Why isn't Kucinich being mentioned. I am so tired of choosing some of the middle of the road person who doesn't embrace all of my ideals. That is why we lost last time. We were split between what we wanted and what felt like was possible. If Seabiscuit could win, so can Kucinich who embodies everything I want. I want health prevention...not early detection. I want the freedom to use herbs and vitamins and not be worried that the Europe and Canada restrictions will take away our rights here too. I want someone who works for me instead of what we can do for him. I just don't get why he is being shunned. He has vision, presence, and is refreshing. I really can't believe it is just about his name being hard to remember. Surely if people can say Arnold Schwartenager (even if they can't spell it), then they can learn to say Kucinich's name!


p.s. I forgot to check the declared box when I signed up so my message got posted to the wrong box. Sorry that it is in both places but I want Democrats views on this

At this point. all democrats, including me, are just trying to push ANY democrat into office. It's time to stop squabling over which democrat.... but ANY democrat that embodies the basic ideals of what it means to be a democrat is good enough for me.

I'm throwing my support to any democrat so loosely because democrats need those extra votes if they even want a prayer of winning. I absolutely refuse to vote for Bush.

Dennis Kucinich is a good candidate, certainly better than Lieberman, who seems more like a Republican.

I'm backing Howard Dean because of his stance against the Iraq war and also because he says that the nations we trade with should follow the same rules, human rights and workers rights, that our country follows. This is a man of principle.

But the fact is, I would vote for Kucinich in a heartbeat over Dubya if he were to become the nominee.

Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate that has shown any sign of real empathy or true conviction in his beliefs. It's amazing to me that people can't see this, and even more amazing that those who do see this are still willing to support one of those corporate owned mouthpieces like Lieberman or Gephart.

people better WAKE UP!! NOW!!

If you don't you'll be stuck with emperor Bush for another 4 years.

Good Luck. I'm out of hear and off to Canada.
You morons can rot in your american dictatorship.

BCBound - did you miss the notice at the top of this page? This forum is form declared Democrats ONLY.

I would also advise you not refer to the membership here as morons. It is not constructive.

Well first off he looks like an evil elf. Shallow yes, but I was watching the debates with 40 odd people the other night and thats just about all they could agree on. Looks definitely matter in television dominated society.

Why isn't he getting more support or attention? Because rational democrats realize that with a republican dominated senate and house the president isn't going to get implement much of anything. He is going to be a break and a veto machine. Just like Clinton was. So why lose an election trying to get a man elected that won't be able to implement a single thing he's teaching? Most people would rather actually elect Kerry, Clark, or whoever, and have their threat and use of the veto give the democrats in congress a much needed boost in power.

Oh yeah and there is whole Smoot Hally style economic collapse followed by global depression that would ensue if the US just walks away from the WTO.

I don't want to rip on Kucinich excessively- I've seen him speak before a small gathering and he came off very well, then. What I've seen since he started running is, in fact, properly summed up in the aforementioned "evil elf" dynamic. It's not just the underwhelming appearance, he's managed to combine Dean's anger and Lieberman's love of ripping on the other candidates and take both up a notch. Agree or disagree with the man, his charisma is the exact opposite of Clinton's. He's unmarketable- think how much fun the Repubs could have with a guy that imposes vegan rules in his debate greenroom.
I don't think that obstinately refusing to compromise makes you principled- I think the foreseeable consequence of voting Green in 2000 was the election of someone with just such a "my way or you're a rat fink" view of the world. I'd rather have someone who can persuade Repubs to voting our way when possible (thus doing actual good), not someone who'll feel morally vindicated in losing. Finally, being politically tone death, out of the mainstream (however wrong the mainstream is), and uncharasmatic doesn't mean he doesn't flip-flop when politically expedient. I take exception when people claim our field of candidates is lackluster, but Kucinich is the least among them in areas other than height and polls. At least Sharpton's jokes work.

Key Issues <--Read me

I have decided to back Dennis Kucinich. He appears to be genuine. I don't care if he looks like an "evil elf" to some people. Actually, when I saw him declaring his candidacy on CNN yesterday, I saw a kind expression.

