Here's why former Dean supporters have switched to Dennis Kucinich

[The Sushi Bandit]

http://www.kucinich.net/i-switched.php


"At first, I heard that Dean was "electable" while Dennis was not. But Dennis has actually been setting the agenda of this election. How many times has Dennis forced his competitors to take stronger stands on issues? Now all the candidates use the expressions, 'UN in, US out' and 'no more Halliburton sweetheart deals'. And Edwards and Kerry voted No on the $87 billion only after Dennis challenged their positions. Speaking of this bill, Dennis's warnings have proven prophetic! While most of the candidates said they would hold Bush accountable for how the money was spent, the bill passed without a single Democratic condition in place! All the wording about accountability was dropped in committee! Not even a provision against fraud was kept in the final bill!"

"I switched to Dennis because, as a mother of three and a clinical social worker and activist, I support Dennis in his thinking about corporate fraud, the Iraq war and foreign policy, universal healthcare and most importantly (and the reason I switched my opinion during the Rock the Vote debates) universal free college education for all America's children. I was leaning toward Dean because I thought he was the most electable. I support Kucinich now because I know he is the best candidate for the job, he is the most forward progressive candidate out there.... so Go Dennis Kucinich!"

[_NorCal_D_]

1. Interesting.

But I hope this dosen't turn into flame bait. B-)

[LuminousX]

2. It will

[JohnKleeb]

3. sigh

I dont like it when it happens, its so annoying and thats for all candiates.

[helleborient]

35. And on this one...I love proving you wrong Luminous...

Just look at this thread!!!

Isn't this great??

Can you smell the fresh air?? :-)

[JohnKleeb]

37. Well you started it by acting cool instead of acting like an asshole

;) hehe. being sarcastic yet truthful, sarcastic in that fact I sound like I am finger pointing, and you really did set a good tone,

[helleborient]

39. No problem at all (n/t)

[JohnKleeb]

41. ahh the smell of civility

Smells rather nice.

[LuminousX]

63. I hate being wrong, I have a bottle of vitriol right here to dump...

just kidding...

I really assumed this would be received in a very negative fashion. I'm glad it isn't. You are right... Fresh air.

[mistertrickster]

4. I'd support Kuchinich if he got the nomination, but let's be realistic,

he's not gonna get the nomination. He polls so far back, even light can't reach him at the bottom of that hole.

You either have a shot, or you don't. He doesn't.

Good man . . . no chance.

[helleborient]

7. If he's a good man, it's unnecessary to attack like this...

Isn't it?

[mistertrickster]

15. It's not an "attack," it's simply the truth . . . the guy isn't polling

anywhere near what he needs to get the nod.

If he dropped out, it would help the person who is going to be the front runner. That's also not an attack--it's a simple fact.

[helleborient]

26. I'm confident Dennis will support the party and the ultimate nominee...

If it's not him.

No need for him to drop out now.

[NNadir]

74. Which party?

Democrats or Greens?

[lastliberalintexas]

100. Democrats

Dennis has already said that he will support the Dem nominee- as have ALL of our candidates. He has also said thathe will not run as anything but a Dem. If you'd been paying attention, you'd already know that. But maybe it's just more fun to throw yet another attack on this issue at Kucinich.

[dfgrbac]

159. Why isn't he polling?

Dennis Kucinich is not polling as well as Dean because the media talks about Dean. They talk very little if at all about Kucinich - and that's the problem. Most Americans don't even know Dennis Kucinich is running for President! He needs more exposure - lots more! I think most Americans would actually be for Kucinich for President if they knew what he stands for.

[no name no slogan]

9. If we were all "realistic", we'd just vote for BushCheney

According to the "realistic" angle out there today, no democrat has a chance of beating El Arbusto, because he's got the money to trounce anyone.

[peaceandjustice]

138. crazy-ass idea about the money

Could a series of benefit concerts raise several million dollars next summer to compete with Bush's fundraising prowess? Even if they couldn't give the Dem. candidate the money, couldn't it be spent as soft money on TV, radio and newspaper ads critiquing Bush's record? I would think a dozen dates by Pearl Jam, NoFX, Willie Nelson, Ani DiFranco...countless artists who can sell out a wide variety of different venues have made their distaste of Bush known.

[Mairead]

13. Well, you know, you're doing your tiny best to create that situation.

If all those who say they'll support him if he gets the nomination would support him now, he would get the nomination! With about 75-90% of the vote, probably.

[Mairead]

14. (hiccup)

.

[DemDogs]

110. Kucinich is the candidate Dean purported to be

Anti-war, for real civil liberties, "the Democratic wing of the Democratic party".
Like with public financing, Dean backs away from more pure and radical positions when he sees it might not be in his interest. One thing you have to say about Kucinich is that he is a purist and the people who were once attracted to Dean see that Dean is not that way in fact. I frankly am surprised it went on this long.

The real question is whether, if DK really cannot be nominated, where they go if Kucinich drops out. What will Kucinich tell them?
I don't think he'll tell them to go to Dean, who has refused to treat him seriously.

[helleborient]

5. Congrats on the switches...

There's been a lot of switching candidates so far in the race.

I started out leaning to Dennis but am pretty firmly in the Howard Dean camp now. I know there are others who have gone the opposite direction.

It is kudos to the campaign when they can convince individuals to switch...and it's usually a result of honest appeal to the best in the individual, not a result of vicious attack politics.

[idontwantaname]

8. well said!

and i dont want to see anyone post unless the posts are as well written as helleborient!

yeah!

[helleborient]

10. Thank you...

Nearly made me blush.

[belab13]

6. I'll vote for Kucinich if I get the chance.

[w13rd0]

11. This morning on NPR...

...Terry Gross did an interview with Studs Terkel <sp>. He said he was supportive of Kucinich, but didn't think there was a chance of him being nominated. Said DK has important things to say, and at the very least, he deserves 15 minutes at the convention. I tend to agree.

[helleborient]

16. If he's not nominated (and I know that's not a done deal)...

I would be saddened if he didn't get to speak at the convention.

And then I would be torn about whether if he's of most value to us in a Cabinet post or near the top of the House leadership. I understand, of course, Dennis' own wishes are of major import on any of this.

[a_lil_wall_fly]

58. IF DK doesn't get the nod for Prez..give him the chance at the posts of

Sec of Energy---he would make big oil run fast to new renewable energy sources and ulities would reconsider an new ideas of greed or else
Sec of Interior--- he would make the mining and lumber industries reconsider thier agendas or go out of buniess
Sec of Transportation-- he would clean up the unfriendly skies and make the auto companies more independent of the oil companies

[JohnKleeb]

59. labor would be nice too

[blm]

76. Never happen. Dean really is a global free trader

and just because so many believe his 10 month old conversion to populist policies, doesn't mean he believes them himself. If he never developed a principled stand on it when he was governor, what makes you think he'll be loyal to his election year conversion?

[JohnKleeb]

77. No I mean if DK doesnt make it, labor secretary would be good

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[_NorCal_D_]

18. Not true.

What about principle?

[JohnKleeb]

21. I really gotta give to people like hell for not getting mad and same with

AWD. Yes what about principle, btw I was kinda a Dean supporter once my self, but I forget what exactly but now I am a Kucinich supporter. I really appreciate the Dean supporters who have posted in this for not getting overly upset, yeah he contributes much.

[_NorCal_D_]

28. Heck, we were probably

all originally Dean supporters at one point. He was, after all the first genuine anti-war candidate to enter the race. Although I am now a Clark supporter, I deeply respect Kucinich for his steadfast opposition to the war both in rhetoric, but most importantly through action in congress.

[JohnKleeb]

31. lol not sure

I wasnt in name though, I was for Gore until it happened.

[Mairead]

51. If I understand what you're saying about Dean, i believe you're mistaken

Dennis has been documented as opposed to the invasion since Feb '02 (the 'prayer' speech to SoCal ADA). Dean is documented as supporting the invasion through the Conason interview, aired 20th Feb, '03.

I'm all but certain (does anyone remember?) that Dennis had already announced by that point, and I suspect his entry was actually what persuaded Trippi to pull Dean left on the issue. Because Dean 'evolved' almost literally overnight: in the Conason piece aired only the day before he was irritatedly telling people that he believed that Hussein must be disarmed and the US must do it unilaterally if the UN wouldn't, while on the 21st--the next day--he was claiming to be solidly anti-invasion.

[Desertrose]

55. No, I was never a Dean supporter

something seems off to me and has since the beginning...
:shrug:

I'm sticking with DK

peace
DR

[redqueen]

22. Exactly, _NorCal_D_

I didn't particularly enjoy voting for Clinton or Gore, but I knew someone like Nader had ZERO chance, being from a third party.

This time, the hero's in MY party, and I'm enjoying supporting him. First time that's ever happened! :D

[helleborient]

29. Isn't that great??

I wasn't that excited by Gore or Bill Bradley last go-round.

The up side of 9 candidates (and I know plenty bemoan the lack of 'unity') is we actually have choices!

I've been more excited about my candidate in the primary season than I have in a long time.

[redqueen]

34. It is, helleborient, it certainly is!

Unity schmunity, better that everyone is jazzed about supporting Democrats again! :D

[Tinoire]

64. Ask someone who has some

Principled people don't go around calling supporters of other candidates stupid for daring to stand by their principles.

The mind boggles at DU these days.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[pruner]

27. that's not the point

I really think voting for Kucinich in the primaries is like voting for Nader in the 2000 election.

you know he's got no chance at winning, so by voting for him you're increasing the likelhood that a candidate whose views are further from Kucinich's will end up with the nomination.

