Imagine if Kucinich ran -- and won the general!

[pnwmom]

It would be just as if the great anti-war candidate George McGovern had won

Instead of losing in 49 states

to Richard Nixon.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

1. He couldn't do much worse than HRC in the general

If we are going to choose to lose we might as well nominate someone who at least stands for something.

[pnwmom]

2. I think she would be a much stronger candidate. n/t

[draft_mario_cuomo]

4. Both would lose

If we are going to lose let's at least nominate someone who stands for something.

[pnwmom]

7. I see no reason why HRC couldn't take every Kerry state.

And Florida and Ohio are back in the running now. Plus she might do better than Kerry in the midwest.

She has a very strong organization, and her husband is Bill Clinton.

Kucinich's organization got him a few percent of votes last time. And since then, he's married a woman in her twenties. Believe me, that won't increase his appeal to women. Cradle robbing isn't a strong selling point.

[AnOhioan]

10. LOL....this is the 2nd time you have brought up DK's wife

Sort of lame imho....to diss someone on their choice of partner. ALot of folks here on DU could not care less about the age difference. What does that tell you? It tells me you are one of the few who do. Have fun with your petty notions about age.

[pnwmom]

16. It doesn't really matter what "a lot" of DUers think about Kucinich or his wife

What matters is what the general voting population is going to think, especially the independents.

[AnOhioan]

30. Excuse me, I did not realize......

I was dealing with the ultimate arbiter on what the independent voter thinks is, or is not, important.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. Then read the Gallup poll about her 52% unfavorable rating

Or the polls that put the percentage of people who say they would not vote for her at 46-50%.

[pnwmom]

17. Her negatives are high, but her positives are higher.

The public has already formed an opinion of her, and the positives outweigh the negatives.

But HRC really isn't important to my thoughts about Kucinich. She isn't one of my primary choices, either, though I'm sure she has a better chance of winning the general.

[Alexander]

19. Negative - 52%, Positive - 45%.

The same Gallup poll draft_mario_cuomo is mentioning says that. Last I checked 52 was a higher number than 45.

I'm not sold on Edwards either, but HRC's terrible polling numbers bother me. We don't need someone so instantly divisive.

[pnwmom]

22. That was one poll on one day, that isn't in line with the others.

Again, HRC isn't important to my thoughts on Kucinich. I favor Obama, Edwards, Gore, or Clark. But I think HRC would have much greater chance than Kucinich.

[Alexander]

18. You are delusional if you think HRC will get New Hampshire.

Heck, we may find ourselves fighting for New York if Giuliani is her opponent. If that happens, it's game over for 2008.

[rinsd]

20. Really?

New Hampshire - http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/nhdem8-704.shtml

http://www.pollster.com/mystery_pollster/poll_zogby_new_hampshire_prima.php

And in NY, Hillary kicks Rudy's ass,

http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/nyspolls/NY070327.htm

http://www.ny1.com/ny1/content/index.jsp?stid=1&aid=68544

Its NJ that has Rudy-fever

http://www.pollster.com/mystery_pollster/poll_quinnipiac_new_jersey_pri.php

[pnwmom]

24. I hope she doesn't, since my current choice is Obama.

But I also like Gore, Edwards, and Clark.

But this is about Kucinich, not HRC.

[Ninja Jordan]

15. He could do much worse.

[mtnsnake]

31. If Kucinich got in the GE, he'd do twice as well as your guy

because he didn't co-sponsor the war and people all over are sick of the entire Iraq mess. Kucinich's only problem is making headway in our own party, unfortunately. I'll guarantee if Kucinich and Edwards faced off in a general election (not that anything like that is politically possible), Kucinich would mop the floor and win. Too bad that situation can't take place. Then again, if it could take place where 2 Democrats were running against each other in the GE it would come down to either Kucinich and Obama or Kucinich and Hillary.

[NoPasaran]

3. Imagine it rained chocolate

Just as likely a possibility.

[Big Pappa]

5. At least

we would have someone who is more in touch with democratic ideas.

[pnwmom]

8. Except it won't happen, anymore than it did for McGovern, who I was

thrilled to vote for.

Some of us learned from that lesson, others are determined to repeat the same mistake.

