Why doesn't Dennis Kucinich move to Cincinnati and run for Boehner's position?

[pnwmom]

He lost his spot in Cleveland but I'm sure there are plenty of progressives in Cincinnati who would love him to unseat Boehner.

[frazzled]

1. Because he'd lose in that very conservative district.

It's not Cincinnati, and Boehner's had it since 1991. There hasn't been a Democrat in that seat since the 1930s.

[pnwmom]

2. And yet people here keep telling me over and over

that all we need to win in the Red districts is to have a true progressive run, instead of a DINO.

[Recursion]

4. Ah, I see what you did there (nt)

[MADem]

7. The way to win a D seat in a district like that is to ..... gasp .... triangulate.

People don't like it, but you can't move a conservative electorate to the liberal column with one election. You've got to do it by degrees, by explaining to them why one view on one issue is better than another.

It also helps to have a VERY good personality and a way with words, a la WJC....!

[DireStrike]

27. which is fine, IF your triangulator votes with the party.

If your "D" representative just votes like a republican all the time...

If you have 60 "D" senators and can't get even CLOTURE for progressive bills that are wildly popular...

Maybe it's better to not waste money on that district. Maybe you just ALLOW the progressive challenger to run, instead of paying for a lieberman who isn't going to vote with you anyway, undermining any chance of real change.

[MADem]

32. Well, the ones that get DCCC money will, on issues where their vote is needed.

Or they will get primaried the next time around, and the leadership will invest in getting them gone.

If there's no hope for the vote anyway, there's no harm in letting the triangulator vote with the enemy.

Good leaders know how to count vote and enforce party discipline---but only when it makes a difference. That's how you get/keep a majority.

[AgingAmerican]

39. Triangulation drives the party to the right...

The triangulation model is a failure.

“Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time” - Harry S Truman

[MADem]

41. Not always. It can win us seats where we'd never get them otherwise.

Depending on the skill of the politician, it can drive the electorate to the left. Cult of personality happens.

[Bluenorthwest]

59. It has not won that seat in the last 73 years.

So 'it can win us seats' needs proof which is the winning of those seats. 73 years of triangulation leave us with John of Orange.

[MADem]

61. Jon Tester...hello? Remember him, the farmer with the missing fingers and the goofy crewcut?

http://www.tester.senate.gov/

Not a screaming liberal, but the best we're gonna do in Montana.

Wake up, the coffee is brewing. You aren't going to get way, way lefties elected in conservative states. It's just NOT gonna happen.

Even Bob Kerrey, native son, former Senator, couldn't come home to NE and take back his seat, because he had too much of that Noo Yawk Liberal Stank up on him.

Triangulation will give us a majority in conservative states. With triangulation, we get THE LEADERSHIP. And with The Leadership, we can get things done.

It's a fairly simple concept, and it makes much more sense than cutting off one's liberal nose to spite one's progressive face.

[MineralMan]

12. Zing!

[Whisp]

19. ow!

Grayson for President!

[Chan790]

25. The issue has never been the need to trianguate to capture red districts...

the issue is that we should never triangulate to win purple or Democratic districts. Go moderate where you need to, to win...hold true to Democratic values and go liberal everywhere else. The DLC brigade at DU likes to consistently misrepresent this as saying that we're arguing for the need to run liberals in conservative districts; nobody is saying that, it makes the center-rightists look less like quislings to imply we are.

The problem comes from running moderates in districts and races that we can elect less-moderate people in; we need the non-moderate bulk to counterbalance the tea or else the Democratic party is going to continue to slide further center-right. Pulling some portion of the electorate with them but increasingly leaving more of the electorate behind. We've ceased to be center-left even...major races like the Presidential nomination have increasingly become centrist vs. center-right (for example, Obama vs. Clinton in 2008), center-left and liberal not welcome.

You're were aware that both parties are now right of the majority of the overall national electorate, yes? You don't see that as problematic?

[pnwmom]

28. Not true. When we lost several so-called DINO's in red districts in 2010

there were plenty of DUers saying good riddance. I have frequently seen the view expressed here that the way to get more progressive laws passed would be to get liberals to run against DINO's, who are almost always in conservative districts.

How can you demonstrate that both parties are now right of the majority? I haven't seen any poll data showing that that's true. I think that's a bunch of wishful thinking.

[Chan790]

34. That's the extrapolation of results over about 8 years...

indicating that the positions taken by majorities in both parties in Congress fall more conservative than the general public.