It's time we stopped looking at candidates as window dressing for the Presidency.
Kucinich, in my opinion, represents the interests of the common people. He was and is against this engagement in Iraq, which I see as commendable. (For those people who say "We support our troops" and push for a pro-war agenda, how does sending these troops off to die on foreign soil and for questionable political motives "support" them??? )

Kucinich cuts through the rhetoric of others, and it doesn't look as though he is beholden to foreign interests, or big corporations, or the Skull & Bones Society, or the Council on Foreign Relations, or the Trilateral Commission. He is a dark horse only because these power brokers did not make him.

It would be so refreshing to have a President who looked at issues from the standpoint of the good of the people of the United States, addressing domestic problems before interfering with other nations.

It would be refreshing to have a President who cared enough to tell the truth.

(edited to include link)

His views on free trade are non-constructive to say the least. The US can't just pull out of the WTO and NAFTA. Even if we wanted to it would crash about 50 economies world wide and would lead to a global economic recession, which would eventually even hurt the mighty US. I don't like the WTO, but there needs to be a world body governing trade. Also the US economy is set up to take advantage of free trade, if tariffs suddenly sprung up then business plans would fail, earnings would drop, people would be laid off, stocks would drop, investment portfolios would crash, ect. Look at what happened with steel and sugar, we put tariffs in place to protect producers from cheap imports, and it caused consumers of those commodities to fail or to move their plants outside the US to escape the tariffs. Steel benders, people that make everything from cans to rebar to bicycle frames, are getting KILLED by higher commodity prices and are having to lay people off left and right. Why is the job of a steel worker in Bethlehem PA any more important than that of a worker who makes steel cans for Campbells outside Camden NJ?

Kucinich doesn't have an economic plan he has feel good union economic rhetoric. Dont' get me wrong I'm a big supporter of promoting global environmental and labor standards. But to do so takes hard choices and innovative planning. Kucinich is just a reprise of the feel good pseudo-economic pie in the sky idealogy that has lost the Democrats so many elections in the past.

Which is besides the main point that the man in NOT charismatic or telegenic. His policies aren't in line with the majority of Americans even Democrats. Sounds like the perfect definition of someone who should lose an election.

The Democrats need someone who is going to win, not get blown away in a landslide. After watching the far left hand the last election to Bush with their Nader excursion it drives me insane that they would want to do the same exact thing when they're the ones who hate Bush the most.

I.) Why he can't win the primary
A.) Lowest popularity of 9 according to Gallup poll (2% to Sharpton's 5%- of Dems)
B.) Not charismatic
C.) Poor fundraiser
D.) like Lieberman, shows contempt for most of the party
E.) Waffled on abortion
F.) opposed taking down the Taliban
II.) Why he'd make a bad nominee
A.) not charismatic
B.) Little appeal to indep. and moderates
C.) Waffled on abortion
D.) Poor fundraiser
E.) opposed taking down the Taliban
F.) Claim to fame is defaulting on loans, bad p.r. despite good reasons
III.) Why I'll be cursing his name after he backs out/loses
A.) May continue attacking other, successful Dems out of sour grapes
B.) May ally with Nader to help 2000 repeat, 'cause what we really need is 4 more years of Bush
IV.) Why it'd still be bad if he was elected Pres.
A.) Would inherit Congress way too much to his Right to accomplish his plans
B.) Lacks savvy to campaign to change congressional make-up
C.) Would withdraw troops from Iraq w/o stabilizing the country, meaning it finally would be a haven for terrorists (as it's becoming under Bush's mishandling).

Being extreme in one's rhetoric is equated as having more integrity than others (b/c alienating moderates=integrity, somehow?), but doesn't anyone find it suspect that he changed his opinion on abortion right before deciding to run for nominee of a mostly pro-choice party ? He saw his vegan, pro-life and pacifist views as all of one cloth, but he conveniently changed his mind before running as the progressive candidate. Where is the conviction that he's the only "honest" candidate for "the common people" coming from, other than his attacks on the more popular candidates? Frankly, he strikes me as no more earnest but more negative than most of the other candidates.

Whoa, pennDerek, but when will you tell us how you really feel!?

OK, so I like what he has to say. There was a link to the link I provided, an article by Studs Terkel, that deals with the kind of man Kucinich is. I think he's got guts.
And it's pretty evident that he is in nobody's pocket.

