Looks like CNN "Screwed the Kooch"

[flvegan]

Had to be said. I'm not shocked.

[MADem]

1. If you compare that to his fundraising percentage compared with the rest, he did VERY well.

And his questions were more substantive than "Didja see a UFO, Denny? Huh, huh?"

[hootinholler]

4. Oh? whoever raises the most money should get the most time?

That will fix a lot of stuff.

-Hoot

[MADem]

14. Well, yeah. Fundraising is an indicator of popular support. Even if you don't like it.

See, Kucinich is in single digit territory because that number indicates how many people say they will vote for him, and out in the real world, he doesn't have many supporters.

Because he doesn't have many supporters, he doesn't have much dough.

It's not a question of "fixing" anything. It is how it is.

[mmonk]

20. That would be a catch 22. What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

I'm willing to bet one corporation and it's employees could give more to a candidate than an individual.

[MADem]

32. If he'd campaign instead of going off overseas, maybe he'd get more dough.

He doesn't fundraise. He doesn't campaign much. His schedule isn't the schedule of someone who's interested in winning; his is a 'vanity' candidacy to put his points out there.

Your "bet" is kind of obvious, given that their are laws that limit contributions in those regards.

[rjones2818]

62. Actually...

he's doing his job as congressman.

Strange idea, I know, but that's what he got elected to do.

[MADem]

69. How does meeting the Syrian President and dissing George Bush "help" his district?

His poor, hardscrabble district, that could actually use a little legislation, a few jobs, a little PORK, a little ANYTHING from the DC coffers to help them out?

How does talking to the SG of the UN "help" his district? Please. It helps HIM. It raises his profile on the world stage. It does NOT bring money or jobs to his district, though.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1188392553023

Even KUCINICH admitted it was part of his PRESIDENTIAL aspirations, so that convoluted, desperate stretch doesn't float:

http://blog.cleveland.com/pdextra/2007/09/outrage_over_kucinich_in_syria.html

In a Sept. 5 e-mail to campaign supporters, Kucinich portrayed his trip as a way to get firsthand knowledge of the Middle East political situation....Pelosi's office wasn't familiar with Kucinich's trip, which was privately arranged through his presidential campaign. A Pelosi spokesman said the speaker "makes it a practice not to criticize the president when she is in a foreign country."

There's where those contributions, the few he got, went!!

Whatever!

[rjones2818]

75. He's traveled to the Middle East several times.

The fact that someone from the US is meeting with Assad and trying to get Syria involved in it's area should be seen as a good thing.

[MADem]

81. He used campaign money to do it. Campaign money from a campaign he isn't going to win.

It's all about Dennis, you see.

No, you probably don't see.

Never mind.

[mmonk]

78. You rather he use tax dollars?

I wouldn't brag about this money system if I were you. It's one of the things wrong with this country, not right about it.

[MADem]

85. I'd rather he paid for it HIMSELF. Or gone on a CODEL to Iraq, and

paid for a commercial flight from Jordan.

I'm not "bragging." I'm simply stating the obvious.

It isn't helpful to live in a dream world, tilting at windmills, and hoping that things might be different. That always ends in disappointment. If DK is your candidate, I will GUARANTEE you that he will not win, and if that is your earnest wish and desire, you WILL be disappointed. It's not a "maybe." Stick a fork in him.

You have to fight your battles on the battlefield, not in your mind. The Wishing and Hoping Brigade doesn't get the job done. Right now, the weapons to win the battle are campaign contributions, TV time, a good staff of paid and volunteer personnel, a good organization, regular, unbiased, truth-to-power pollsters, and HARD, HARD WORK.

DK has none of that, least of all the last item--he's not killing himself on the "campaign" trail. If you go to his website, he has whole days, almost full WEEKS, where he has NOTHING scheduled. And on his 'full' days, he's calling a couple of radio shows and going to a rubber chicken dinner--that's IT! I'd hardly call attending an Annie DiFranco concert 'serious' campaigning, but your tax dollars are paying for that trip, too. Contrast that sort of lazy, "I'm above this shit" campaigning with any of those "top tier" candidates--they're out there, shaking and baking, meeting the people, and doing the hard slog to get their message out.

[oldlady]

21. Fundraising is not always an indicator of popular support

sometimes it just means that the smaller group of people that support a less popular candidate have deeper pockets.