[No More Shrub]

32. Its called Principles

I have them, my choice is determined by them. So far, Kucinich is the closest to my ideals. I'm voting for who I think will do the best job. If everybody did that maybe somebody decent would win. Instead people say oh he can't win let me compromise my principles and vote for someone who seems more popular. If thats what you want to do go right ahead, but don't call me stupid for having principles.

[ThirdWheelLegend]

33. uhm?

"...likelhood that a candidate whose views are further from Kucinich's will end up with the nomination."

Like Dean? So I should vote for Dean because if I vote for Kucinich I am going to end up with a Dean-like candidate anyway?


TWL

[pruner]

38. is Lieberman a Dean-like candidate?

n/t

[ThirdWheelLegend]

45. If you take a left/right approach.

Dean is closer to Lieberman than he is to Kucinich.

TWL

[loyalsister]

57. You sure?

DK is A LOT closer to Lieberman with respect to the first Amendment. They're both religious nuts and DK was all for the flag burning Amendment to boot.

[snoochie]

67. First Amendment? How?

Also I don't exactly place as much importance on flag burning as I do on budget cutting and fiscal matters. Lieberman won't go after the crooks on Wall Street or change the laws to prevent further abuses, and I doubt Dean would either.

Also, Dean's closer to Lieberman on his willingness to let loose the dogs of war, another topic I rank a bit above flag burning.

[loyalsister]

75. "Religion should influence public policy"

They are also asked, "Do you practice a faith, and would you invoke the name of God when discussing a policy?" Nearly every one of them gives the safe answer, that their faith is important to them, but that they respect the separation of church and state. "I pray every night, but don't go to church very often," says Dean. "My religion does not inform my public policy, but it does inform my values," is Edwards's answer, and he adds, "The president of the United States should not be setting policy for the country based on his or her faith."

Only Kucinich dissents. (Along with Clark, Kerry, and Braun, he's one of four Catholics at the debate. Although Braun and Clark self-identify as Catholics, Braun attends an Episcopal church and Clark attends a Presbyterian one.) He says that within the context of a pluralistic society, religious values can and should influence public policy. "We must live our spiritual values in our public policy," such as full employment, health care, and education, he says. "A government that stands for peace reflects spiritual values."

http://slate.msn.com/id/2090856

We've got that now and it has not been good for us. Theocratic leanings are UGLY whether they come from the right or the left. Clinton invoked Religion too much for my taste. Gore and Lieberman (ESPECIALLY Lieberman!) both did, too. DK is as bad as Lieberman on this.

[snoochie]

85. That quote is nowhere in the article you linked.

Why are you spreading disinformation?

Kucinich talks about spiritual values. Spirituality has no dogma.

Saying he is as bad as Lieberman on this is really not a fair assessment. I don't believe Kucinich would be favored by AIPAC. Unlike another candidate who seems to do well despite his militarism.

[loyalsister]

91. Oh C'mon!

"Kucinich talks about spiritual values. Spirituality has no dogma."

He's as dogmatic as they come. "Every sperm is sacred." "Every animal is sacred." He leaves no room for compromise and bases it on something "spiritual" it leads straight back to his Catholic belief system. He says so himself. People are constantly claiming that the fact that he doesn't compromise is a demonstration of his character. It's actually dogma and his very own brand of fundamentalism. (ALL corporations are BAD, NAFTA is evil, ALL war is wrong, etc.)

"I don't believe Kucinich would be favored by AIPAC."
It's not the specific religion that I am discussing it's the quality. I am referring to his moralizing rigidity. He is every bit as sanctimonious as Lieberman.

"We must live our spiritual values in our public policy," -Dennis Kucinich

"Our" spiritual values???? We "must"??? If this isn't a Lieberman style statement, I don't know what is.

People appear to be blinded to the fact that his presentation and disposition are identical to the vitrolic sanctimony we get from the right because they happen to agree with the perspective. It's a shame when people don't recognize this perverse mentality unless it's working against them.

Liberal= flexible Radical= rigid and dogmatic. I don't think the exact opposite to what we have now is the answer when one of my largest objections is style and an unwillingness to consider the opinions of others. If you go far enough left, you meet the right. Because the extremes are mirror images of each other.

[snoochie]

94. You didn't admit that the 'quote' in your other post was complete fiction

"He's as dogmatic as they come."

What makes you think so? Just stating something doesn't make it true.


"Every sperm is sacred." "Every animal is sacred."

He said that? Please cite a reference. Thanks.


"He leaves no room for compromise and bases it on something "spiritual" it leads straight back to his Catholic belief system. He says so himself."

Again I'm gonna have to ask you for a source. Sorry, but his colleagues from both sides of the aisle would argue with your statement that he leaves no room for compromise. Please tell us why you believe that, and actual sources /facts would be better than just stating it again, in a different way.


"People are constantly claiming that the fact that he doesn't compromise is a demonstration of his character. It's actually dogma and his very own brand of fundamentalism. (ALL corporations are BAD, NAFTA is evil, ALL war is wrong, etc.)"

Sorry, but if you're referring to the fact that he didn't sell MUNY to SEI, that's not an example of HIM not compromising, that's an example of him not capitulating to corporate interest over the public interest. Many Americans only WISH we had as many leaders so resistant to this kind of 'compromise'. It was actually the BANK that wouldn't compromise, but you're not alone in trying to pin all the blame on Kucinich, despite the fact that his act was recognized as being of benefit to Cleveland and he was recognized for his efforts, in addition to being elected to higher and higher offices.

[loyalsister]

95. Complete fiction?

I wasn't quoting him. It was a reference to the basic premise of what he said. His religion IS his spirituality. READ....

A Roman Catholic, Kucinich’s faith influences profoundly the way he views society, calling to mind Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker Movement, which he says has had a “powerful” impact on his life because it is an example of the “social gospel” — a commitment to worker rights, healthcare and peace.

“The Catholic faith has had the most powerful impact on my life. I try to make every moment of my life prayer,” he said. http://www.hillnews.com/living/072303_kucinich.aspx


"Every sperm is sacred."
He has an EXTENSIVE voting record on this subject. It's as ugly as any RW fundie up until spring of 2002.

No compromise...
Um- his platform. Reverse NAFTA entirely. Reduce Pentagon budget significantly, etc. Are you forgetting his big ideas to do a lot of this stuff unilaterally?

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

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

[snoochie]

103. Yes, complete fiction.

That quote is no where in the article.

Neither is the one from Monty Python.

I'm done.

[loyalsister]

108. Think conceptually

and broadly, and you may notice that the statements are totally reasonable summaries of his positions.

[snoochie]

109. One person's 'summary'

Is another one's spin.

[no name no slogan]

104. So what? Jimmy Carter was a "born again" southern baptist

AND JFK was also a practicing Catholic. Are you saying that members of ANY church/temple/mosque have no business running for office?

You're Catholic-baiting is very similar to what many folk did in 1960 with JFK. There's no need to repeat that kind of ugliness 43 years later.

:eyes:

[loyalsister]

107. That's not at all what I'm saying

I'm saying that a guy who says his Religion will actually influence his public policy has no business being president.

[Desertrose]

112. He never said what you claim he did!

"We must live our spiritual values in our public policy," -Dennis Kucinich

S P I R I T U A L not religious...

Heck of a difference there loyal sister....one can be extremely spiritual and yet not be attached to any religious dogma.....

I don't know where you are getting this ...must be your issues coming up ...
:shrug:

Peace
DR

[loyalsister]

117. Add it up!

"We must live our spiritual values in our public policy," -Dennis Kucinich

“The Catholic faith has had the most powerful impact on my life. I try to make every moment of my life prayer,” he said. http://www.hillnews.com/living/072303_kucinich.aspx

Where now, do YOU think his "spiritual values" come from????

one can be extremely spiritual and yet not be attached to any religious dogma.....
I don't deny that, but, this IS the guy who never gave operation rescue people anything to complain about until 2002.
His political philosophies are as black and white as Bushes. The difference is they're at the opposite end of the spectrum. I can understand that that is attractive to some people who want change, but my biggest problem with Bush has been his disregard for dialogue and differing opinions. "Mr. I know what is best, only my ideas will work. You're with me or against me (substitute poor people or middle class for DK). Time for an executive order." It's a matter of governing style.

[no name no slogan]

128. Then why

does he get praise not only from fellow Dems but even REPUBLICANS for his ability to work together in Congress?

If what you are saying is true, then there would be NO WAY WHATSOEVER DK would have any kind of power in Congress. However, seeing that he's not only the head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (largest Dem caucus in congress) AND the Democrats' ranking member on the defense appropriations subcommittee, your logic is hard to follow. By your logic, if he were so obstinate and dogmatic, he never would have been re-elected to one more term, let alone three.

[loyalsister]

133. The Dem who drove me to vote Green

loves him here. Let's see, Ya think he has voted in favor of embryos over women enough to gain some trust? Believe me, they are hoping he'll revert back to his old voting habits.
People gain trust when they mimic the other side. If you go far enough left, you meet the right. They share a black\white thinking style- remember. If some of them see him as a "good Christian" there may be some Republicans who would not be willing to work with him. Now that you have brought this up, can you point to any really progressive bills that reflect his agenda he has convinced the GOP to go along with?

I think his ability to work with the Republicans is probably overrated. Both alienate voters who have the flexibility to accomodate the actual world we live in. He HAS NOT convinced them to go along with the things he's pushing in the agenda the supporters here so love. Otherwise, his single payer bill would have been heard.
He only has power as a leader of his own choir in congress. That is not convincing.