I'm just tired of the smoke-filled room guys who provide the country with just more of the same promises with no intentions of keeping them. Men raised in privilege, men who attend the Bohemian Grove summer camp, men who give their secret handshake and all the doors open up for them.

If Carol Moseley-Braun (another two-percenter, I believe) had a prayer of making it, I would actually vote for her in preference to all the others, but since her anatomy is different, she can only count on this bully pulpit of the Democratic debate for a few more months.

As far as free trade goes, it has snookered the American workforce. Corporations continue their exodus to other countries at an alarming rate, even Levi Strauss. They have shown no loyalty to American workers.

Kucinich is concerned with the hemorrhaging of the American job market. It's time China got less of our business and the 50 United States got appreciably more.
I think the "evil elf" has his priorities straight. Elections are not supposed to be
beauty contests.

Whether or not I can convince you or any others in this thread to vote for Dennis Kucinich, I have been given an opportunity to share a link on this candidate who is at the very least worthy of investigation by the voters. Obviously, what you choose to do with it is your prerogative.

(edited)

The China speel is old hat. If the working class really hates losing jobs to China they should stop buying at Wal-mart and start buying higher priced US made goods. But they don't of course. People are all about protectionism when it comes to income and free trade when it comes to purchases. US companies and multi-nationals are not shadowy forces of evil that are beyond human control. In the 80's people got so mad about South Africa that they FORCED us firms to divest themselves of amazingly profitable ventures in that country. People have the power they're just too greedy gluttonous and lazy to use it.

I remember in the early 90's when the US textiles industry was giving out its last short breaths they ran those "Mommy why do we have to move? Well dear people bought cheaper clothes from other countries rather than ones made in the US so daddy lost his job." commercials plus the whole "VISA "America's FREEDOM fabric!" campaign. The industry and the unions literally spent millions explaining to anyone who cared to listen that penny pinching ambivalent consumers were costing the US tens of thousands of jobs. And no one cared.

The simple fact is that cheap imported goods raise the standard of living for the majority that don't lose their jobs. And thats all consumers, be they poor, working class, middle class, or rich, seem to care about. Until that changes no politician is going to do squat to effect the issue in a positive manner.

If you are waiting for the general public to develop a conscience when they are trying to make their dollars stretch further, I doubt that it is going to happen, any more than corporate execs are going to develop a conscience about shipping our jobs to another country to save bucks and make the almighty shareholders happy.

This is why protective tariffs are so important. This is also why we need to be more consistent in dealing with other countries, especially other countries with lousy human rights records, like China and Cuba.

Selfishness is ubiquitous in our society. But even at that, an otherwise thoughtful person who is making McDonald's wages cannot be expected to pay a higher price on domestically produced products if it means getting behind on the bills.

Kucinich, more than many of the others, understands these things and takes the time to address them.

As a fellow Ohioian, I can't tell you how thrilled we all are to have our very own Dennis the Menace running for president. Yep, there's a buzz in the air and there's a lot of excitement going on in O-h-i-o.

Okay. I'm lying.

The fact of the matter is that there's no buzz about Kucinich even in his home state. Maybe in Cuyahoga County somebody cares, but in the remaining 87 counties of the state, it's much ado about nothing.

While Kucinich is probably the candidate I'm most in agreement with politically speaking, I have no intention of voting for him even if he should be able to hang on until the state primary next March. I agree with what Michael Moore said about Kucinich. He's a nice guy and right on most of the big issues, but he isn't going to get the nomination and he can't beat Bush. Those are two things that are important to me and Kucinich falls short on both counts.

I understand why it might feel good to throw Dennis a bone, but invariably all it would be is a gesture and in 2004, a feel-good gesture just isn't good enough.

(First off, I'm democrat, and hit the wrong thing when I joined, so I hope I've properly corrected it now )

Anyway, I think Kucinich could be a good candidate for VP runner next to a more feasible Pres candidate like Dean or Kerry - but he would have to get in line for the campaign. If we could muster a candidate capable of beating Bush, it would be nice to have someone "waiting in the wings" who might be able to ride a (hopefully) positive tide and get elected after our dem president gets in their and reverses the entire political landscape (as in we get a dem or at least more even split congress and people become more willing to vote for dems). But then, not many people are prob willing to end up like Gore - a good candidate, but harmed by previous pres wrongs and one's own tv persona.