• The public supported a public option...both parties opposed it.
• The public supported marriage equality a full 3 years before DOMA was struck, Congress has never reached a majority on it in either chamber.
• The public supported broad healthcare reform as far back as the debate over Medicare Part-D...President Obama had to sell his own party on it, the only reason the party platform reflected it at all in 2008 was because of the public push and it being a centerpiece of both the Clinton and Obama campaign agendas; previously to that nobody in Washington wanted to touch it after the last healthcare fight under WJC.
• The public supports tax increases for earners in the top bracket, both parties favor across the board tax cuts.
• The public supported substantial Wall Street reform, neither party in Congress wanted to pursue real reform.
• The majority of opposition to Obamacare is that it doesn't go far enough or do enough to extend coverage to the uninsured or effect price-control.
• The public supported stimulus, we got deficit reduction.
• That's not even touching on foreign policy, the last military action supported by a majority of the public (at the time of initial action) was the post-9/11 invasion of Afghanistan.

There's a trend there...if Congress felt compelled to reflect the majority will of the public, the resulting public policy would be more liberal than enacted policies nearly across the board. Are you really going to argue that doesn't reflect that the electorate at-large is more liberal than the positions taken by our elected officials in both parties? Can you identify even one issue where the nationwide electorate at-large is more conservative than both parties? Even one party?

(I'd guess gun control, but you'd be wrong. The majority of Americans support commonsense reforms.)

[AgingAmerican]

40. Harry S said it best

“Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time”

[JonLP24]

33. We got a progressive in our district

That was mostly red. In fairness it was newly created district that includes a majority of the old red 5th district but also parts of Southern Phoenix and Ahwautukee(can't spell it).

I remember in a time where a lot of our state party leaders wouldn't take a stand one or the other on SB 1070 and got hammered(Terry Goddard as an example)-- Felecia Rotellini took a strong and affirmative stand against it and lost the Attorney General's race by less than 1% - 843 votes.

Not saying you can stick a progressive in a red district and they'll win, but sometimes, people with convictions give you the best chance rather than the ones that either support or vague on positions to get elected.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. People keep telling you that?

I don't think they understand politics.

[MADem]

5. He couldn't get elected dog catcher in Cinci...and he's getting a swell payday from Faux. nt

[PeaceNikki]

6. He's too busy working for the Ron Paul institute.

[pnwmom]

8. Really? n/t

[PeaceNikki]

10. Oh, really.

http://www.dailypaul.com/294076/dennis-kucinich-on-ron-paul-institute-advisory-board

[Recursion]

14. They've been personal friends for a while

I don't think being on somebody's charity board really says that much...

[PeaceNikki]

17. um. it's not a charity

It's a "non- profit", but not a charity

[Recursion]

18. yikes, thanks, i thought it said foundation, not institute

Even so, being on the board of his ego-boosting non- think tank doesn't say all that much.

[Ohio Joe]

20. That is very disappointing news...

Dennis has a lot of good about him but... To join up with those vile things is plain stupid.

[MADem]

43. I never saw much "good" come out of that guy. He was a big mouth.

Try as I might, I can't think of any legislation he initiated or even co-sponsored that he shepherded through Congress to make life better for working individuals.

He liked to blab. He didn't like to do the dull and boring work of crafting the legislation, then running around to hundreds of fellow representatives cajoling them to help get the bills passed. All talk, no walk. Imperial.

He wasn't very much liked in his own caucus, and isn't missed by them. There's a reason for that.

[Ikonoklast]

9. Because, he's Dennis.

He polled well in only two places, his home town, and with people outside of this state that could never vote for him.

[Capt. Obvious]

11. Because he'd lose in a landslide

[G_j]

13. I'd love to see it

I see folks have jumped once again at the opportunity to attack a progressive Dem.
Typical..

[NYC Liberal]

15. Kucinich is not a progressive, which would imply he

actually does things to make progress. He simply grandstands and stamps his feet if he doesn't get exactly what he wants.

[G_j]

16. thanks for making my point..nt

[NYC Liberal]

23. Except nobody is "attacking" a progressive Dem,

since Kucinich is not a progressive.

[Cha]

45. +1

[MADem]

44. Progressive Dems work for the Ron Paul Institute now....??

[G_j]

48. Never mind

Last edited Sat Oct 5, 2013, 08:58 AM - Edit history (1)

not worth the time

[MADem]

50. It's really impossible to justify. If we're standing on principle, anyway--and he's not, anymore.

The dude is all about the Benjamins, otherwise he wouldn't sell himself so readily to Ron Paul and Faux as the new Dem Punching Bag.