[MADem]

34. Well, oldlady, in this case, it IS. He's in single digits, and his coffers are bare.

His support and his cash match pretty well.

[fenriswolf]

79. right meanwhile

HRC gets alot of money from pharm and HMO so I guess because corporations give her alot of dough she should get the most facetime from the corporate news right?

[MADem]

83. Her money, Obama's money, and Edwards' money doesn't just come from

corporations--but as I said above, there are PEOPLE with a view behind that bundled dough. Now, you might not LIKE their view, but this isn't a single bastard writing a check.

The way it is done, nowadays, is if you like it, you vote with your wallet. If you don't, you don't get heard. No shooting the messenger.

How DO you propose that candidates get the word out? Are you hoping that there will be "free" airtime, and Dennis, Gravel, and the crazy guy down the street who is running can all get on CSPAN like it is a milk box in the town square?

Do you think the Fairness Doctrine will magically resurrect itself?

Dream on. There's no political will for that to happen.

Don't get mad at me for pointing out what is plainly obvious.

[fenriswolf]

87. air time = money

the more air time the candidates have the more people know about them and the more they are more then likely going to donate money to them. The top candidates already have a whole lot of "free" publicity which garners them more contributions which makes them a more "viable" candidate because hay look at how much money people have given them because they saw them the most on a debate put out by a contribution.

[MADem]

90. If he took all of the money

that he used taking himself and his entourage to THREE Ani Difranco concerts, in TN, NY and MA (none of which are EARLY PRIMARY STATES, FWIW) he could get one HELLUVA media buy in New Hampshire.

NH is not an expensive market--media is actually VERY affordable, in the big scheme.

He might not be able to show his commercial every fifteen minutes, on every goddamned channel, like Romney does (and people hate him for it) but he could target his message to programming and stations that are watched by people who are likely to vote for him--the Adult Swim crowd from 11PM to 2AM, for example. Anything that reaches the 18-30 demographic. He could buy fifteen second slots, and make the commercial himself, or with volunteers, like Wellstone did.

And publicity begets publicity. A good ad (something funny, wry, eye-catching, amusing) would be shown, in HEAVY rotation, on news programs for anywhere from two to four days, depending on the demands of the news cycle--like the Clinton caucus ad was, with husband Bill exercising to get that hamburger (it was a funny ad, too).

He should be shaking hands in NH, not listening to music in TN. He should be talking ISSUES in Iowa, not parked in the VIP section at a NY concert. He should be calling radio stations in SC, even if he doesn't want to go down there, not prancing off to SYRIA on his campaign's dime.

Local, tiny small businesses--like restaurants that seat less than fifty people--use 'spot cable' in the NH market. http://www.comcastspotlight.com/sites/Default.aspx?pageid=7970&siteid=62&subnav=4 It's affordable. This is 'cheap reach' that can be very precisely tailored to the individual's wishes, and good bang for the buck--you buy in the Boston market, and you get southern NH; you buy in the Burlington (VT) market and you get NORTHERN NH: http://www.comcastspotlight.com/sites/Default.aspx?pageid=8254&siteid=62&subnav=4

The cost to deliver 1000 households or persons:



He's not 'in it to win it.' He's in it to make a few points. He's not even TRYING to bump his percentages in the primary states.

[Greyhound]

56. You got it. He's the only candidate without a major corporate sponsor/advocacy group

sponsoring him.

OK, I shouldn't say the only one, Mike Gravel doesn't have a huge sugar daddy backing him either.

[MADem]

65. That's his fault. Why doesn't he have the windmill makers, the health care workers,

or the Pro-Hemp lobby on his team? Why doesn't he seek these people out and ASK them? Because .... it's ....WORK??

It's way easier to get on a high horse about campaign spending. That way you don't actually have to work. The "fix" is in--he's fixed it so he won't win.

If he doesn't want take the money from the causes he claims to champion to get his message out, he's screwed. And he's not a neophyte. He knows how it works. He can pick and choose, and be judicious.

But see, he doesn't WANT to win. He just wants to play. And he can play in Syria just as easily as he can play here. Which he did, fairly recently--an odd thing to do, in primary season.

[hootinholler]

38. Gosh, I'm so naive!

I have this concept that a convention is about the debate of real issues and building a platform, setting the direction of the party.