[redqueen]

134. The choir in congress you disparage ...

is the Progressive Caucus.

Do you think we don't need them?

Do you think we should just capitulate to the right, since any sincerely progressive goals would be defeated?

He is admired by both Republican and Democratic colleagues for his willingness to stand up for his beliefs. It's called integrity.

Someone who doesn't stick to their own value system is, by definition, a sell out.

[loyalsister]

135. I wasn't disparaging

The point is you cannot point to building a consensus as an "accomplishment" when he it is only amongst people who agree with him in the first place. He certainly hasn't convinced people in the middle or further right that single payer health care is a good idea. Otherwise, his bill would have been heard.

[redqueen]

136. That's not logical

We all know single payer is better. The only reason his bill is sentence to death by committee is because of our system of legalized bribery.

[cyclezealot]

92. Whose views are close.

Well said above..- Dean's conversion to protecting American jobs.Not genuine..On this score, I have more faith in Gephardt.Will not vote for anyone who voted for Bush's war.
I say no one else convinces me that they are anywhere close enough to Kucinich views to think I am wasting my vote on Kucinich.
If not a possible to vote for Kucinich, then I would only feel vindicated in 'wasting' my vote for Braun..

[No More Shrub]

49. Thanks

I was going to come back to this thread to appoligize for the post that I made in anger, good thing the modorator is doing an outstanding job Thanks

[no name no slogan]

48. Maybe you should stick to "pruning"

as you clearly have little to add to this thread. Just hope that your man does't get elected-- he'll continue the same pointless "drug war" we've fought under Bush I/Clinton/Bush II. So if you get caught enjoying your hobby, you're still in deep mandatory minimum-sentencing sh!t. :eyes:

[AWD]

17. My thoughts...

...I am going to praise DK and HD whenever I get the chance.

If Dean wins the early primaries, he'll be a lock. Then, I will vote for DK in the Ohio primary to give him the numbers.

If Dean does poorly in the early primaries, I will vote for Dean in the Ohio primary to help him win the nomination.

But I campaign for only one man right now.....me. I need all the help I can get, and any minute spent away from producing numbers for my election is a minute wasted.

[helleborient]

24. Best wishes AWD!! (n/t)

[redqueen]

20. Thanks for the thread, SB!

I love checking that page. My favorite testimonial is from the guy who compares the presidential race to the world series! Great analogy!

Go Kooch! :D

[foo_bar]

23. it all depends on who drops out

If all nine candidates fight to the finish, Dean probably has a Schwarzenegger-style plurality. If Edwards, Kerry, or Lieberman drop out Clark has it sewn up. On the other hand, Kucinich/Sharpton/CMB wouldn't boost Dean's high water mark greatly. I think it all depends on who'll be the McClintock. I'm guessing Lieberman, Sharpton, and Kucinich will fight to the bitter end. Gep's union rolls might go Dean but the yellow dogs are Clarkier.

[JohnKleeb]

25. Well I think that Gep's unions should he go and Kucinich stays would go

for DK, just saying, Kucinich is great on union issues.

[redqueen]

30. I love that page!

Another great quote:

"Dennis wastes little time on bad mouthing the president or the other candidates. He's is FOR something that is REAL. We sense that about him and we are so grateful for his courage and fortitude." - P. Ashford, Langley, Washington

:D

[Egnever]

36. If only that quote were true

Kudos to denis for gaining supporters.

However the page itself puts the lie to that quote. I find it quite Ironic that that person would post it.

[redqueen]

43. To feel that way, you must think he's bashing Dean.

He's not. He's pointing out a difference, and an accurate portrayal is offered.

I'm sorry that Dean made that comment about how he'd go after candidates who didn't stick to the cap. He left himself open for this, and that's just how life is. If you don't want to be considered a hypocrite, you have to be careful about telling people what your principles are.

I'm genuinely sorry you feel that this is just about bashing. It's really not.

[damnraddem]

40. Kucinich plays an important role in the campaign.

I hope he keeps it up, and keeps things moving to the left. And, indeed, he is far closer to my politics than Dean is. I support Dean because he can win, and Kucinich can't. Not this time around. That's another reason Kucinich needs to stay in the primaries for a while -- to get more face time with the voters, more name recognition. He'll need it when the country might be ready for him, in 2008 or 2012.

[helleborient]

42. 2012...after Howard Dean's second term...

:-)

[JohnKleeb]

44. He'll be 66 then and it would be natural for his VP to run in the primary

but I dont know who President Kucinich has in mind for his VP, that could be a popular primary member in 2012.

[redqueen]

47. What I find encouraging...

are the number of people on that page that say the reason they originally didn't support Kucinich was because he wasn't electable.

:)

"If not now, when? If not here, where? If not us, who? If not us, WHO?!" -- Joel Tyner, "Go Go Dennis"

[nocreativename]

46. I really like DK

But when I head to the caucus on feb 7th. I'll be supporting Dean.


Also I think DK is needed in the house, we get worked in the house.

[Larkspur]

50. My reasons for NOT switching to Kucinich

Kucinich does not have the leadeship ability to build a coalition like Dean is building with labor, activists, and business.

Also, Dean has the ability to take a bad situation and make it better, like he did in Vermont where he took a $70 million deficit and turned it into a surplus, turned the worse bond rating into the best in New England, and lowered taxes fairly. We need that ability after taking over the White House.

Kucinich also lacks the executive leadership skills. When Mayor of Cleveland, could not prevent the city from going bankrupt. While Kucinich is not totaly responsible for that happening, he failed to develop a plan to prevent it.

And lets look at the 2 campaigns, Dean got in early because he understood his lack of name recognition was a big hurdle and he patiently built a network of contacts before the Internet helped launch him into the frontrunner status. Dean also took risks, like deciding in Feb 2003 to attack the Dem leaders, who let the party down in the Nov 2002 elections and with the IWR vote, along with Bush. The Cheney Challenge was another risk and it paid off big time for him. In short, Dean's campaign is not a gimmick but a well conceived campaign that uses traditional and contemporary methods to attact supporters.

Overall, Dean is a better executive leader than Kucinich. Dean started with $157,000 and now has earned $25 million and growing. Dean is a better fundraiser and wiser spender of his funds. Dean has a better talent with developing a winning strategy than Kucinich does.

I see no reason to switch.

[Padraig18]

52. Nor do I. n/t

[redqueen]

53. Thanks for sharing.

Since you offered your reasons, I'm taking it that you're open to dialogue.

"Kucinich does not have the leadeship ability to build a coalition like Dean is building with labor, activists, and business."

Kucinich is the chair of the Progressive Caucus. He also led the opposition to the war. In addition, his colleagues, both Republican and Democratic, admire him for his ability to work in a team spirit. He's a can-do guy who builds bridges to get things done.

"Also, Dean has the ability to take a bad situation and make it better, like he did in Vermont where he took a $70 million deficit and turned it into a surplus, turned the worse bond rating into the best in New England, and lowered taxes fairly. We need that ability after taking over the White House."

I don't know about the bond rating thing... or how fairly taxes were lowered. If you were an elderly person who depended on chiropractic care to alleviate pain you might not feel they were so fair.

"Kucinich also lacks the executive leadership skills. When Mayor of Cleveland, could not prevent the city from going bankrupt. While Kucinich is not totaly responsible for that happening, he failed to develop a plan to prevent it."

He could not have prevented it, because the board of the bank was in cahoots with the board of SEI, who wanted to buy the city-owned power company. I guess you could say I look at this decision the same way Dean supporters look at Dean's cutting medicare benefits. Tough love. :)

"And lets look at the 2 campaigns, Dean got in early because he understood his lack of name recognition was a big hurdle and he patiently built a network of contacts before the Internet helped launch him into the frontrunner status. Dean also took risks, like deciding in Feb 2003 to attack the Dem leaders, who let the party down in the Nov 2002 elections and with the IWR vote, along with Bush. The Cheney Challenge was another risk and it paid off big time for him. In short, Dean's campaign is not a gimmick but a well conceived campaign that uses traditional and contemporary methods to attact supporters."

I don't know if attacking Democrats is a great strategy. :shrug:

"Overall, Dean is a better executive leader than Kucinich. Dean started with $157,000 and now has earned $25 million and growing. Dean is a better fundraiser and wiser spender of his funds. Dean has a better talent with developing a winning strategy than Kucinich does."

I dunno... apparently Dean got some of that seed money from top execs at energy firms. That alone would turn me off. His decision to abandon his office to run for president doesn't impress me either. Being a better fundraiser goes hand in hand with getting nice-nice treatment from big media. Make of that what you will. As far as strategy... well, I'll let that one go so we don't devolve into a flame war. :)

[MrSoundAndVision]

61. Again

You have coolheadedness RedQueen, see?

[Mairead]

54. Lark, like the J-man's, your statements never disappoint

They're always made as though you were merely reciting that water is wet and fire burns and things fall down rather than up. Your hermetic certainty is charming, in its own very special way.

[no name no slogan]

56. Fair enough, but I must correct a couple of misconceptions

* Cleveland didn't go bankrupt because of Kucinich. It was already in debt when he took over, much of which was held by the bank that was in cahoots with the power company trying to buy up Muny Light, the city-owned electric company. The bank and the power company were closely intertwined, sharing four board members, and had been continually trying to undermine Muny Light for the past several years.

When DK refused to sell Muny Light, the Bank that held the city's credit called all the city's debts in at once, forcing the city into default. The bank told DK that if he sold Muny Light, they would extend him credit. He stuck to his principles, which cost him the election.

