Comments on: Candidate Kucinich gets a blog.

Candidate Kucinich gets a blog.

insomnia_lj — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 22:29:57 -0800

Candidate Kucinich gets a blog. Dennis Kucinich has jumped into the weblog arena, making his own posts and accepting comments. He even has an RSS feed. Kucinich's campaign is drawing the largest crowds of any candidate and is expected to perform well in the MoveOn Primary. Kucinich faces tough opposition from Dean, but his support for military budget cuts and tougher accounting practices set him apart from the other candidates. Studs Terkel says "Kucinich Is the One", and Ralph Nader not only encouraged Kucinich to run, but invited him to speak on the Democracy Rising tour. Will Nader endorse the Kucinich campaign? Can Dennis move the Democratic Party to the left and bring the Greens back into the fold?

By: mischief

mischief — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 22:51:08 -0800

So, is he actually writing it, or is the actual writer a staffer?

By: delmoi

delmoi — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 22:55:57 -0800

Kucinich is such a wanker. He's at least as stupid as bush.

By: insomnia_lj

insomnia_lj — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:05:38 -0800

mischief - Kucinich is writing approximately a post a day (the ones signed by him), with a staffer making additional posts on Kucinich-related news and events.

By: Schnauzer

Schnauzer — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:05:40 -0800

From the madison.com link, in reference to a Des Moines Register article:

"Even more helpful to the Kucinich campaign may be a line from John Carlson, another Register columnist, who says the candidate is "from the Michael Moore wing of the Democratic Party.""

And knowing the Des Moines Register, that was meant as a complement...

By: bshort

bshort — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:15:50 -0800

I would love to see Kucinich get elected.

By: nobody_knose

nobody_knose — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:15:50 -0800

GOP dream ticket: Kucinich /Sharpton

By: namespan

namespan — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:21:07 -0800

Will Nader endorse the Kucinich campaign? Can Dennis move the Democratic Party to the left and bring the Greens back into the fold? Hmmm. It seems to me that if the Dems run left, they will likely lose. Assuming some bell-curve like distribution along the traditional political spectrum, I expect that the numbers in the margin in the middle are greater than the number of those likely to come in from the left tail.... Not to mention I really don't see anything impressive over in the Kucinich site.

By: UrbanFigaro

UrbanFigaro — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:32:55 -0800

Kucinich doesn't have a chance in hell. He should bow out and throw his support behind Dean.

By: insomnia_lj

insomnia_lj — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:37:39 -0800

I'm not entirely sure that Kucinich couldn't do pretty well against Bush in an (admittedly unlikely) campaign scenario. Republican candidates have traditionally held the belief that they should win their party's nomination by going to the right, and win the presidency later by moving to the center. Who is to say that a Democrat couldn't do the same thing? Kucinich has traditionally done well in winning groups that could swing either way (blue collar workers), so his populist message could play very well with traditional America and could do a lot to widen the base of support and increase the level of support. Would it be easy? Of course not... but I would hardly say that it wouldn't be winnable, especially after a debate or two.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Mon, 23 Jun 2003 23:41:17 -0800

He's at least as stupid as bush. As a special service from Wonderchicken Industries, I invite you to choose the response you find least annoying : a) Now come on. I just can't see how that's possible. b) Yes, but is he also Pure Evil™? c) I'll bet he can't fwy aiwpwanes, though! d) Stupid like a fox! Hah!

By: barkingmoose

barkingmoose — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 00:31:34 -0800

I choose a) because nobody running for president is as stupid as bush. Meanwhile, I'm going to follow insomnia_lj's lead and start copy-and-pasting my personal blog entries here on Mefi. Is that cool with everyone else?

By: insomnia_lj

insomnia_lj — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 00:41:16 -0800

barkingmoose - Actually, I posted to MeFi first, and then decided to copy (and slightly change) the MeFi post for LiveJournal consumption. Out of the 1M+ accounts on LJ, only 113 read the LJ MetaFilter feed, so it's not as if I am somehow competing with MeFi... or for that matter, even linking to myself. Hm. Does that mean that MeFi'ers are forbidden to post about pancakes outside of these hallowed grounds?