Don't you think that making it about who can raise the most funds smells just a little of fascism?

-Hoot

[MADem]

47. The 'convention' is also about choosing a general election candidate.

If the one who campaigned the hardest, convinced the most people, and likely raised a lot of dough (you can't shake every hand in America or call every phone number--you do, at some point, have to go to paid TV) has won the most primaries, you've got your candidate.

Oh, boy, here we go with the 'fascism' theme thrown about, lightly, but with such .... DRAMA.

We're done here. No point in going on.

Hoot the last word if you like.

[hootinholler]

55. I don't use the word lightly and not for dramatic effect.

Do I expect Dennis to get the nomination? Not really, but I'm ready to be surprised. Do I want whoever does get the nod to address his issues? Damn straight! Why? Because they are my issues and I demand representation by my party. Otherwise, what's the point?

Please explain to me how allowing large corporations and rich folk to buy the candidate doesn't carry at least a little whiff of fascism? Especially in our current climate when my future tax dollars are being given away to the MIC today? When the current climate in DC is to roll back citizen protections from corporate abuses?

I could go on, but you've implied that you've closed your mind. I honestly want to know if my world view is in error.

-Hoot

[MADem]

64. You're extrapolating falsely.

Please explain to me how allowing large corporations and rich folk to buy the candidate doesn't carry at least a little whiff of fascism?

The F word is a loaded word. I refuse to get into an involved debate over it, that's been done here more than enough. The corporate-government union in fascist governments is only a small slice of the entire "F" pie. When you use the F word, you evoke Hitler and Mussolini, ovens and Jews and genocide, trains running on time, false comparisons, and that's unhelpful to any debate.

Kucinich's supporters are, quite frankly, pragmatists. They say they like him, but they don't support him with their cash. If everyone who said they supported Kucinich sent him ten to a hundred bucks, every time they could afford it, he'd be able to mount more of a campaign--that is, if he would actually DO some campaigning. Which he doesn't do much of, and he COULD do more with the federal funds he gets.

Corporate money does actually have its roots in PEOPLE, too. Corporations work like a borg, but they're made up of like-minded PEOPLE, who have similar ideas and similar goals. Same with lobbying groups, be they labor, lawyers, guns, you name it. They want their membership's views heard, so they organize to make sure it happens.

Why aren't DK's supporters in the public service sector, the charitable sector, the health care sector, the low-wage agricultural worker sector, and the Green industries (not all corporations are evil, you know--or maybe you don't) running around bundling dough for him? They surely could if they wanted to, if they'd just get off their asses, step away from their keyboards, and hop to it. With just a little more support, he could do a few media buys, do a clever commercial, get the news media to show the thing for free in heavy rotation--THAT's what underdogs who want to win do. And they call, call, call the media and BEG for interview time. They're available at a second's notice, they call in to radio and TV shows, they get out there and push.

His supporters don't bother, they don't organize, they don't exert themselves, and he doesn't do that stuff, either-- because they and he KNOWS--he is a VANITY candidate.

He doesn't want the fucking job. He wants to make a few points, try to push the field a bit to the left, and raise his profile. If he really wanted the job, he'd take himself off the ballot for reelection in his district, and not do a Joementum 2000 base-covering exercise. If he REALLY wanted the job, he wouldn't be prancing off to fucking SYRIA during primary season.

And if he REALLY wanted the job, he'd RUN for it...not 'stroll.'

He knows that the one percent he's getting isn't likely to get much larger. He knows he isn't going to win. It's not a question of "likely"--he isn't going to win. That's it!

If every other candidate on the stage got food poisoning and died, he still wouldn't win--someone else, who thought about it and said "Naaaaah,"--a Kerry, a Bayh, who knows who else--maybe even Dean would go back on his oath not to run, resign his DNC job and say Desperate Times, Desperate Measures-- would come forward and run a write-in campaign, and beat him like a rented mule.

I find all this "But MY guy can't get any support because of (fill in some halfassed bullshit excuse)." Ten years ago, very few people knew who Barack Obama was. And Barack wasn't a rich guy, even though he had a fine degree and could have been a moneymaker at Dewey, Cheatham and Howe, or any other law firm. He got out, worked in his community, worked his way up, and did the tough slogging. He has supporters who stand behind him and work for him because he stood behind them. Now, only Mitt Romney has trouble with his name.

