it likely that he will win. Send Kucinich delegates to the convention. His ideas deserve more attention in the general election.

[revcarol]

44. Democrat for 42 years already voted,

with her heart, her intelligence(hey, I'm the one telling this,)her senses, her years of wisdom, her intuition, her flair for thinking outside the box, her common sense, her pocketbook, her sense of the right time,.....FOR KUCINICH.

[brendan120678]

45. Tomorrow I am casting by vote for...

Kucinich, of course. I really do like him, and it encourages me to see how idealistic he is. Even if he has no chance in hell of getting the nomination, at least having somewhat of a strong showing of delegates may be able to influence the platform developers in the party.

This will be a few firsts for me...

First time:

1. Voting in a voting booth (even though I am 25, from age 18 to now I always voted absentee. Now that I am back at home again working on my Masters, I can actually go see what the inside of a voting booth looks like!)
   
2. First time I have never actively campaigned for anyone in an election cycle. 4 Years ago I was campus coordinator at Saint John's University and Queens County (NYC) co-coordinator of students for Bradley's bid for Prez. This time around I've just been to busy to do more than drive around with a Kucinich sticker in the side window of my VW.
   

SO nonetheless, I am looking forward to tomorrow. I'm sure I'll be waiting outside the polling place at noon for the doors to open.

[newyawker99]

56. Hi brendan120678!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

50. Already had the chance.

I voted for Clark instead.

[Hippo_Tron]

51. NO! and I resent being told that I'm not a true Democrat...

If I don't vote for Kucinich. Look, I think Dennis Kucinich is a great guy and a valuable asset to the democratic party but I'd rather have John Kerry as President of the United States.

With Kerry, I get a president who...

Is not afraid to use force but will only do so when necessary.

Is against the death penalty except for terrorists

Has a healthcare plan that will actually pass congress

Wants to spend more on primary/secondary education and has a community service for college tuition program.

Wants to repeal the provisions of the Patriot Act that allow the government to violate our civil liberties

The only one of these I disagree with him on is gay marriage, and that's not a huge issue for me. And franly, I think civil unions are a giant leap in the right direction.

[R3dD0g]

52. Goddamned Right I Want To Vote For DK

Unfortunately, he won't even be on my primary ballot come May 18.

But, still I signed up for his newsletter and sent him a picayune sum way back in the summer of 03.

Just because the people of the US are stupid doesn't mean all of us are.

DK would be an excellent president.