He's a private citizen, though--so no harm, no foul. He is what he is.

[G_j]

53. I do realize

his "big mouth" got on a lot of nerves when he from the beginning, relentlessly criticized Bush's wars.
so be it..

If Paul Wellstone were still alive I bet
he would receive similar distain.

[MADem]

57. Paul Wellstone was NOTHING like Kucinich. Not in the slightest.

Paul Wellstone was the genuine article, a happy warrior, a liberal who never made the perfect the enemy of the good. Paul Wellstone worked to get legislation passed; he didn't stand still pontificating, griping, and alienating the people in his own caucus like Kucinich did. There wasn't a dry eye in the Senate when Wellstone died; there wasn't a damp one in the House when Kucinich lost his district and his seat.

Some people DO--that was Wellstone. Some people gripe--that's Kucinich.

So, no, Senator Paul Wellstone would never 'receive similar disdain' because he understood that there were times when one had to compromise and deal with the other side. He was able to do that without sacrificing his own deeply held beliefs, and that's because he was a smart guy who knew how to take the long view and who did not believe that it was all about HIM.

[Bluenorthwest]

60. Wellstone was a DOMA yes man, his legacy was one of bigory and ignorance

His deeply held beliefs included the belief that I should never have rights equal to his own. He is touted here by folks who don't mind some homophobia in their politics. He was a vicious man driven by fear of those unlike himself. The DOMA yes me were a lot of right wing bigots, no matter how they promoted themselves.
Wellstone died without ever making amends, so history records him as backward, prejudiced and in agreement with the far religious right about civil rights issues for millions of Americans.
Of course he's the example you'd pick as being some great hero.

[msanthrope]

63. Wait a second....did you just throw Paul Wellstone under the bus? Did you just call him a bigot?

What's sad is that you are maligning a very good man for a very politically necessary vote, without context. It was a horrible vote, and he knew it then, and hated it.

That '96 election run was brutal. To characterize his vote without analysis of the history and context is to do a disservice to a good man and the facts.

[MADem]

67. That's exactly what happened, to my eye.

The late Senator is under his big green bus here on DU.

It's quite remarkable.

[msanthrope]

70. Holy shite!! I'm floored at the utter ignorance shown about the 1996 election.

And noting that it's us 'conservadems' raising the stink.

[MADem]

72. Ooooh....makes you wonder!!! nt

[msanthrope]

73. When we defend the Fox News employee and Ron Paul board member but bash Wellstone,

I don't wonder...I know.

[MADem]

74. Game. Set. Match! nt

[b.durruti]

64. This queer person honors Paul Wellstone. I firmly believe that if he were alive today

He would have long ago recognized his error and been the among the first to congratulate happy gay couples.

[MADem]

66. I'll bet he would have come around.

I think you need to exercise that fine mind of yours and do a little research on Wonderful Dennis and HIS views on issues like choice and DOMA. Dennis used to be a Catholic bigot--he only changed his mind when he decided that it was more fun to take government money and run failed presidential campaigns rather than crafting and passing legislation. He had to liberalize his views in order to develop a base of acolytes and get people to believe his bullshit.

He lived long enough to come around, lucky him. Of course, since he was frequently absent from votes, and never initiated any legislation that did anyone any damn good, he's "safe" from criticism--when you do absolutely nothing, it's hard to point to something you've done wrong.

[G_j]

68. you left out that he is short, has big ears

and saw a UFO..

[MADem]

71. Wellstone was short, and Jimmy Carter had big teeth and saw a UFO.

I liked Wellstone and Carter.

They actually worked FOR us instead of playing a ME ME ME game with the American people...

[G_j]

62. mmm..

try as I can, I cannot recall a single "moderate" Democrat speaking out against Bush and his wars. As a peace activist, I can tell you, we were very much ignored by most Democratic "leaders".
Dennis earned the gratitude of the peace movement. I'm sorry your hatred for DK is not convincing. Should we go on about the spineless cowards who enabled Bush's crimes?

[MADem]

69. And what did Dennis "do" for you? Not a damn thing.

No legislation, no coordination with his own caucus, no nada.

Oh, he made speeches, and took honoraria for some of them.

He traveled around the country on the taxpayer's dime running quixotic Presidential campaigns that made the Democrats look flaky. He took debate time away from our candidates with his grandsstanding and his "younger than his daughter" wife.