Obama did the hard slogging, within the party, as a legislator, to raise his profile, to articulate his views, to grow his constituency--Kucinich, as I said, is strolling.

You get out what you put in. He puts in one percent.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

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

[Truth2Tell]

53. Fundraising is an indicator of popular support...

among lobbyists and the extremely wealthy. And boy do they love them some Hillary!

[MADem]

66. Is that how Obama got all that cash in that last fundraising push?

The one that gave him that huge figure?

No, I don't think so.

He got many individual donations. He also gets repeat ones, from people who donate small amounts monthly.

DK doesn't have that. Most of his 'supporters' know he isn't going to win, so they don't 'waste' their money. They enjoy his vanity candidacy, but they realize what many here do not--that it IS a vanity candidacy, designed to raise his profile and his views on issues. He's not doing this to win.

[Truth2Tell]

80. The reason it's a vanity candidacy

is because he can't beat the mainstream media, not that his ideas don't have resonance. I firmly believe that on a level playing field in a real democracy (unlike our phony democracy) Kucinich would be a real contender. And why don't we have a real democracy? Partly because of the media consolidation enabled by Hillary's DLC husband. And partly because our Democratic leaders, like Hillary and Obama, have never made pressing real reform a serious part of their political agendas. Instead they have decided that "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em."

Regarding Obama's money - yes he receives a lot of small donor cash, but without the elite money he wouldn't even be a contender - so he panders with the best of them.

I agree that barring some extraordinary unforeseen circumstances, Kucinich isn't going to win - although I'm not sure his candidacy is "designed" to be vanity. I think he and some of his supporters believe he can actually win.

[MADem]

86. It's a vanity candidacy because he does NOT CAMPAIGN.

Look at this NOV schedule--it has WHOLE BLANK DAYS where NOTHING is happening, and on the days that stuff IS happening, half the time it's his WIFE doing the work!!!!

http://www.dennis4president.com/index.php?option=com_jcalpro&Itemid=36&extmode=cal

This is the schedule of an unserious candidate. Is it necessary to go to not one, not TWO, but THREE "Ani DiFranco" concerts? All in ONE MONTH??? His new wife must like that artist...? Nope--it's on him--he's mixing business with pleasure:

Kucinich is described as both a fan and a friend of DiFranco, whose November tour is dedicated to promoting clean sustainable energy solutions, and opposing the construction of nuclear power reactors. http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200771106070

I mean, come on. That's BULLSHIT. Sorry. It is. He gets to write it off on his 'campaign,' those appearances--he gets the quick introduction, he stands up, MAYBE says a few words--and maybe not--and gets to listen to his pal's music, gets a taxpayer-paid ride to the venues for him and his entourage (in TN, MA, and NYC) and to what end? Jeez, people got pissed at Al Sharpton because he didn't like crappy motels on the campaign trail--this, to me, stinks worse. Not ONE of those concerts is in an Early Primary State, and one of them is in a state he AIN'T gonna win no matter what--NYC, which an incumbent Senator should take without issue. So why is he REALLY there?

That's not "In it to win it" campaigning. He should use the money he wastes going to meaningless concerts on motel rooms and a cheap rental car, and go banging around NH and Iowa, each and every day, yakking, yakking, and yakking some more. Hell, TV time is AFFORDABLE in these states--with some of the cash spent listening to Ani, he could put up a cheap, Wellstonian ad (those early, home-made ads of his, may he RIP, were brilliant) and capture some "Live Free or Die" imaginations.

The way you counter lack of media attention is by personal appearances. Lots of them. Each and every day. Little ones, small venues, actually talking to people IN DEPTH. In places that MATTER--like early primary states!! That's how Howard Dean took off. And once he took off, he became a force. Who knows what might have happened had not that foolish 'scream' setup not occurred?

I do believe that you are right when you say some of his supporters think he can actually win. I have to differ with you on him, though. I think he knows full well he isn't going to win, because he isn't trying--if he were trying, he'd pass on Ani and her concerts, and head straight for Manchester, Concord, Portsmouth, Franconia, etc. etc. etc. You know what the REAL benefit of that is? There's a cheap SOUTHWEST flight from Manchester to Baltimore--he could get back to the House in a few hours if he needed or wanted to (I've taken that flight myself, many times).