By: barkingmoose

barkingmoose — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 01:07:38 -0800

Sorry, it's late on my end of the country and I'm punchy. Post as many places as you want. It's good to see Kucinich has a blog... I probably would've been happier if the FPP hadn't turned into a sort of endorsement for the guy. Back on-topic: You linked to an opinion piece that talks about Kucinich drawing a crowd of 1,000 in Madison, Wisc., and while I'll agree that's impressive I'm not sure how that means he's "drawing the largest crowds." Since you already know my bias, I don't have to mince words: Howard Dean drew over 3,000 to a rally in Austin, Tx. earlier this month, and earlier today somewhere around several thousand more gathered for his announcement in Burlington, Vt. I don't know how the numbers add up for the other candidates, so I won't make any claims either way.

By: eustacescrubb

eustacescrubb — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 03:30:56 -0800

Any talk about Kucnich (whom I personally admire and like but whom I also think won't win) has to address the fact that he's pro-life. The dogmatists in the Democratic Party will (and have) take issue with this.

By: jbou

jbou — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 07:47:48 -0800

Kucinich is not a good enough salesman to sell his liberal agenda he'd get thrashed in the general election. Dean repackaged himself yesterday, and gained even more supporters. Kucinkich preaches, Dean converts, that's why I'm in the Dean camp.

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 07:52:13 -0800

eustace - Kucinich had a campaign-eve conversion. I admit that it looks weaselly, but at least it puts him on the proper side as far as I'm concerned. And also, even when he was pro-life, he was at least more consistent than 99% of pro-lifers, being a vegan and all.

By: vraxoin

vraxoin — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:23:21 -0800

I was all for Dean until I really started examining his statements on the issues. He wants to repeal "parts" of the Patriot Act? Which parts? He's also pro-death penalty. He's pro-gun. And he's pro-Pentagon. He defers to states rights on a myriad of issues. In other words, he's about as liberal as Joe Lieberman in many ways. If he wins the nomination, I'll vote for him, but I've officially jumped over to the Kucinich bandwagon.

By: spilon

spilon — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:32:31 -0800

Wow -- Kucinich has the thumbs up from Ralph Nader? And that's considered a good thing? When are the Naderites going to wake up and realize Ralphie is nothing more than a reckless, raging egomaniac that's done far, far more to harm the causes he champions than he has ever done to help them?

By: namespan

namespan — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:47:57 -0800

Republican candidates have traditionally held the belief that they should win their party's nomination by going to the right, and win the presidency later by moving to the center. Who is to say that a Democrat couldn't do the same thing? That's the conventional wisdom, but it depends on how far from center you run in the primaries. Would Pat Buchanan or Alan Keyes have done as a well as Bush in the last election? I doubt it. I also theorize McCain could have done much better. They're all on a continuum of ability to run towards center. Buchanan and Keyes couldn't have done it. Bush had a hard time with it, but pulled off the image. McCain is farther center, which is why he lost the primaryh (that and some people think he's insane). The question in my mind is: how far center can someone who is "green" run? Not so far, if you ask me. They're pretty far left economically and socially. And I say that as a person who voted for Nader in the last election (but I was in Utah, which was going Bush no matter what, so I don't think I spoiled anything)...

By: Medley

Medley — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 09:53:14 -0800

The term 'pro-death penalty' for Dean is about as accurate as the term 'pro-abortion' for people who are pro-choice. He's definitely not 'pro-death penalty' like Ashcroft -- he is not against the death penalty in the case of killers of cops and kids and in the case of terrorists. I don't agree with him on this issue, but he's not some execution-lovin' wacko like the current resident of the White House and he's still got my vote (and money and time). He's complicated and not easy to pigeonhole and I encourage people to read up on his positions. (Of course, I'm also someone who can't stand the Republicans but won't register with the Dems because of, among other things, the gun issue -- being originally from a rural state like Dean, I appreciate his position.) Also, last I knew, not -all- of the Patriot Act is a repeal of civil liberties, hence there may be some pieces that are salvageable and I give Dean credit for acknowledging that the issues are complicated and nuanced.