He was a spectacle. He talked and talked, and that may have made you "feel" good, but he didn't make a damn lick-o-difference. He was a useful tool to the right, because he was so easy to mock.

And how "liberal" can a guy be when he hangs around with, and heaps fulsome praise on, an unrepentant racist like Ron Paul? How principled can he be if he takes a paycheck from Ron Paul's foundation....and Rupert Murdoch?

You got gamed by his pretty words...

[b.durruti]

65. Paul Wellstone was the most effective progressive legislator and they murdered him for it

I still honor and respect Kucinich though and I would support him against any repug.

[maxsolomon]

21. He was going to move to Seattle and run in the new disctrict here

At least that was the rumor.

I'd love for him to make conservative heads in my olde hometown explode - he could take on Mean Jean Schmidt's disctrict (Brad Wenstrup, now), or even Steve Chabot on the Catholic Westside where I grew up - that's an old school working class conserva-dem district in the grip of Tea Party/Pro-life hysteria. Tom Luken held that seat from 77 to 90.

He won't win, but it would be entertainment to hear my Father bitch about him.

[Connie_Corleone]

22. We don't want Kucinich down here.

He would get clobbered anyway.

[LondonReign2]

24. Geez, more of the liberals are bad BS and we need more conservadems?

You still haven't admitted that liberals WERE NOT responsible for 2010 and instead keep pushing the lie after being shown the data. Why?

[Chan790]

26. For the same reasons she consistently misrepresents other liberal positions.

I zinged her for it in post 25. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023784197#post25

[frylock]

30. yep. even in this moment of solidarity, The Very Sensible People can't help but fling shit..

the last one was PPR'd. we need more of that.

[frylock]

29. how much crap would a Woodchuck chuck?

[Motown_Johnny]

31. Do you think Dennis could win in Kentucky?

Well then you can forget about Cincinnati.

[roamer65]

35. I'll be surprised if he runs in 2014, and if he does I suspect...

he's going to be primaried now. Some disgruntled Rethug will run against him. If it's a far right teabagger that beats him, it could throw the district into play.

[madinmaryland]

36. Because he doesn't want to give up that great position at Fox News. nt

[treestar]

37. If only the Democratic party would wise up and run a real progressive in that district!

Surely if that district's voters heard a real progressive, they would change their minds instantly and vote for progress!

And if that progressive does not win, it'll be Obama's fault, basically, for not campaigning hard enough for him there!

[JI7]

38. good point

don't know why people are so angry about it

[Fumesucker]

42. I'm sure Dennis would get a great deal of support from the Democratic party in that effort

[Jamaal510]

47. He'd be a fool

to give up his high-paying job at FOX for an election in which he'd be unlikely to win. From what people have been saying, the Annoying Orange's district is pretty right-leaning.

[reddread]

49. Voople Spew is that you?

Spirit of MichiganDem58 lives on
glory glory
there are plenty of parts of this country that would sweep Kucinich into office.
Especially if "moderates" didnt allow the Reepers to Reedistrict after 2010.

[LondonReign2]

55. Yes indeed

She's picking right up after m*58 was tombstoned. Someone's gotta fill the bullshit void of procliaming liberals bad

[eridani]

51. His success in the Cleveland area is due to 40 years worth of personal connections n/t

[spanone]

52. cincinnati is just right of wyoming

[Bluenorthwest]

58. Cincinnati is not part of Bohener's 8th District.

To win a district, one first must be able to find that district. This goes for Moderates, Liberals, Conservatives and everyone else.

[LWolf]

54. Or: you could. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

56. Boehner's district is not Cincinnati. So why would he move to Cincinnati?

Now that you have figured out where Boehner's district is, can you explain why no 'moderate centrist' or 'Blue Dog' has been able to win there since the 1930's? If running 'moderates' is the key to victory, where the hell is victory in that district for the last 73 years?
It's a Republican district. Held for nearly a century by Republicans. In a place like that, so very long in the Red, I would personally try just about any sort of Democrat in each and every election. Perhaps one would win, perhaps one neither of us would think of as able to win. So in a 73 year Red District, I'd try your moderates, I'd try my liberals, I'd try running an old socialist woman then a young Centrist man, but I'd fucking try various things.
73 years GOP. What's your cure for that sickness? Got one? Or is this just a slap at liberals for sharing the moderate's inability to defeat Boehner?
If you think your Blue Doggy can win, run that Dog and I'll send her money.