Heck--there's snow coming, it's falling in the far part of the state now--he could take his new bride skiing and shake a few hands if he wanted to have some fun....

[Truth2Tell]

88. You're kidding right?

You're accusing Kucinich of running for President as a way to get free Ani DiFranco tickets?

Sure, that must be it. Nothing wrong with our democratic process, Kucinich is just a dilettante. Got it.

Talk about lack of seriousness. :eyes:

[MADem]

89. You're not reading what I wrote, are you? You are having trouble understanding it, if you are.

I did not say he is running BECAUSE he wanted tickets.

You made that leap. All by yourself.

Go back and actually read what I wrote.

:eyes: indeed.

Don't assume a "cause and effect" when one isn't there. Here, let me spell it out in two easy sentences:

He's a vanity candidate, AND he is wasting time at concerts.

He isn't a vanity candidate BECAUSE he wants to get concert tickets.

There's a plain difference.

And you know damn well there is.

But hey, whatever. Way to go!! Heckuva 'twist,' there, Brownie!

Seriousness? You're apparently in 'Defense' mode, and not interested in any sort of serious exchange. And DK isn't serious, if he's EVERYWHERE BUT the early primary states in the two months ahead of the primaries, certainly.

[ginchinchili]

71. I suppose it's just a coincidence that Bush/Cheney have done favors...

for corporations and industries that support them. Popular support my ass. Corporate support, and in Hillary's case, pardoned criminal support.

[MADem]

91. Please. This thread is about "Poor Dennis" not Bush, not Cheney, not Clinton.

Poor Dennis should spend some time in a PRIMARY state, doncha think? To get voters to vote for him?

Are you saying the people of "Live Free or Die" NH are easily conned by "Big Corporate Support?"

That must explain why Pat Buchanan, with no money at all, beat the living shit out of Heavy Funded Big Corporate Bob Dole up there a few years back....

Yeah, sure...

[bobthedrummer]

84. No it isn't, it's an indication of the flow of money-not popular support

but from special interest groups, and we, the people know it is corrupt.

[MADem]

92. Tell that to Pat Buchanan, who won NH without any of that Big Money you say triumphs over all.

He's not even TRYING in NH. He doesn't even go up there and shake hands.

He's not "in it to win it."

[magellan]

2. Best candidate the Dems have

...IMO, and they give him less time even than BLITZER? :wtf: What the hell was Wolf waffling on for 14:53 about?? Is he running too or just trying make a date with Hillary????

:mad:

[Ravy]

3. Personally, if he had had 15 seconds less,

the 15 seconds where he put a qualification on supporting the Democratic nominee, I would have thought more of him.

[hootinholler]

7. Actually, I liked that he did that!

The qualifier should never have to be stated in a normal time, but it's crucial today!

The qualifier is that the candidate will not use war of aggression (which is illegal under the U.N. charter treaty) as part of their foreign policy.

-Hoot

[TahitiNut]

8. Agreed. The idea that "might makes right" is terrible policy BOTH foreign and domestic.

We do it in foreign policy by placing our military at the disposal of global corporatists. We do it domestically by imprisoning more of our citizens than any comparable nation on earth! The Power of the Dollar rules EVERYWHERE in Pax Americana. The idea of War as an instrument of policy is abominable! Sadly, it's NOT limited to the GOP.

[Greyhound]

61. Sans pax... n/t

[Ravy]

9. I can respect the sentiment, but it turned *me* off a bit.

I am pretty big about working within the party.

[MADem]

17. I agree on that score. NT

[hootinholler]

33. Part of the real problem we have in the party right now is following the wrong advice.

When that changes the spine starts to stiffen.

-Hoot

[Ravy]

43. I agree with that. Progressives need to control more

of the Democratic party. There is too much corporate influence. Progressives do not control enough influence in the party so that all of the Democrats will stick together, as the republicans do now.

Threatening to "drop-out" is counter-productive to the end that I see.

I am not saying it is wrong, just not the strategy I would like to see employed.

[hootinholler]

49. Hmmm, is there ever in your mind a apropos time to resign in protest? n/t

[Ravy]

51. Yes, but not when you are on an upswing...

.. and also not unless you have a place better to go.

[Individualist]

10. So did I

It would be hypocritical if he were to support someone who is pro-war.