By: xena

xena — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 10:07:39 -0800

I know Dennis personally (dated his brother). He has an intense sincerity that can be a bit unnerving. This link (cribbed from the trackback here) has a good, concise profile on his background.

By: vraxoin

vraxoin — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 11:28:42 -0800

I give Dean credit for acknowledging that the issues are complicated and nuanced. That's fair, and I'll support Dean if he gets the nomination. But there's no doubt which of these candidates is an unapologetic progressive, and which is striving for mass approval. I'm not convinced that Dean won't follow in Clinton's footsteps and buckle ideologically when the pressure mounts. One quibble--how can you argue that someone who supports the death penalty in any situation isn't pro death penalty? That's having your cake and eating it too; I don't buy it. Regardless, I'd rather have Sharpton in the office than four more years of W.

By: billsaysthis

billsaysthis — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:42:53 -0800

Wait a sec, do you guys still think that Emperor Bush has to run against some lowly plebian Democrat next year? Where were you when Cheney and Ashcroft declared the Constitution repealed and Bush enshrined for life?

By: kindall

kindall — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 12:44:19 -0800

how can you argue that someone who supports the death penalty in any situation isn't pro death penalty? "Pro death penalty" makes him sound positively eager to execute people.

By: soyjoy

soyjoy — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:23:44 -0800

Bob Harris's Kucinich v. Dean page.

By: wendell

wendell — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:32:14 -0800

Kucinich will probably serve the Democratic Party well by making Dean (or whoever is nominated) look more moderate by comparison (the 'running for the center' concept). But let me get this straight: Kucinich used to be Mayor of Cleveland. Jerry Springer used to be mayor of Cincinnati. Or is it the other way around? (I always get those two mixed up) PS: the MeFi Spell Check first alternative for "Kucinich" is "unclinch". Comedy Gold.

By: xena

xena — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:30:49 -0800

Amen, Wendell. Very well put. PS: You got 'em right, too. (the Mayor thing)

By: owillis

owillis — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:51:50 -0800

Kucinich is in the Alan Keyes wing of the DNC, which may not be a bad thing. He's not important enough to embarass the national party, but appeals to enough on the very far left to motivate them to go out and vote - I think more than the candidates or the "swing" voters this election will be a test of which party can get its people to the polls. As far as Dean goes, I think his speech yesterday signified the movement of his campaign to a more Clintonian centrism from the antiwar left space he's occupied to date. If he somehow beats Kerry in NH, you'll have a Democratic frontrunner who appeals to the base as well as the center-lefters like myself.

By: trharlan

trharlan — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 14:56:49 -0800

From soyjoy's link: Dean is Adamantly opposed to all use of medical marijuana; War on drugs--Accepts National Governors Association position: more federal funding for all aspects of the drug war Holy cow. They both smell like communists (no hyperbole intended), but Dean looks like one of those authoritarian progressives. Scary.

By: Medley

Medley — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 19:25:38 -0800

Soyjoy's link is rebutted here. All due respect to Harris, but he was doing a fair amount of spinning in that piece.

By: dejah420

dejah420 — Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:35:25 -0800

Wow -- Kucinich has the thumbs up from Ralph Nader? And that's considered a good thing? -spilon Yeah, that is a little like being endorsed by the Monster Raving Loony Party, except not quite as cool. Don't get me wrong...I've voted for strange politicians all my life. At first, I was really pro-Dean...but the more of his positions and papers and history I've researched, he really does seem like he might be more Republican-lite, than actually an opposition candidate. Kucinich may be a very, very left...but there's no doubt that he's in total opposition to the existing status quo.