Of course, if we picked pres and vp based on the current republican model, we could choose a powerful, yet silent vp who embodies the basic tenets of the far left (at least in the dems case) and a windbag/talking monkey for pres. Of course, we might have to figure out how to steal ourselves an election - but then I obviously digress... I guess I still might be smartin' a little bit from that last smack in the face pres election

But seriously, dems have a choice if we want to pick one that might win or pick one that might actually pursue some of the goals of the democratic party (other than beating Bush). My mother is so frustrated she's wants dems to pick a woman (ala mosely-b ) and another long shot like kucinich for vp because if we can't win, we might as well make some waves! Bottom line is there is a rare dem like Clinton who is charismatic enough to overcome the general population's seeming tendency toward conservatism.

I honestly worry about Clark - he may be the only candidate that is pretty much untouchable when republicans start talking their brand of patriotism - but he's the least democrat of the candidates (well, obviously since he was a republican until he wanted to be the democratic candidate) and his about face on the war on Iraq is such a dishonest republican move it makes me cringe.

[quote]Well first off he looks like an evil elf. Shallow yes, but I was watching the debates with 40 odd people the other night and thats just about all they could agree on. Looks definitely matter in television dominated society.[/quote]

If he doesn't look too good then that could be a good sign in that he actually has worked as a Congressperson.


[quote]I.) Why he can't win the primary
A.) Lowest popularity of 9 according to Gallup poll (2% to Sharpton's 5%- of Dems)[/quote]
Here's a poll he scored high in:
[URL=http://www.austin.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=9109&group=web cast]Dennis is favored amongst Austin voters[/URL]
He scores the highest in many online polls.
http://htmlgear.tripod.com/poll/control.po...anabel_1&i=13&a =vote

http://freeinternetpress.com/pollBooth.pl?...n=&qid=4&aid=-1

http://www.channelvip.splashhost.com/forum...3829e4ecde39be3 08e98acb728fb4&action=showresults&pollid=44

http://www.misterpoll.com/results.mpl?id=2591387123

http://www.demochoice.org/dcresults.php?po...oll=0310#Round1

http://www.potuspoll.com/email-thanks.htm (click on view results)
[quote]
B.) Not charismatic[/quote]

I think he has good charisma. He has gone to homeless shelters to talk to people there.

[quote]Poor fundraiser[/quote]

Only because many people don't know how to access his website so they don't know where to send funds.

[quote]D.) like Lieberman, shows contempt for most of the party [/quote]

Actually, he likes the Democratic Party and has stated he'd support whoever receives the nomination

[quote]E.) Waffled on abortion [/quote]

He's pro choice and the only candidate willing to make Roe vs. Wade a litmus test for judges

[quote]II.) Why he'd make a bad nominee
A.) not charismatic[/quote]

see my text above
[quote]
B.) Little appeal to indep. and moderates [/quote]

he attracted former Republicans like me and my ex-Republican friends to the Democratic Party

[quote]C.) Waffled on abortion[/quote]

see my text above

[quote]D.) Poor fundraiser[/quote]

see my text above

[quote]III.) Why I'll be cursing his name after he backs out/loses
A.) May continue attacking other, successful Dems out of sour grapes [/quote]

Like I said earlier, he'll support the Democratic nominee if he doesn't win which he will

[quote]B.) May ally with Nader to help 2000 repeat, 'cause what we really need is 4 more years of Bush[/quote]

An alliance with Nader would be good. Better to be allied and working with Nader than working against him.

[quote]IV.) Why it'd still be bad if he was elected Pres.
A.) Would inherit Congress way too much to his Right to accomplish his plans[/quote]

Better to have Kucinich President than anyone else

[quote]B.) Lacks savvy to campaign to change congressional make-up[/quote]

I think Democrats in Congress would support Kucinich -- he's of the Progressive Caucus -- largest Democratic Caucus in Congress

[quote]C.) Would withdraw troops from Iraq w/o stabilizing the country, meaning it finally would be a haven for terrorists (as it's becoming under Bush's mishandling). [/quote]

Dennis is going to turn Iraq over to the UN

Personally, I must confess that I'm rather torn on this issue. I voted for Gore but then became very active in the Green party after the election. I served on a steering committee for the greens and considered myself a Green for life. I became very disillusioned with the democratic party, in particular, with the blue dog democrats. While I was active with the Greens, I never changed my party affiliation-I guess I was waiting to see if they were for real or not. It turns out that in my state at least, they aren't.