And lets look at the 2 campaigns, Dean got in early because he understood his lack of name recognition was a big hurdle and he patiently built a network of contacts before the Internet helped launch him into the frontrunner status.

* This is true, Dean did get in early, setting up his exploratory committee in 2001. His stance on the IWR also helped him get noticed by the mainstream media, as well.

However, Dennis Kucinich never planned to run for president. He was drafted by an outpouring of support for him after his Feb 2002 speech "A Prayer for America" at the Sothern California ADA. He was bombarded with mail and email, requesting that he jump into the race.

Kucinich set up his committee in Feb 2003, and has only campaigned in earnest since then, while still maintaining a nearly spotless attendance record at his "day job" in Congress. Dean has been campaigning full-time since the end of 2002, when his gubernatorial term expired.

Dennis has also been a leader in Congress, too. As the co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, he led the fight against the IWR in the House, even going against the party leadership, and managed to get fully 2/3 of House Democrats to vote against it.



Dean also took risks, like deciding in Feb 2003 to attack the Dem leaders, who let the party down in the Nov 2002 elections and with the IWR vote

* He did do that, which was admirable. However, he was also the "point man" responsible for helping the Democrats to win more gubernatorial races in 2002. Unfortunatly we failed in that. Also, his leadership in Vermont led to steadily declining re-election margins over the course of his re-elections. This leads me to believe that his "coattail effect" will be quite small, possibly even negligable.

You do have good reasons for supporting your candidate. If you truly believe he will be the one to make a difference in this country, then I commend you for sticking with your choice. Not many people can say they support their candidate with conviction.

Best of luck to you and your candidate. It's gonna be bloody no matter what anyone says! :D

:hi:

[MrSoundAndVision]

60. Don't you dare!

Say he couldn't prevent the Cleveland bankruptcy. He fought for the urban poor and their energy bills. He said no to the electric companies and their henchman, the banks. Yes, he paid the price: ousted, branded by a compliant media (sound familiar).

For you to display such a misunderstanding of that situation implies one of the following: either you haven't actually READ what happened at http://www.kucinich.us or other sources, or you're just being belligerant. Which is it? I invite all of the thread readers to read about Muny Light on http://www.kucinich.us (I think under "My Story") and see help this guy out. His mouse is broken.

[Mairead]

65. We need to not fall for the "bankruptcy" canard

It wasn't 'bankruptcy', which is a declaration by a bankruptcy court that some entity is either (a) hopelessly in debt and will have its assets sold off to partly repay creditors or (b) under the protection of the court while the entity tries to get its act together and repay in full.

What happened in Cleveland was a missed payment, a default. Dennis always uses the correct term, and we should not let the malicious/ignorant get away with using the wrong one.

[snoochie]

68. Thank you for that clarification, Mairead

We shouldn't allow other Democrats to hijack language to suit their spinning needs.

Kucinich did the right thing, and the people of Cleveland know it. They elected him again after the city presented him with some honor or award, IIRC, for saving them over a hundred million dollars. Then they elected him again, and again, and again, and again... :D

[peaceandjustice]

139. to be fair, a forced default

As I understand it, the bank favoring the MUNY sale changed the schedule of payments to force the default. Called the loans in ahead of schedule.

[Mairead]

144. Do you have a cite for that? That would be interesting

and I certainly haven't heard that before. I hope you do have!

[peaceandjustice]

153. here's two links

"When Kucinich refused to sell Muny Light, the banks took the unprecedented step of refusing to roll over the city’s debt, as is customary." So I guess while it wasn't a legally binding schedule, they usually rolled over the debt and didn't just to spite him. I got this from his website.

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/issue_publicpower.htm

Here it is, in his own words, told to Studs Terkel.
"When I was elected mayor on November 8, 1977, it was discovered that the previous administration had misspent tens of millions of dollars of bond funds. They could not be accounted for. The city was trying to negotiate the renewal of $14 million worth of notes held in local banks. One bank talked: the Cleveland Trust Company.

I had a meeting on the day of default at 8 o'clock in the morning, with the Council president, the chairman of the board of Cleveland Trust and a local businessman, a friend of mine. The conversation turned immediately to MUNY Light. The chairman of the board of Cleveland Trust made it very clear that if I sold MUNY Light to the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, he would extend credit and save the city from default. CEI's largest shareholder is Cleveland Trust. Four members of Cleveland Trust's board are directors of CEI. If I didn't agree, I could not expect any help from his bank."

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020506&c=3&s=terkel

[redqueen]

154. This subject deserves it's own thread!

Then we can just kick it when it gets spewed again. :)

Sheesh...

[Mairead]

155. Ah. Thanks.

I don't quite see, though, where it says that the banks called in the notes early. I can see where they refused to re-finance, but that doesn't seem to be quite the same thing.

[peaceandjustice]

162. yeah, I know, I wish I could find the writer who described...

it as calling the debt in early.

[cryofan]

82. dean can lead us to the same old status quo

if that is what you want.
I am sure all millionaire donors, all business owners, all Washington DC eltie, all major media news reporters and editors want exactly that.

And that is what Dean will give them. That is why his name is known to the public right now.

And Kuch will NOT want the status quo.

Kuch is a changer and a fighter and has a grudge against the status quo. That is why his name is NOT known to the general public.

[genius]

62. I switched from Dean to Kucinich because I believed his positon

on criminal justice and the death penalty was racist. Also, my kids would never have forgiven me if I had voted for someone like Dean.

[LWolf]

66. I switched.

Early on. Because Dennis represents the direction I think our country should go. He more closely matches my position on issues than Dean.

I'll support whoever gets the nomination, gladly. But in the primary, I get to support the real deal: the candidate I truly prefer. The candidate who actually supports and works for things that I believe in.

[snoochie]

69. I switched

after I found out Dean wasn't really against the illegal invasion of Iraq.

[Larkspur]

73. Dean was against Bush war against Iraq

so maybe you should switch back.

[no name no slogan]

78. Against Bush's, war, YES-- but not against THE war

There's a big difference between supporting a 60-day waiting period before invading if Saddam didn't give up his supposed WMD (Dean's position) and not supporting the war because there was no credible evidence of WMDs in the first place (DK's position).

It may not seem like much to some people, but it's a HUGE difference to those of us who knew it was yet another bullshit imperialistic war for PNAC's sake.

[Egnever]

79. That is no where close to deans position

the bifen lugar bill which he supported Calls for proof of an iminent threat before invading.

The 60 day waiting period comes in to effect in the face of definirive proof of WMD and saddams refusal to destroy them.

absent that we have no war.

Seeing as how we are now 6-8? months in and still there are no WMD. Deans position would have kept us out of war. Or would have forced the president to go on record with false evidence of an iminent threat.

We may have still gone to war but Shrub would be hanging in the wind right now because of it.

[no name no slogan]

80. Not quite

And I quote from Salon, whom he talked to in February:

He gets a deluge of phone calls from reporters asking him to clarify his position. Which is -- "as I've said about eight times today," he says, annoyed -- that Saddam must be disarmed, but with a multilateral force under the auspices of the United Nations. If the U.N. in the end chooses not to enforce its own resolutions, then the U.S. should give Saddam 30 to 60 days to disarm, and if he doesn't, unilateral action is a regrettable, but unavoidable, choice.

He said Saddam should be disarmed-- nothing to do with whether or not there was credible evidence to do so. He also said unilateral action could be necessary. Nowhere does he say anything about the credibility of the threat-- just that Saddam needs to be disarmed, either with or without the UN.

Of course, his position has steadily "evolved" over the course of the campaign. During the invasion, he strangely fell silent, while DK continued to speak out against the war.

After the statue fell in Baghdad, Howard was back opposing the war again. But when it came to the $87b to "rebuild" Iraq, he had to have DK help him "clarify" his position during the debate.

Principled? Possibly. Courageous? Highly unlikely.

EDIT FOR Salon.com URL

[Egnever]

115. Well that was the only time he said it without qualifying it

and that statement came either the day of or shortly after powells dog and pony show at the UN. Not to mention it hapened to be what the UN was calling for at the time.

You can try and twist it all you want but Dean has been verry consistant on his stance on the war throughout.

as far as going silent during the invasion here is dean the day after we invaded

Those Americans who opposed our going to war with Iraq, who wanted the United Nations to remove those weapons without war, need not apologize for giving voice to their conscience, last year, this year or next year. In a country devoted to the freedom of debate and dissent, it is every citizen’s patriotic duty to speak out, even as we wish our troops well and pray for their safe return. Congressman Abraham Lincoln did this in criticizing the Mexican War of 1846, as did Senator Robert F. Kennedy in calling the war in Vietnam 'unsuitable, immoral and intolerable.'

"This is not Iraq, where doubters and dissenters are punished or silenced --this is the United States of America. We need to support our young people as they are sent to war by the President, and I have no doubt that American military power will prevail. But to ensure that our post-war policies are constructive and humane, based on enduring principles of peace and justice, concerned Americans should continue to speak out; and I intend to do so.”


If the only way your guy can win is to try to twist Dean you might as well give up now.

[snoochie]

129. qualifying it how?

If the UN's inspectors didn't find weapons, why go in without them? and if they did find them, then we'd get our warmongering way.

There is no way to qualify his time period, it reflects how he views the situation, which is not how I or most other Democrats view it.

[peaceandjustice]

140. speaking of which, who wants to bet

that right before the 2004 election we'll "find" weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, without enough time for them to be proven authentic...The Bushes are masters of the October surprise...