[Alexander]

6. I think vote rigging would suddenly become a huge issue.

Even if Kucinich won legitimately, they couldn't allow that to be the perception.

Just look at Bill Clinton - freepers are still accusing him of "stealing the 1992 election" just because Perot ran and split the vote.

[TheWatcher]

9. Imagine if you lived in a country where a legitimate candidate truly devoted to the interests of

We The People, could do just that.

Win.

Instead, you will be allowed to choose a Kinder, Gentler Tyranny in 2008.

Enjoy Your Freedom.

[MGKrebs]

11. If you want a revolution, presidential politics is probably NOT the place

it's going to happen.

[LWolf]

13. Imagine

a Democratic Party clean of corruption. Imagine Democratic voters voting for the candidates with the best platform and the best record, rather than the best bank balance, spin masters, and corporate media backers.

Imagine. Voters offered a chance, on a national level, to vote for someone who actually represents their interests, instead of the interests of corporate masters.

Imagine how many disenfranchised voters nationally might flock to the polls, and to the Democratic Party, if a candidate was offered up that actually represented their interests, instead of the corporate candidate offering comforting rhetoric along with no, or wrong, action.

Imagine if Democratic campaigners cared more about honesty, transparency, ethics, and issues than "winning" by dishonest manipulation, distraction, and prevarication.

Imagine a loss in '04 when disenfranchised Democrats don't turn out to support, campaign, or vote the way the party powers that be demand that they do.

Imagine campaigners reaching out to those disenfranchised Democrats, 3rd party voters, and non-voters, rather than the current efforts to threaten them into line or purge them from the ranks.

[MGKrebs]

21. So many things need to happen to bring that to reality.

We really have to find a way to educate/energize/organize the grassroots. people have to be made aware that TV is not the answer, that free-market isn't always the solution, and participation is rewarding.

We need electoral reform, and my suggestion involves much easier ballot access for candidates and parties, and Instant Runoff Voting. I wish we could consider a parliamentary-type system, where elections are not necessarily at regular intervals but dependent on a confidence vote, therefore potentially reducing the campaign season to something like 90 days (or whatever we decide), but that would require a Constitutional amendment and that is unlikely.

Reading about France's high unemployment lately has been interesting. They are essentially suffering from the same thing we are: Outsourcing, especially to Asia. But, whereas our unemployment is low, theirs is high. The price we pay for the low unemployment is stagnant or declining wages. The French have tried to maintain their excellent worker and wage protections, so the jobs that are left are good jobs, but there aren't enough of them, especially with the influx of immigrants from all over Africa and Eastern Europe and the Middle East. My point in mentioning this is, it may take a crisis before people actually DO something, and we seem to be inching closer and closer; Lower wages, higher healthcare costs, higher energy costs, social security in jeapordy, and debt. We shall see.

[LWolf]

28. I agree with you on election reform.

At least part of it, anyway. Easier ballot access? Yes. IRV? Possibly. 100% public funding of campaigns, cutting the big money groups out of the process and giving candidates an equal playing field, too.

[pnwmom]

25. Been there, done that. Every new generation has that hope.

I want someone who can take the electoral college. Unfortunately, life is more complicated than the idealists would hope. There is no utopia.

[LWolf]

29. I don't know what utopia would look like.

I don't mind being an idealist. Those who can't or won't live for, stand for, and work for the best that humans are capable of are the problem, in my opinion.

If I can't work for what's right, or what's best, if I'm supposed to "winning" to be placing someone in office that doesn't represent me, then I'll leave the "winning" to others. You don't need my help to allow the system to further decay.

If that's the case, that there is no "winning" without losing the whole point, then the U.S. as a nation is corrupt beyond redemption, and should be disbanded.

I've been a lot of places, and done a lot of things; learned many lessons and been down many paths in my 47 years. I haven't lost myself, or my reason, or purpose, or perspective, or heart, or courage along the way.

[pnwmom]

26. self delete (dupe)

[PresidentObama]

14. Don't you know April Fools Day was the first of the month? n/t

[paulk]

23. no thanks -

I'd rather spend my time imagining that I've won the lottery.

I mean, that actually has a chance of happening...

[pnwmom]

27. LOL. n/t