For Kucinich Supporters and Greens: The Case for Dean

If you haven't yet read this article, you owe it to our (perhaps last vestiges of) democracy to simply consider it.

I realize that y'all have your own very good and well-thought out reasons for your current views.

But please, if you haven't seen this yet, please read it and consider it, if only to debunk:

http://www.guerrillanews.com/newswire/doc2632.html

That's a wonderful article and covers a lot of ground.

You're preaching to the choir with me, but I'll take all the concise, articulate material I can get to spread around - and I'll be sending copies of this to a number of people. :)

...and just part of the reason for my belief that Dean actually has broad and deep support...for the last several election cycles, I've voted for the candidate that seemed to speak to me, save 2000. I was convinced at the "last minute" to vote for Gore. Oh well, read the article...

For the first time in years, a true progressive Democrat is running for president and people who consider themself progressive are throwing their support behind a centrist who takes a couple of progressive positions.

I will continue to support the progressive, thanks.

If I thought Kucinich had one chance in a million of winning the Presidency, I'd have to consider his primary candidacy very seriously.

That's not to say that I don't understand where you are coming from by supporting him. For many of the activists I respect most, this is like a Gore/Nader dilemma redux, except this time you are (usually) electing delegates who can change their minds rather than winner-take-all state electors who cannot.

So I can see both sides of this coin quite clearly. Pitney just happened to explain my personal side more completely than I could.

unelectable" meme. A couple of DUers still come into Kucinich threads regularly just to say that.

Kucinich is doing very well in terms of supporters and money, considering his late entry into the race and refusal of corporate support. He can still win. And I think he's the only Democrat who would make a significant difference in this country as president. Most people in politics today, whether Democrats or Republicans, are too tied to corporate interests to really serve the people.

he'd get killed in the general election. Change that radical simply scares the bejesus out of a large fraction of Americans.

Moreover, if he were to somehow become President, he wouldn't be able to govern any more effectively than a lameduck Jimmy Carter. It would be a fight between vetoes and veto overrides that would almost assuredly end in impeachment on false charges or assassination.

But I guess it's nice to dream about all the changes he'd make with his proclamations and other unilateral executive abuses of power, right?

Try this one: if we put Dennis into the WH, we'll be putting a large number of people into Congress, too. And they'll be pro-Dennis if for no other reason than self-protection.

He's beaten incumbent Republicans for each of the positions to which he's been elected. His positions are "populist" not "radical" and he lays out a pragmatic vision for where to go from here.

The same kind of Fear, Ignorance, and Doubt (FUD) spewed here about Kucinich can apply to any candidate who gets elected against the wishes of the BFEE.

And you don't have to look far to find "unilateral executive abuses of power" if you look at Captain Unelected's withdrawal from the ABM Treaty and refusal to move forward on Kyoto, etc.

This kind of bitter diatribe doesn't serve any of the candidates, and makes it less likely that the people who are seeking a clear break from the BFEE will move forward to support whoever you're supporting, if Kucinich doesn't win the nomination.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

OK, I don't really have any point of reference for Kucinich other than some (so far unsuccessful) candidates for mayor of San Francisco. I know that I really like his stances on the issues overall. And during his calmer moments, he shows good potential as a communicator. However:

1) Representatives don't win Presidential elections,

2) he comes in dead last in many polls,

3) he comes across as slightly deranged when he starts yelling at everyone,

and

4) the few people I've met outside the progressive/Green/vegan community who know of the guy seem almost viscerally frightened of him.

Of course, I'm way out here in California, and Howard Dean also frightens a lot of semi-but-mostly-uninformed voters (who think he's too liberal--yeah, right).