I've been a progressive democrat ever since I can remember. I shook Jesse Jackson's hand when he campaigned for president in '88. I filled out my mother's ballot and checked his name when our state had its primary. I would love to vote for Kucinich, but I truly doubt the guy will even come close to being the nominee. He's lucky to get 1% of the vote half the time. I don't like the pragmatist argument. Should anyone but Kucinich, Moseley-Braun, or Sharpton be the nominee, I will think long and hard about switching to the greens or become an independent until a party with true principles rises up.

I'll tell you why he won't win... he doesn't look like a president!
How's that for a shallow answer. But seriously, like it or not Kucinich looks like he's 5'2" and 98 lbs and the average voter will hold the fact that he looks like a whimp against him.

At my local democratic meeting, there was a supporter of his handing out flyers. One of them has a picture of him at a protest. Unfortunately the people surrounding him were all 5 - 8 inches taller and each had him beat by atleast 75 lbs. He needs to choose his photo releases more carefully. I'm not saying we need the terminator in the White House (that's a scary thought), but our society does value appearance.

Having said all that, I'm still amazed that a person with poor grammar and goofy expressions like George Bush could have made it all the way to the White House (with a little help from the Florida Election Commission).

12:23:3

I support Democratic Pres. Nominee Dennis Kucinich, for many reasons in addition to what is here.

Killing has to stop, Kucinich is for peace and is willing to go further than anyone else to get it. As an obedient Christian, I can not support killing and Kucinich will stop it, right now.

Then there is the topic of caging humans for using a plant. The historically discredited prohibition of cannabis is gross, uncivilized and is Biblically sinful.

Kucinich will end cannabis prohibition.

In case You haven't heard:

Democratic Presidential nominee, Dennis Kucinich, put in writing that as PRESIDENT He WILL:

"DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA" -"in favor of a drug policy that sets reasonable boundaries for marijuana use by establishing guidelines similar to those already in place for alcohol."

(POSTED ON His website!)

http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17917.shtml

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/marijuana_decrim.php

As I try to live to obey Christ God Our Father, I am unable to vote for a politician who supports killing or supports caging humans for using cannabis, which I know of as kaneh bosm. I don’t want to put anything in between Me and the “spirit of truth”.

If Kucinich is not elected to run against Bush, I may not be able to vote for someone like Howard Dean, who supports caging His brother for using a plant or will further engage in killing.

Some people say Kucinich can not win. But there are a few things to note. He is about the same place as Clinton was at this time… and right now from what I understand, the people that monitor Dem. Pres. Nominees websites says Kucinich’s website interest is growing and is second only to Dean’s. It is worth noting that even if Kucinich does not win, He is getting increased interest and the Dean people will need to poll the Kucinich supporters and find out why they supported Kucinich… which will expose that the issue of decriminalizing cannabis and regulating it like alcohol is important to a portion of Democratic constituents.

It may indicate a need for not only Kucinich to include a cannabis decriminalization platform, but that all Democratic nominees must take this platform. For this reason, even Republicans who support ending persecution and extermination of cannabis / kaneh bosm, should consider changing their affiliation to Democrat for the sake of the primaries, in order to give more votes to Kucinich for to show the credibility of ending the senseless cagings.

Kucinich is the best candidate and is a true Democrat.
The idea of ending cannabis prohibition alone is reason to make sure You vote for Him.

The war on cannabis is a litmus test for all to see. Caging Your brother for using a plant is wicked evil, there’s no way around that. Supporting that wickedness, does great harm and will separate people from having access to the communication system Christ God Our Father gave Us in the “spirit of truth”.

You show Me a candidate who is willing to cage His brother for using a plant and I’ll show You someone with serious personal problems / baggage and is unfit to run the country the way Christ God Our Father has requested.

Show Me a candidate willing to cage His brother for using a plant and I’ll show You a politician that does not pass the litmus test… and I’m not talking about My litmus test but Christ God Our Father’s litmus test.

One of the most harmful policies in America today is the perpetuation of cannabis prohibition.