[dpbrown]

81. Kucinich did something about it - Dean held no public office at the time

Dean opted not to run for re-election in 2002 to "run for President" but Kucinich, in the House of Representatives, helped to lead the biggest group of voters to reject Bush's "use of force" rationale. More than 120 Representatives who didn't stand with Gephardt and Bush on the dais and pledge the lives of our brave men and women to helping Bush take over Iraq's oil.

While Dean can be lauded for speaking out against Bush's rush to war, Dennis Kucinich actually did something pragmatic and real, by leading more than a quarter of the House of Representatives to vote against Bush's military farce.

And now it turns out that Kucinich was indeed prescient - his Prayer for America speech, delivered on February 17, 2002, fully seven months before Bush "rolled out his new product" by hyping the war, included this quote:

We did not authorize the invasion of Iran.
We did not authorize the invasion of North Korea.
We did not authorize the bombing of civilians in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize permanent detainees in Guantanamo Bay.
We did not authorize the withdrawal from the Geneva Convention.
We did not authorize military tribunals suspending due process and habeas corpus.
We did not authorize assassination squads.
We did not authorize the resurrection of COINTELPRO.
We did not authorize the repeal of the Bill of Rights.
We did not authorize the revocation of the Constitution.
We did not authorize national identity cards.
We did not authorize the eye of Big Brother to peer from cameras throughout our cities.
We did not authorize an eye for an eye.
Nor did we ask that the blood of innocent people, who perished on September 11, be avenged with the blood of innocent villagers in Afghanistan.
We did not authorize the administration to wage war anytime, anywhere, anyhow it pleases.
We did not authorize war without end.
We did not authorize a permanent war economy.

_______________________________________________

It's easy to have no elected office and speak out.

It's leadership to use your elected position to do something about it - to fight and to convince others to fight with you to protect the public interest. That's Dennis Kucinich.

Kucinich: Better Ideas, Better Candidate - it's just that simple

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[snoochie]

86. I think others have cleared this up...

but I wanted to add personally, that it was the 60 to 90 day waiting period with or without the UN that really gives him away.

With proof of weapons stores, with inspections by UN inspection teams, why wouldn't they be on our side and OK the invasion? There is no reason. He clearly advocates unilateral, preventive war, and that's just never acceptable, IMO.

[JohnKleeb]

70. I switched

because I took a look at Mr. Kucinich himself, I realized this man is my candiate, and for the longest time I too couldnt spell his name, also what affected my switch was the fact that Dennis spoke about Taft-Hartley, I am a big labor supporter. Go Dennis!

[MrSoundAndVision]

71. I switched

in September because of his stance on trade, and also I saw Dennis speak online.

[cryofan]

72. I switched

WHy?

Well. I have been following politics since the 70s (I cast my first vote ever for Carter), and I have made some decisions about what is going on in the world, and about how is "best in life" (thanks Conan).

What is best in life is getting pleasure from leisure and friends and family. That and having a relatively stress-free life.

And what I see in Europe is different from what I see here in America. In western europe, I see people who are not afraid of losing their job because they be poor or have no medical care. Now, you may give me anecdotal cases, but in many western european countries a single person with a menial job could work for several years, then quit and travel the world or go to school. All without taking loans or facing financial ruin. Or they can work part time and still get medical benefits from the state. Or they can develop a small business without having the additional burden of $800/medical insurance payments.

The western european states have a somewhat opposite approach to the Americans: we build a stable environment for capital investment, and let the majority of the benefits of business go to the investors and managers, and let what is left over trickle down to the citizens. The Europeans build a stable environment for capital investment, and let a lot of the benefits of business go to the citizens, and let some of the benefits trickle down to the investor and managers.

It is more like the citizens OWN the western european countries, and the corporations are only there as renters. THe citizens get the most benefits.

A person who wants a degree here in the USA has to go into tens of thousands of dollars of debt, even for a public school.

Kucinich is the only candidate out there who seems to want to adopt a european approach to governance. He seems to want a citizen-oriented country, as opposed to an investor-oriented country.

Plus, he has come out in favor of proportional representation. THat is the tool by which we can rebuild America in the shape of western europe.

[snoochie]

87. Great post!

Thanks for adding your perspective. Sometimes it's difficult to imagine another way when you've been completely immersed in one thing your whole life.

Other countries also have mandatory vacation time, so people can stay sane. :) Other countries value people over corporations. I want my country to be like that, too.

[Sean Reynolds]

83. Why does Kucinich continually go after Dean?

Moreover, what is so wrong with people supporting Dean? I can understand you're all mad that Dean stole the 'anti-Iraq war' voice, but please do you think we're all that stupid to JUST support a candidate based on his like and dislike of the war in Iraq?

If Kucinich really wants Dean supporters, he's going about it in the wrong way. Same with his supporters too. If you really feel you want us to back your candidate, yet turn around and continually bash Dean, you're not going to get my support.

I've been VERY vocal about how well I like Kucinich. I don't agree with ALL the ideas he's put out, BUT I do respect him. Sadly, a lot of his supporters continue to degrade Dean supporters by stating he isn't a liberal and that we're all only cozying up to him based on his Iraq war stance. THAT will not garner you support, my friend. If you want to switch from Dean to Kucinich, good. But these threads only bring anti-Dean hate to the board and I'm really sick of it.

What would you do if I started a post outlining why I don't support Kucinich? Would you not take that as an attack?

[dpbrown]

84. I think it's differentiation

I think former Governor Dean initially positioned himself as the "liberal" and so it was incumbent on Representative Kucinich to propose how they differed in their positions.

While there is some difference between Dennis and Howard on the Iraq invasion, I think there is a differentiation to be made between their positions as well as their pragmatic actions relative to their positions. While Dean held no elected position at the time, Kucinich helped to convince more than a quarter of the entire House of Representatives to reject the position of Dick Gephardt and the leadership to call Bush's bluff.

And whether or not one is "liberal" or not, I find Kucinich's position and agenda better on:

1. Abolishing the Death Penalty
2. Universal Single-payer health care for what we pay now (no diverting of Bush "tax cut" money from other programs to fund it)
3. Rejecting the failed NAFTA and the WTO
4. Making the Pentagon accountable to the taxpayers and cutting the bloat
5. Demilitarizing space and stopping "Star Wars" once and for all
6. Empowering family farmers by getting them into energy and product distribution
7. Public Financing of Elections

For me, Dean's not even in the top four as far as candidates go.

Kerry's more "liberal" than Dean and a war hero.

Clark's probably as "liberal" as Dean and a war hero.

Edwards is more liberal than Dean and a trial lawyer, the only kind of rich people Republicans hate - because they help people secure their own rights.

People already do attack Kucinich. I haven't found much that sticks, yet, though. And now that Kucinich's keeping his word on public financing and Dean's trying to outplay the Republicans at their own game - well, Kucinich looks even better on that front now, as well.

Kucinich: Better Ideas, Better Candidate - it's just that simple

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Sean Reynolds]

88. Kucinich: Better Ideas, Better Candidate - it's just your opinion.

Frankly I started supporting Dean in February and knew from the start he wasn't a left-wing liberal. WHY? Because HE STATED it. He's always stated that he's a left of center candidate, it was only the media that has pushed the belief he's a commie.

That said, I do not believe Edwards is more liberal than Dean. Both, like Clark, are about the same. While Kerry is more liberal than Dean, he's taken on a more moderate ideology since he put his hat into the ring. So, I don't know what to think.

I like Kucinich, but I don't agree with him on every thing. Like I've said MANY times, he is my second choice. You're not helping the cause though by attacking Dean supporters.

[dpbrown]

90. It's my vote, too

I didn't attack ex-Governor Dean.

The question you asked was why Kucinich "goes after" Dean.

I answered it with my opinion, related to two people not being able to be in the same place at the same time, i.e., both be the "liberal" candidate.

I don't even really think Kucinich is that liberal. I just think we've become so beaten down by nearly 16 years of the BFEE that we've become susceptible to the message I hear most often from Dean supporters - and I don't mean this negatively - that "it'll pass."

I wrote a list of positions in which I think Representative Kucinich has a better plan and agenda than does former Governor Dean.

I don't think it's an attack to point out the differences.

Kucinich is right to distinguish himself from Dean. And with Dean opting out of public financing, that's one more thing to differentiate Kucinich from Dean on.

On March 7, 2003, the Associated Press wrote: "Howard Dean committed Friday to taking taxpayer dollars to finance his presidential campaign.... He promised to make it an issue in the Democratic primaries if any of his rivals decide to skip public financing, as President Bush did en route to winning the Republican nomination in 2000. 'It will be a huge issue,' Dean said. 'I think most Democrats believe in campaign finance reform.'"

The thing is, he was probably right then - most Democrats do believe in campaign finance reform...

...and the unfairness of the Death Penalty.
...and in Universal Single-payer Health Care.
...and in halting unfair corporate handout trade agreements.
...and in the Pentagon being held accountable to the taxpayers.
...and in the demilitarization of space.
...and in ending the bloated, stupid, failed "Star Wars" program.
...and in farmers getting a fair shake.

I guess we're about to find out how many.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[snoochie]

89. Exactly, Dan... it's NOT just about the Iraq war...

it's about progressive values in general.

You forgot to mention Dean's active opposition to the public defenders office. I'm not sure how he feels about the drug war, but his position on the defense for people who can't afford lawyers combined with the trend toward a prison-industrial complex really bothers me.

[NNadir]

93. Kucinich is probably my least favorite alternative...

precisely because of the Green spin, which I note, like all Green Party spin, completely ignores even mentioning women's rights as an issue. No surprise: Nader held Women's rights in contempt, as does Kucinich.