I know Kucinich got 250 people meeting for him in Eugene, OR. However, even though the organizers tried, there was no mention of the event in any of Eugene's newspapers or major radio stations.

but he has a right to be in this race they all do. BTW I will support Dean if hes the nominee but Kucinich has a right to be there and hes inspired me. Thats the problem stick he hardly gets press and frankly I think he is just as stand up against Bush policy as Dean is. Also to be honest about history, new englanders havent won one in 43 years and that was JFK. Just saying, he is a pretty big leader in the house, has done great things in the house, and above all he gives me and others hope. The media will spin what any of the dems say and the republican congress will be tough on Dean as it would be on Kucinich.

Keep fighting for what gives you hope.

That's what keeps me going.

It feels like you lost. I wear two Kucinich buttons on my backpack and have him as an avatar for a reason. This man on the issues and a lot of other things flat out inspires me. I sincerely think the moment is now and we could as a party and nation get on the track that won us elections many years ago.

more than he does the people. I've even turned Republicans on to him- 2 today at my work. His message is strong, clear and his track record so solid that I've had no problems.

Getting his message out is what will make all the difference.

That large fraction of Americans is so tired of a broken system that I think you'd be pleasantly suprised at how much they're itching for radical change.

You turned republicans on to DK. Hey if we got publicity, a bit more money, hard work, and a little bit of luck. yummy.

Me and Dennis ancestrly wise kinda come from the same region. Sucks really. They said the same about the "Irish Catholic" John F Kennedy.

What does Dennis' ancestry have to do with anything I posted?

I was responding to dembones and affirming I have seen it before. Geez I was just saying Ive seen it before. It has nothing to what you said I said simply Ive seen that refered to as a problem. I wasnt talking about you.

The argument boils down to 'he's popular'. We need more than 'popular'. I'm staying with Kucinich.

The argument they present is "Only Dean can win"

Talk about false premises!

next President.

How much are you in for?

Kucinich and Dean aren't the only candidates.

I post an argument that attempts to convince Kucinich supporters and Greens that Dean is an attractive compromise choice with a real chance of beating Bush.

In response to this argument, you post:

The argument they present is "Only Dean can win." Talk about false premises!

Nowhere have I or the article I linked made the argument that only Dean can win. The argument I've made is that the most attractive candidate to the definite left of Dean (no, not DLC Kerry) doesn't have a chance of winning.

Now, do you think Kucinich has a legitimate chance at becoming President of the United States or not? Come on, I'm giving 100 to 1 odds here.

If you don't take me up on this generous offer, I'll have to assume that you don't think Dennis has a chance, either. In which case, I have to question your motivations for responding to this thread simply to reinforce the fact that I'm somehow insulting Kucinich supporters for saying something you also believe to be true.

just saying do not snap at me
Anything can happen you know stick. Look youve been pretty decent in this thread but I ought to say it bugs me when people say its already Dean and Kerry. Not mad at all but I think Kucinich needs better press and he certainly earned it but the media being the media ignores him. I am not mad at all that said what I mentioned saddens me.

And what can you possibly do this election cycle to change that?

Dean forced the media to take him seriously because of the way he's been able to raise funds through small donors is unprecedented in campaign history.

Next time, it could be Dennis' turn.

But right now, with the political debate in this country hanging around the right field foul line, Dennis simply looks way out of bounds to a right wing dominated corporate media that has already successfully memed the absurd idea that Dean is too liberal to win.

wait till next year.
I no doubt think Dean earned his media attention but donthca think that Dennis has done a lot that merits it. You know what it feels like to read an article and it doesnt even mention him? It hurts it stings like a hornet's sting. Why do we have to wait, would you like it if I had said say last year oh Dean's gonna have to wait, this election like it or not is the moment for everyone. BTW win or lose the primary I will always be proud of who I supported, I think Kucinich should be in higher office hes done enough as it as and maybe a cabinet position but its kinda harsh of you to tell us to wait because your campaign is in the drivers seat now, now I commend you on getting there but you cant just give up if this is your candiate.

The interaction between the campaign and its supporters is revolutionary. The $50 average donation fund raising effort is also revolutionary.