DK is no hypocrite!

[Ravy]

12. So which Dem candidate is supporting using war as an instrument of agression?

I don't think any are, and insinuating that some Democratic candidates are is detrimental.

[hootinholler]

35. Who voted to declare Iranian QUDs terrorists? Who avoided theat vote?

Not saying it's proof, but it's a position definitely closer to the edge of the slippery slope than the rest of the field.

-Hoot

[Ravy]

48. I think they were both pretty clear that they did not believe

that a war in Iran was the proper step.

I could be wrong, but I don't think any Democratic candidate *will* do that, if elected. I think most of the Republican's would do that.

I do see what you are saying though-- but if you polled the candidates immediately after he made that statement with a question such as "Do you think he is talking about you?" I don't think any of them would think that he was.

I wish he had been specific, or just said "Yes" and dealt with his concerns privately. There is no dishonor in withdrawing support if there is a good reason to, later.

[hootinholler]

58. That being the case they have no worry about his support...

But, blind allegiance in these times is dangerous, and it's an opportunity to communicate his fundamental guiding principles.

-Hoot

[Greyhound]

60. HRC. n/t

[lonestarnot]

24. Honesty again. By damned honesty. He will not support a war of lies. And that is fucking that

[Ravy]

30. Innuendo isn't total honesty.

Which candidate(s) was he referring to? Could he not name them?

[lonestarnot]

36. He said he would not support the war of lies, which dems do?

[Ravy]

39. I think he said something more like "War as an instrument of

foreign policy". Maybe the word agressive was in there, somewhere.

Whatever he said, I thought it was the wrong place. IMHO, progressives should work to control the Democratic party, then make sure the Democratic party controls the government-- much like the neo-cons were able to take over the republican party.

[lonestarnot]

46. And that would begin with end the fucking war. 1.2 -1.6 trillion

[Ravy]

50. Well, yeah...

but was he talking about anyone who votes for continued funding of the war even with deadlines to end it?

Dennis is certainly ahead of the curve with policy ideas, but where specifically is he going to draw that line as far as "supporting" whatever he said it was?

He made some good points too. I am not anti-DK by any means... I just thought that was not one of his better moments.

What I will be really interested in seeing, is that if by some miracle the Senate sends the war funding bill with the 12/08 deadline to the president, and it gets vetoed, if he would vote to override *if his vote* would make the difference.

[MadBadger]

5. nice innuendo

[Maven]

6. Fuck them. Dennis still got a standing O when he said IMPEACHMENT NOW.

And that, my friend, is why they want to keep him quiet.

[BeHereNow]

26. Hello? That IS the truth of the matter! EXACTLY!

Thanks for saying it!
:toast: to you
BHN

[Cha]

31. Zactly...corporatemediawhores

need to keep Dennis quiet at all costs.

[Greyhound]

59. Bingo, I've never seen it as blatant in my lifetime.

The fact that there are so many that buy into this is truly frightening.

[Cha]

93. Corporatemediawhores are acting

like cornered Rabid Rats..more proof is newsweak hiring karl, "cause Goebbels is Dead", rove.

[JackORoses]

54. Wolf was really trying to cut him off when he brought up Impeachment

[TahitiNut]

11. They stacked the audience and then didn't control them, either.

It was clear that the Clintonistas were deliberate in their fan club meeting.

[Audio_Al]

15. "Stacked the audience" is pretty strong. EDITED OUT NUMBER HERE.

I think there was a figure that was discussed -- 51% for Clinton. Can't check it now.

Maybe that means in Las Vegas, but I do not think the group was "stacked" or mostly women, either.

Respectfully,

Al

[flvegan]

18. 51% of WHAT "people"? And please be specific.

[MADem]

19. The pre show, as Al said, did say that fifty one percent of the primary voters

were for Clinton. I believe they meant DEMOCRATIC voters, at this point in time, before the general election.

[flvegan]

22. So I'm trusting a CNN poll before a debate?

Oh, please. Was any data on that 51% released? Target area? Number of people polled?

Yeah, probably not.

[Audio_Al]

27. No need to fly off the handle. We're just talking here. Don't rely on it if you don't want to.

We started watching at 4:20 PM PT while eating dinner.

I'm not a real source on the poll or the outcome, because I feel asleep.