I note for all of these (greatly inflated) opinions about what a great candidate Kucinich is, he has failed to climb in any poll (except in threads including his name started on anti Bush sites).

Here's the latest Zogby:

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=755

While Kucinich has doubled his support from 1% to 2%, half the support for Al Sharpton and tied with Mosley Brown.

Mosley-Brown would have my support over Kucinich since she didn't spend the last several decades trying to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

She has introduced Bills in the Senate that actually passed.

She does not go after non existant weapons in space like mind control satellites.

I'd guess too that she understands science better than Mr. Kucinich, who is as about as anti-Science as you can get.

Now, maybe Kucinich has won over the entire Dean contingent except for me in the last four hours and is now leading the race, getting Union endorsements, and keeping close base with Bush in fund raising, but speaking only for myself, I'd really like to see some evidence beyond the wild claims we see associated with Kucinich.

He would be a lot better candidate if he had ever introduced a bill about all of this wonderful stuff that was passed by congress and became law. Thus far he hasn't completed even the first step.

Here's what it takes to be the nominee: Get people to vote for you, to donate to you, to support you in numbers greater than your opponents. Without those things you cannot be a "great candidate" or even a respectible candidate.

I expect Kucinich to be the Green Candidate. I expect him to claim victory in spite of getting the same 0 electoral votes that Green Candidates always get. I don't expect him to matter in the same way Nader managed to give the illusion of mattering. Nader had exactly this same wunderbar platform you mentioned and it went nowhere.

[snoochie]

97. SIGH

First time I've used ignore.

I've seen a lot of the same regurgitated spin from this poster, I wish redqueen were here to put him in his place (she did it on smirking chimp, too!)

ahhhh, ignore. :)

[NNadir]

99. You can't address the substance

and neither can Redqueen.

The facts are there: Kucinich has spent a carreer disregarding women's issues, making proposals that go nowhere, failing as an administrator and negotiator.

Try to change the subject, but you cannot change these things. You also can't get more than 2%. This IS NOT WINNING. THIS IS NOT BEING A GOOD CANDIDATE.

Excuse me for saying this, but the purpose of the current election is not to make an obscure esoteric point for the purpose of the fringe. It is to defeat George Bush, and in so doing give ourselves a chance at a better world.

Sigh, sigh...

I'm not living on another planet. You are.

[no name no slogan]

105. Evidence, oh champion of "women's issues"?

You keep on saying that DK has spent his career disregarding women's issues, yet you cannot cite any evidence.

If you're talking about abortion, guess what: there's a hell of a lot more to a woman than her reproductive system.

You're use of a single issue to define "women's issues" (on which DK has explained his change in position, btw) is one of the most sexist things I've seen here on DU-- and it makes you look like you have a total disregard for women as working, living, voting people.

Look at DK's record on healthcare, "welfare reform", pentagon accountability, equal rights, and any number of so-called "womens issues", and you'll find he's as good as any other candidate-- and better than most-- on these issues. He's gotten a ton of support from many noted feminists, including Barbara Ehrenreich and Winona LaDuke.

Of course, if you can't see past a woman's vagina and/or uterus, you may not be able to see that.

:eyes:

[cyclezealot]

121. That is so bogus..

Any candidate who can get the support of musician Ani DiFranco is certainly not anti feminist. This BS comes from fact Dk was raised Catholic and grew out of his Catholic upbringing about choice.
DK supporters are rapidly pro choice. His explanation about large families and the ravages of poverty and birth control, etc. are brave stands and I suspect he could be a bridge builder between the pro and canti choice forces..DK does not deserve brickbats but applause for his growth..

[NNadir]

126. The contempt with which you respond to this shows how little you care.

First some evidence, this from the Nation:

"...He supported the Child Custody Protection Act, which prohibits anyone but a parent from taking a teenage girl across state lines for an abortion. He voted for the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, which makes it a crime, distinct from assault on a pregnant woman, to cause the injury or death of a fetus. He voted against funding research on RU-486. He voted for a ban on dilation and extraction (so-called partial-birth) abortions without a maternal health exception. He even voted against contraception coverage in health insurance plans for federal workers--a huge work force of some 2.6 million people (and yes, for many of them, Viagra is covered."

cf: Politt, "Regressive Progressive?" The Nation, May 27, 2002.

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi=20020527&s=pollitt

Politt's article as a whole is a broad argument that the Green/Kucinich crowd has complete contempt for women. This is remarkable for a candidate who claims to represent care about human rights, but holds 50% of human beings as unworthy of his serious consideration.

Voting against contraception in health plans? That's "progressive?"

It is very clear that the Green Party "Progressive" crowd right through its Kucinich stand-in hold women in contempt, which is why they could see no problem with having George Bush rather than Al Gore in the White House. As for "Babs the Green" and Winona, they are ineffective and meaningless fools, as their Green past confirms.

Now "let's look at DK's record on healthcare, "welfare reform", pentagon accountability, equal rights" excluding the other (of course unnamed women's rights - though I doubt you can name one).

Dennis Kucinich has not introduced a single bill in Congress that has passed. (I keep asking to be disproved on this on these threads, but predictably, I am not.) Ergo, he has not changed a thing on any of these issues. You Green "progressives" seem to think that "progress" is making grand pronouncements. It is not. It is effecting change. This means formulating coherent, well thought out bills that can garner broad support, necessarily through comprimise. We all want peace. We all want health care. But damned if I'm going to vote for someone who will mouth on it about it endlessly and not accomplish it. Comprehensive Health Care is going to take great political skill and capital; and Peace will take far more than cutesy rhetoric and new org charts to achieve.

I'm not worried about having to hold my nose to vote for Kucinich in the General Election because Kucinich is incompetant; he can manage a campaign no better than he has managed anything else in his career. There is no evidence at all that he will catch on in anyway to become the nominee. What I am mildly concerned about is the fact that you will all demonstrate your self-absorption in the general election to express your contempt not only for uteruses, but for the ultimate Democratic nominee whoever he or she may be. It's not likely to be of much importance this time out, though, Bush turned out to be a lot less like Gore than you predicted in 2000. I doubt the American public at the end of the day will be so easily fooled by either the extreme left or the extreme right.

[cyclezealot]

131. Not true.

Kucinich was raised Catholic. He outgrew it like many Cahtholics did. Yet, he still remains Catholic. He had an change of mind.. I accept that. To think him anti-woman is just not informed. Anti-woman would go against his humanist values.
He values life, as shown by his views on peace. No one would show more compassion to the worth of all human beings than Kucinich. The idea he is anti-woman is just silly. Too many feminists are allied to him.If anything his vuneralbe point will be his feminists supporters will haunt him with the silly femi-nazi charges. Being from a large family, growing up Catholic and poor, he suddenly realized the forces of poverty that Margaret Sanger fought 100 years ago.
As to Kucinich's life. His valueing his career less than his principals speaks nothing but of his greatness.He life is one to be proud of. Gandhi's nephew agrees and I am sure Gandhi would.
As to passing legislation.. Kucinich got to Congress after the Republican takeover. No Democrat gets legislation passed anymore. His bills speaks to me.
Yes, even though I voted for Bill Clinton twice and prefer him..His undoing of Federal Communications Act , welfare reform, bad trade bills , terrorist restrictions - which were a forerunner of the Patriot Act, etc. .....
Yes, I am jaded and proud of it. I have principals. We have lived in Europe..We know how medical care should be administered...I expect progressive change, not collaboration with the darker side of the Republicans. I am no Green either. Just a progressive Democrat in the mold of Paul Wellstone/ David Bonior... I expect the party to reflect that,if it wants my money and time.
I certainly think Kucnich's conversion about choice is more sincere than Dean's in regard to bad trade compacts and the resulting job losses.

[peaceandjustice]

141. well said, hear hear,

"Peace will take far more than cutesy rhetoric and new org charts to achieve."

The Dept. of Peace is a vanity project, pure and simple. It will divert funding from proven programs like AmeriCorps, AID and MSHA. And its agenda will always match the agenda of the President and his appointee to head it, so it becomes a detriment to society when a conservative takes office again.

[no name no slogan]

150. Clarification

you stated: The Dept. of Peace is a vanity project, pure and simple. It will divert funding from proven programs like AmeriCorps, AID and MSHA

Actually, funding for the Department of Peace will come from the 15% of the Pentagon budget that DK will slash when he's elected. This 15% is currently being spent on useless programs and weapons that don't work (like Star Wars), or on programs the pentagon has not requested and does not need, but were put through by the Congresscritters owned by the Military-Industrial Complex.

It WILL NOT take money away from current programs.

The Department of Peace is not just about promoting peace abroad-- it will also deal with domestic issues like family violence, abuse, and curbing violence in our communities. It will champion things like non-violent conflict resolution, which has already made a difference in many of our "at-risk" schools and communities.

If his program is merely a "vanity program", than why has Arun Ghandi, the grandson of the Mahatma, endorse the department and the candidacy of Dennis Kucinich?

[peaceandjustice]

157. it's still money not being spent on proven programs.

That 15% cut to the Pentagon budget could otherwise be available to increase MSHA, AID funding. Instead it will, If DK has his way, be spent on copiers and fax machines for a new bureaucracy.

[redqueen]

158. That is so weak

it's not even funny.

So, I take it that, in your opinion, any government agency OTHER than MSHA or AID (?) funding, is money spent on 'copiers and fax machines'?