Kucinich is the only candidate that will end this embarrassment. Kucinich is the only candidate who passes the litmus test.

Cannablis for the holiday season and may it bring You closer to knowing the spirit of truth.

And realize it’s about the Tree of Life; Not the tree of Christmas.

The Green Collar Worker

I would ask Kucinich supporters this question: If Dennis Kucinich is not the nominee, would you vote for the eventual democratic nominee?

Or would you vote for Kucinich if he ran as an independent?

nebraska29, Kucinich has stated he will support the nominee if he's not nominated. I'll probably vote for the Green Party candidate if Kucinich is not the nominee.

I may not vote for a person that supports caging humans for using a plant. I will not vote for someone who supports killing.

Kucinich will bring home the American solders in 90 days and will create a Dept. of Peace.

Kucinich put in writing on His website that He will

"DECRIMINALIZE MARIJUANA"

-"in favor of a drug policy that sets reasonable boundaries for marijuana use by establishing guidelines similar to those already in place for alcohol."


(POSTED ON His website!) http://www.kucinich.us/issues/marijuana_decrim.php


If the Democrats try to put a cager or a killer in office they will probably get what they want and have a cager and a killer in office, namely Bush.

As an obedient Christian and cannabis activist, Kucinich is the choice I can vote for, that I think will eliminate a little bush.

If He gets upset at the unfairness of the present system and decides to opt in to the International Green Party, then the Democrats will be in big trouble… If that happens the Democrats are going to have to consider putting cannabis decriminalization on the Party platform to compete.

Cannabists are not to be taken for granted. Just read the news these days and You will know who is the Real grass roots effort.

Not just the Green Party; the International Green Party. Kucinich is the real Democrat and He could be Green at the snap of a finger.

Kucinich is not just good for America; He’s good for Earth.

Kucinich as a Democrat eliminates a need for a Green candidate.

Sorry to say GCW if these are the only 2 reason why you would vote for Kucinich, the mainly being decriminalizing cannabis you should look into his other policies. I am not saying it should not be decriminalized but as it is right now even if he had won the presidency there is no way he could get this policy passed with the climate of the congress with the conservative republicans running it.

Even with any of the democrat candidates winning the election against Dubya while having a republican congress even if some how the Dem's take back control of the Senate, the republicans still will hold the House of Representatives. And with all of the Dem candidates trying to pass a Universal Healthcare program it would be hard to try to pass another party line policy even if it makes sense like the Universal Healthcare program does.

I look at it like this with the opposite political party running both houses you have to pick your battles, because you will only have a few chances to change things in the way you think they should, and even if you get the policy that you wanted probably wont even be close to how you originally intended it to be.

Cadman,

There are other issues that I agree with Kucinich on. Plus I trust Him far more than any other candidate.

Saying in writing that He will decriminalize cannabis indicates a whole lot more than what You see on the surface.

It indicates Kucinich can see straight and talk straight. None of the others have demonstrated the ability to even say the truth.

Kucinich passes the litmus test, like no other candidate in recent times.

A side question: when will the Kucinich supporters here concede his unelectability? If he hasn't won a single primary/caucus/non-binding primary etc. after Super Tuesday? What if he has yet to even score in the top three in any state?

I saw a blurb by him bragging about being number five in Iowa- which meant he beat Sharpton, as Braun was already out and Lieberman and Clark didn't compete. I guess that's a personal best after finishing last in DC, behind Sharpton. I'm going to restrain from making any further comments about his chances, but how many of you believe he has a chance of going into the general or winning, and when do you think he should give up? Should he really try to crash the convention if no state's voters have even put him in their top three?

Kucinich is awesome, but he's never going to make it because we have forfeited our convictions and succumbed to an electoral process perverted by money and celebrity and beholden to the shallow medium of television.

Right now, Democrats and liberals are fearful and insecure, as can be seen by the many posts in this and other similar forums where people are stating that their main criteria for supporting a nominee is whether or not he can beat Bush. What this means is that a candidate's views and ideas are less important to many people than how he looks on television, how much emotion he shows, or whether he resembles an evil elf.

I wish we could be confident that the liberal agenda is the right agenda; that ideas are more important than looks; that we can win the hearts and minds of most Americans.

It's a shame that people will not vote their hearts, because that means their hearts will never win.

z.