[flvegan]

37. I was responding to someone else.

[MADem]

41. Well, I answered you there, pal--and it turns out you were WRONG. NT

[flvegan]

45. Feel better?

Peep the response.

Boing.

[flvegan]

68. *odd little crickets here this evening*

Just sayin...

[Name removed]

40. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Audio_Al]

23. Strike it. Sorry, Flvegan, I really don't remember it exactly.

Some offhanded quote that I vaguely remember. I have to admit I feel asleep during the debate.

Ashamed...

Audio Al

[flvegan]

29. You fell asleep!!11!!11 You're no Dem, then!

Obviously, I kid, and I make light of our disagreement.

:thumbsup:

[JackORoses]

25. stacking the audience has nothing to do with actual support in the State

It has to do with getting enough loudmouths in there to cheer for you and boo your opponents that it casts the illusion that you are winning and have the support of the people.

It stinks of desperation. Hillary wants that cloak of 'inevitability' back, otherwise she might have to start telling the truth.

[Audio_Al]

28. Jack, just WHO DO YOU support right now?

This is all just a guessing game, unless you were personally responsible for finding people for that particular audience and have a real handle on who was there and how they got there.

No need to trash other DUers while offering what is essentially your own opinion.

:hi:

Respectfully,



Audio Al

[JackORoses]

57. it's obvious those people cheering Hillary and booing theothers were, in fact, Hillary Supporters

They were not Undecided Voters as described by CNN.

Undecided voters don't start hooting and hollering on the first question out of the gates.

also, which DUer was I trashing? Hillary doesn't post here, does she?

[TahitiNut]

67. It's important to avoid the use of the impersonal 'you' on DU, imho.

"It has to do with getting enough loudmouths in there to cheer for you and boo your opponents that it casts the illusion that you are winning and have the support of the people."

The words 'you' and 'your' will, if they can be, taken personally. I use 'one' or 'people' or other grammatical constructs to avoid the ambiguity. I eschew making 'you' the (grammatical) subject of my posts ... until provoked. Whether neutral or not, it becomes personal -- messenger rather than message. I'll even employ passive voice to avoid it, even though passive voice is just a bit too weasel-wording for my taste too often.

[TahitiNut]

42. You got it. Exactly. The "American Idol" corruption disgusts me.

These are issues of life and death ... lives are on the line. Reducing it to some WWF sideshow is despicable.

[Greyhound]

63. "Reducing it to some WWF sideshow is despicable...", and yet quintessentially American. n/t

[MADem]

44. The number came from a CNN poll.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/14/nevada.poll/index.html

[flvegan]

16. You mean...plants?

Surely, you jest. Stacking a crowd? CNN? Do we not trust them anymore?

Oh, wait...

[bdamomma]

13. I agree he wasn't given a chance.

what do you expect from CNN.

[deacon]

70. He made the most sense. n/t

[Pachamama]

72. Very intteresting....Because the most memorable and meaningful speaking in my mind came from the

bottom 4 speakers in terms of time spoken. Biden, Edwards, Dodd and Kucinich stood out for me....Hillary, Obama and in particular Richardson, talked a lot but just got lost for me. The booing in the crowd I thought was really rude and sounded like Hillary and Obama plants were busy.

[youthere]

73. Again..you forgot to add "again"

Dennis gets persistantly screwed in these debates. It's almost a tradition. From now on, when someone is looked over, or not given their fair portion we can say they've been "Kuciniched"

I'm a Biden supporter, but I have two good eyes that tell me Dennis is getting the shaft in these debates.

[LWolf]

74. Who's surprised?

*crickets*

[Terri S]

76. Kooch is always getting screwd

It really is a shame candidates are not given equal time. The media has been selecting our candidates for far too long. The League of Women Voters should run all debates and it should end. Period. No media analysis. The American people are smart enough to understand what they just heard.

Just another example of the farce known as election politics, and why we all lose as a consequence.

[robcon]

77. Kucinich got much more time than his appeal would suggest.

He's a 3% candidate.

[Clark2008]

82. Maybe Kucinich doesn't need all the extra time since he

never plays both sides of the fence (Clinton), launches into speeches that sound positively ministerial (Obama) or apologizes sincerely for what he said yesterday (Edwards). He merely answers the question clearly and concisely.

:shrug:

Just a thought.