Geez how did so many right wing talking points get so well used by people on this site. FYI the right wing would label YOUR pet MSHA or AID (?) projects as overburdened with administrative costs as well, and probably cut that.

I also gather from your comments that, to you, violence isn't really all that big of a problem? Certainly not big enough to warrant immediate, top-level attention? Seems absolutely ludicrous to me, but whatever.

[peaceandjustice]

163. I find your reply weak.

we have numerous resources already available to combat violence, including the State Dept. (top-level enough for ya??), Justice Dept. (how about that one??), FBI, AID, Peace Corps...we don't need to duplicate their bureaucracy, which is a necessary part of their ability to operate, just fund them at levels high enough so they can focus primarily on those objectives.
And no, other federal agencies, including but not limited to AID and MSHA, already have most of their material needs met. But creating a new department is going to require purchasing all of their office supplies and facilities as right now they obviously have none (what, with not existing and all).

[no name no slogan]

149. Oh, the "Pollitt Hatchet Job" article

That piece is pretty famous-- she wrote it in response to a piece Studs Terkel wrote called "Kucinich Is The One", IIRC....

Pollitt is also on the record as endorsing Dean, and her bias is all over this article. She deliberately attacked DK and didn't give him a chance to answer her queries-- at least she didn't print them. She had an ulterior motive in this column, and that was to paint DK as a demagogue to further Dean's campaign amongst liberals and progressives.

Dennis Kucinich will also use Roe v. Wade as a litmus test for appointing judges to the federal bench-- will Howard Dean do the same? Has he made a pledge to do so?

Once again, you've proven that you have a myopic view of what "women's issues" are. Not every woman in the country (or the Democratic Party, even) are "pro-choice". In fact, here in MN, the largest anti-choice group was founded by a WOMAN active in the Democratic Party! Most women are not single-issue voters and care about a whole range of "women's issues", including equal rights, access to healthcare, job security, a living wage, etc.

However, if you're content to just see women as "baby machines", that's your perogative.

[Desertrose]

106. The purpose of the election is

to make a choice to take this country in a different direction. Have a bit of vision...we need more than to simply get Bush out... we need to change the things that allowed a George Bush to take over in the first place...if not , we'll have another just like him all too soon.

You clearly don't like Kucinich....that much is obvious...but your dislike and posting "your spin " on Dennis won't change what is real...time will tell us what the outcome will be...who is the better man.

.....it is only your bias that makes you think Kucinich is fringe....I'll go with my ideals any day.....and yes...I am definitely not on your planet and quite glad of it.

Peace
DR

[LWolf]

101. Kucinich is the only real choice for me.

I don't have a primary alternative. He is my favorite by miles. He has my primary vote.

I like Greens. As well as some other 3rd parties. I wish the dems would halt their march to the right. I don't like to see us hemorrhaging good progressives off to 3rd parties. I don't think 3rd parties are the enemy. I think republicans/neo-cons/corporations are the enemy. I don't like to see us antagonizing potential partners in the '04 election.

I like CMB, too.

Dennis Kucinich has introduced plenty of great legislation. Check the record. I guess, since the house is firmly repub, we shouldn't ever introduce any progressive legislation, since it probably won't pass. We should just shut our mouths and go along. We sure wouldn't want any progressive goals in the record for future generations to study, whether or not it passed. We sure as hell don't need any of those congress people standing up to Bush inc. if they can't get the legislation passed. :eyes:

As a DK supporter who has pored over his record, I don't find him to be "anti-science." Anti bad science or harmful science? Yes. As in opposing GMO crops, nuclear weapons, and other "science" doing more harm than good.

Mind control. LOL. This one pops up every once in a while when someone is searching, desperately, for something to oppose. Read the whole bill. Notice that there was no mind control in the version that passed. And produce evidence that US scientists don't have any sort of "mind control" research going on.

And women's rights. Since I'm a woman, I have some personal investment here. DK is the only candidate who will make Roe v Wade a litmus test for judges. He doesn't like abortion. Neither do I. I can hardly blame him. He wants, not to outlaw abortions, but to make them less necessary through sex ed and birth control. So do I.

I think it took a great deal of courage to step away from the Catholic Church's position on abortion. I think his reason for doing so is good. Recognizing that women need to be the ones making their own reproductive choices. I think it's very upfront and honest of him to say, "I don't believe in abortion. I do believe in choice."

http://www.house.gov/kucinich/issues/reproductiverights.htm

This change came about a year before he was drafted to run for president. People who challenge him about "women's issues" are always talking about abortion. It's a single issue. Not "issues." And he's addressed it well.

The really great thing about Dennis Kucinich is that, when he states a position, he supports that position with his words and with his votes. On last week's ban on partial birth abortion ban, which he voted against:

Advocates of this bill who say they stand in defense of life would be more believable if they worked to support families with adequate child-care funding, child tax-credit relief for vulnerable families, and peace," Kucinich said.

Of course, I'm not the only woman concerned about women's issues who supports Dennis:

http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/feminists_4_kucinich/

Some who have endorsed him include:

Barbara Ehrenreich, a political essayist whose most recent book is Nickel and Dimed: Surviving in Low Wage America

Angela Gilliam, professor and scholar of Black feminist anthropology and international feminism

Ynestra King, a writer and activist specializing in environmental, feminist, and disability issues

Gail Lerner, an organizer in the global women's movement, who has worked with several United Nations agencies and international NGOs in the U.S. and abroad

Grace Paley, a writer and peace activist whose works include Enormous Changes at the Last Minute, Later That Same Day, and Just as I Thought

Rosalind Petchesky, an international feminist activist and Distinguished Professor of Political Science at Hunter College and the City University of New York

Digna Sanchez, a Latina community activist in New York, president of the Aspirante Alumni Fellowship

Meredith Tax, a novelist, essayist and international organizer of feminist writers, whose books include Rivington Street and Union Square

Dennis may not climb in the polls until the media chooses to notice him. And that will have to be forced down their throat; they won't do it willingly. Why do you suppose that is? Because America doesn't want to hear him, or because they don't want him heard?

DK supporters will tell you it's the second choice.

[LWolf]

98. There's nothing wrong with supporting Dean,

or any other candidate you feel best represents you. That's what democracy is about. And we have experienced plenty of posts outlining why people don't support Dennis. Most of them are derisive.

I don't think Dennis continually goes after Dean. Although it could seem that way, because he doesn't go after other candidates as much. Probably because of the misconception of Dean as the "liberal" candidate. Which Dean himself discounts. In all honesty, DK, Sharpton, and Braun are the "left" end of the spectrum, and I think Dennis wants the misconception corrected. JMO. I think all the candidates have gone after Dean because they see him as the one to beat. That should be a positive thing for Dean.

It's a campaign. It's an election. Candidates do and say things to separate themselves from the opposition, and to tell voters why they are the better choice. This is an interesting question, though. If you were Dean, looking to collect supporters from other camps, which candidates would you be looking at? If you were Dennis, who would you look at?

I understand how you feel. Dennis has been bashed by so many people that I can feel a little hostile. One of the really powerful things about Dean's campaign is the strength, passion, and organization of his supporters. DK supporters have the strength and passion, but haven't been as organized. I hope that's changing.

I have to say one more thing...in addition to all of that strength, passion, and organization, there has also been aggression. Derision. Sarcasm. All candidates have some supporters who use those tactics. Dean seems to have more. That may be because he has more supporters, or it may have something else to do with his campaign. I don't know. But I think you see attacks on Dean because supporters from other camps are smarting from the aggression, derision, and sarcasm. And when Dean is attacked, you understand how we feel. And you get frustrated. And want to hit back, or not. It's a cycle. Let's break it. I don't mind saying that I switched from Dean to Dennis early on because Dennis more closely represents what I believe. It's not a slam on Dean; it's just me trying to make the best choice from my perspective.

Let's agree to appreciate what we can about all of the candidates, and support the one/s we like the best in the primaries...then join together with whoever wins to defeat Bush.

[Mairead]

125. "Would you not take that as an attack?"

Not if your reasons were based on substance. The problem is that almost NONE of the opposition to Dennis is based on substance. It's based on lies ('he bankrupted Cleveland', 'he opposes women's rights') or mere opinion ('I don't like him', 'he doesn't look presidential', 'he could never get his program made law', and the classic 'he's not electable'). The only substance is either out-of-date ('he used to oppose Choice') or anomalous (taken at face value, his vote to submit the anti-flag-desecration amendment to the states doesn't fit with any of the other things he stands for).

[cyclezealot]

132. You have a right to say why you do not like Kucinich

I have heard Kucinich's charges towards Dean..They are not personal.They are just stating his back sliding and previous positons.
Trade policy is too critical an issue to me. If I do not think the conversion sincere, I must and DK must make that charge. That is what a debate is about. Since Trade policy is my number two issue and I do not think Dean's conversion sincere, then I must go with whom I trust and that would be Gephardt.
Dean has every right to attack DK on any potential flip flops and should. I think Dk's conversion on choice is sincere and have no problems with that, as a pro-choice family. If I did not,don't know what I would do with my support for DK, since that is my number 4 issue.
my line up of issues. 1- Health Care, 2- Trade 3- Iraq 4-Choice/civil liberties. Those are unbridgeable choices.Those choices not meet, then I am just voting for the lesser of two evils. Once the nominee is given to a lesser candidate,then I will no longer speak badly of that candidate, but as to going out of the way to work for a person insincere on 2 out of four issues- I would rather be on my bike.
You have a right to challenge Kucinich on his issues, but doubt it will sway me. Just lets not get personal. with the exception of Liebermann,maybe...

[eridani]

137. He's not after Dean with silly things like the flag flap

His criticisms are strictly policy based, or asking him to quit lying about how no other candidates were against the war.

[The Sushi Bandit]

111. My God... 110 posts to this topic!

DK must be rattling some cages!

[Egnever]

113. Yep almost all of the 8 people on this thread

Are really fired up!

[Desertrose]

114. Nice attitude, egnever

really really nice....

....and certain supporters can't figure out why some folks question their candidate...is this the kind of people Dean draws? Always putting down those who sincerely support another candidate...just because we don't agree with you??

Hey, what are ya'll gonna do if you ever need all the people you've alienated...I wonder....

Peace
DR

[Egnever]

116. Sory to offend you

I find this thread pretty alienating.

if for some reason pigs flied and Denis got the nomination you think this thread telling dean supporters to stop drinking koolaid and get with a real liberal makes them feel somehow warmer towards your camp?

Self bumped over and over purely by kucinich people for the most part?

I am all for rooting for your candidate but why make it a dean/kucinich thread how bout just why I switched to Denis?

This thread is flame bait IMHO just asking for a negative response.

[JohnKleeb]

118. Personally this thread was pretty civil until pruner called those who left

idiots or something. It was pretty civil early on. Sorry if it offended you in any way but there are people who switched and I count myself as one of them.

[Egnever]

119. It was never civil towards dean suporters from the get go

It begins with a grafic that says the doctor is out.

Prety damn negative to me.

I know I as a dean suporter try very hard to stay away from these thread as for the most part Kucinich suporters seem to be a pretty peacefull lot and I dont begrudge you your choice in candidates. If denis is your guy fine by me sing praises of denis till the cows come home It wont bother me the least.

When the thread is based on my candidate is better than yours your gonna get negativity every time. the first response to this thread should have been a heads up but aparently since no one jumped in and verified it for you you think he was mistaken.

He wasnt.

Its flaim bait waiting to get ripped to shreds.

[JohnKleeb]

120. I worried about that too you know

For a while there it was quite civil is all I say. I agree it was a bit inflammatory but so was the post about what Studs Terkel said that gotten taken out of context and was meant to insult us. Thats what I do mostly :D praise my candiate. It goes all ways. I dont appreciate being called an idiot because I saw a guy IMO was my type of candiate.

[Egnever]

122. Again

Suport your guy all you want I am all for it. Theres a ton of offensive threads in this forum from all sides I have started a couple of burners myself.

I dont thoink your an idiot for suporting Denis/ He is a very idealistic candidate and pretty well defined I think. If he reflects your mindset the best than by all means be proud and stand up for what you believe in!

I like denis a lot in a couple of areas and in others I dissagree whole heartedly.

Bottom line here is my take Denis represents a small portion of the population very well. These people have every right to stand up for Denis till the very end. However there are a lot more people that feel betyter represented by one of the other 9 candidates and in the end Denis will never overcome that. I am all for pushing your views as long as denis can afford to stay in this race but when a guy who clearly has no chance of wining starts taking pot shots at the other people in the race that actually do I think he relegates everything good he could be pushing for into silence.

If you want to continue to sit here and tell me he is going to be president be my guest. Dont be too suprised when reality hits you.
Blame it on the media ignoring him if that works for you but he is not going to be president.

Personal attacks on other candidates do not help denis where he stands in the race,they only further devide the party for no good reason. While focusing attention on something other than his message which is what he should be pushing hard right now in an effort to pull the field his direction while he still has a position in the race. Like it or not his time is almost up. After New Hampshire and Iowa are over Denis will not be taken seriously again in this race.

Now is the Time dont waste it bashing other candidates with webpages dedicated to them.

I am not trying top be harsh but its reality as I see it.

[helleborient]

124. As a Dean supporter, I disagree...

I was not a big fan of the beginning of the thread, but it was able to be disarmed for a significant period of time due to the civility of those who were posting - including myself.

What happened in this thread early on is proof to me invcivility is unnecessary here and far from inevitable. However, a number of people believing there is no alternative will allow the discussion to descend quickly.

[Freddie Stubbs]

123. Must be a lot of people switching

Kucinich is rocketing up in the polls!

[The Sushi Bandit]

127. I like this one!

"I didn't actually switch, I just dumped Dean. Early this year I signed up for email from both Dean and Kucinich, then rather quickly discovered that Kucinich was the ONLY democratic hopeful who had consistently put his money where his mouth is on ALL the issues, and Dean was obviously just another Bush "Lite" somewhere between Lieberman and Kerry. So I started ignoring the Dean email and supporting Kucinich with what money I could and with some political action as well. Only when the Dean campaign's TV ads started to deliberately mislead about Kucinich's consistent opposition to the war did I demand the the Dean people remove me from their mailing lists. Dennis doesn't need a script because he doesn't have any lies,omissions, or deceptions to cover up."

[snoochie]

130. I like this one

"I switched to Dennis after reading Dean`s ad stating that he was the only anti-war candidate. It is simply a matter of character and it appears that Dean`s is similar to that of Bush...the proof is in the pudding, a lie is a lie."

[peaceandjustice]

142. I have yet to see an ad

where Dean says he is the only anti-war candidate...can you post the exact wording? 'Cause I bet it is nowhere close to that.

[redqueen]

143. hahaha

We should start looking for Bush's quote where he says the war will be quick and easy too!

And the quote where he says that 9/11 and Al Qaeda are connected!

LOL!

:silly:

[helleborient]

145. Better than looking for undocumented slams against other Democrats (n/t)

[ThirdWheelLegend]

147. undocumented?

See my other post below for the text.

The ad is not only documented, but it ran in New Hampshire even after Dean was confronted by Dennis K about its DISHONESTY.

I watched it with my own eyes. Although now I cannot find the link to it on Dean's site.

TWL

[ThirdWheelLegend]

146. I have seen it and alot of New Hampshire's undecided did also

If you are unfamiliar with the ad which Dean KNEW was misleading but let run anyway and never really apologized for either.

It used to be linked on Dean's site.... let me check...

can't find it now. May still be there somewhere.

Well he ran campaing ads in New Hampshire that was him speaking directly to the camera.

his exact words:

"The best MY OPPONENTS could do is ask questions now that they should have asked before THEY supported the war."

He does not qualify this statement at all later in the ad. Plain and simple he said all of his opponents supported the war.

TWL

[The Sushi Bandit]

148. Hot Thread!!!

[The Sushi Bandit]

151. This says it all!

Honestly, I read Matt Taibbi's article entitled, "Who's Afraid of Dennis Kucinich" in the October, 27 issue of "The Nation." I realized that Kucinich, not Dean, is what America needs." -

[snoochie]

152. At first I liked Dean

And I guess if you're overall satisfied with Clinton's job then you'd find Dean a good fit.

But I wasn't a huge Clinton fan, so IMO Kucinich wins hands down. :)

[dfgrbac]

160. At first, I did too!

Dean supporters got the word out about him very early on the Internet. They made him sound very good. Many members of the other forum I frequent even quit posting there to join the Dean campaign. I was not ready to make a choice back then yet until I knew more about the other candidates. Once I read about Dennis Kucinich (it was in a moveon.org email when they did their survey and election), I started to get excited. He was saying the things I wanted very badly to hear a candidate say!

I was not a Clinton supporter in the 1992 primary either. I voted for Bob Kerrey who wanted to implement single-payer healthcare.

[goodhue]

156. many good reasons

some more favorites

http://www.kucinich.net/i-switched.php

"I was pretty shocked because Dean claims to be against the war but has not come strongly against the occupation. It shows hes not strong enough to do what may be politically dangerous in the corporate media system."

"I supported Dr. Dean because he seemed to represent the peace community and other progressive issues. Then I began to notice some discrepancies, the first one being that he wasn't going to cut the Pentagon budget, not even the documented waste. Then I went to a speech by Dennis Kucinich, and I knew immediately that this is the man! He spoke from his heart saying what was in my heart. I'm now putting in 12-14 hour days as campaign staff, and loving it."

"Dennis stands with labor. Dean stands with the bosses. My first clue to this was their opposite positions on NAFTA. NAFTA is what led me to support Dennis, but I've stayed with Dennis because he stands with labor all the time. Workers need support because we are getting shafted by low wages, lack of health care, lack of child care, lack of retirement benefits, the starving of funds for education, and lack of rights in the work place. Dennis is on our side. Dean has his nose in the air because he's sniffing around for money. Dean doesn't care about workers unless he wants his shoes shined."

http://www.kucinich.net/i-switched.php

[no name no slogan]

161. At our campaign meeting last night

we had a new person show up. She had just recently switched over to supporting DK after being a Dean supporter for several months! :toast:

The reason for her switch? Dean wants to keep our troops in Iraq indefinately, while DK had a concrete plan to bring them home. She also said that DK had clearer positions on the issues, and that it was hard to tell where Dean stood on many things-- which was the main reason I chose to support DK over Dean, too. :)

[goodhue]

164. another reason

http://www.kucinich.net/i-switched.php

"I initially thought I would be supporting Howard Dean because I remembered him as the Governor who had enacted Civil Union legislation in Vermont and because he was putting forward a progressive image. A neighbor encouraged me to check him out more thoroughly and then to take a look at Dennis Kucinich. I was appalled when I found out that Dean supports the death penalty. I then looked at the websites for all the other candidates and found that Dennis Kucinich was not the least of "evils," but rather a truly inspiring human being with a progressive vision and the plans to back it up. Not only am I supporting Rep. Kucinich, but for the first time in my life, I have volunteered to campaign for a candidate."