Can't you at least see real hope for a real progressive in the furure using this type of a campaign?

Because, if not, you're clueless about how to ever actually realize the change you seek.

None of his wildly cheering fans, or the millions of dollars, or any other part of the bandwagon changes that. You can call it 'grassroots' or 'popularity' or 'Fido' for all I care. The bottom line is that he takes the wrong positions, which means he's not the right guy, so I'm not going to support him.

You and others can follow that piper if you like, but this rat is stopping her ears. No permanent bath in the river for me, thankyousoverymuch.

Are diametrically opposed to the Green Platform.

If the question was enticing new business in the state, giving them what they wanted or needed in terms of permits, locations, you could pretty much predict Howard would come down on the side of what business wanted, even if meant sprawling development," said Patrick Parenteau, a law professor at Vermont Law School and a former state environmental commissioner...

As he campaigns for president, Dean has won broad support from gays and lesbians for signing a bill that made Vermont the only state to give gay couples the same legal rights as married people. Dean says he put principle ahead of polls and stood up for what he believed in spite of the political risk. And he almost lost re-election in 2000 after the bill sparked a backlash.

But the matter of civil unions - like the governorship itself - was foisted on him by external events...


http://www.cmonitor.com/stories/news/recent2003/0713%5Fdeanvermont%5F2003.shtml

This articles does a fairly good breakdown of how Deans performance as governor actually is farthest away form the Green Platform.

Ralph Nader, no stranger tobthe Green Party himself, stated that Kucinich was the candidated closest to him. And then that Kerry was the candidate closest to him of the most electable candidates.

He gave a grudging nod to Dean but not for his platform, but that Dean had taken a lot of the Green vote,not Deans platform.

But Nader himself has said "Vote Kucinich in The Primaries"

Nader Urging Democrats to Back Kucinich in '04 Primaries


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0711-05.htm

They back candidates who can't win, and then never compromise.

Their ideological purity won't allow them to try to work within a less than perfect movement to achieve less than the lion's share of their goals.

They don't particularly like anything that gets too popular, so they aren't even inclined to study the dynamics of how they themselves might successfully co-opt successful strategies to popularize their own more radical agenda.

If Kucinich had a bit more stature, was a bit less scary to Joe Sixpack, communicated his competence and reliability a bit better and ran his campaign with the acumen of that Dean has run his, I'd be working for him.

The movement of Dean activists could be easily transferred to a better choice than Dean if a better overall choice existed. And if Dean takes back the White House by setting the groundwork for a new, interactive, participatory democracy, Dean's achievement will fuel progressive hope -- first for progressives' superior political solutions to gain Dean's attention and advocacy and, later, to replace Dean with someone even more to their liking.

Why turn your back on the biggest populist democratic movement of your lifetime to put your energies toward something that just ain't gonna happen?

I've yet to see a single supposedly far left Kucinich or Kerry supporter discuss the exciting, new, empowering democratic potential of Dean's whole approach to his campaign, his supporters, his volunteers and his micro-donor fundraising.

Vague platitudes like "I've got to give Dean credit for energizing people" and "Dean has brought some new people to the table" serve only to minimize the revolutionary nature of Dean's whole campaign. Dean isn't just "popular now" and to dismiss his campaign's dynamic like that is to, quite frankly, remain willfully ignornant of something that is critically important to finally making a real dent in the "whoever has the gold, rules" political status quo of the our country's up-until-now consistently unprogressive election system.

I think you could make a better case for Dean than he does.

That article, when I read it, only distanced me more from Dean (spamming it to us, which Nico did, didn't help). People like you and IG have done 10 times better work than that article in helping me see Dean differently.

You should really consider writing your own...

On edit: But thanks for posting it for people who haven't seen it :)

But I liked it. I missed it on the first go 'round because I printed it out to read and just got to it today.

It's not the "bottom line" stuff I do, so I think of it as a very nice set of supplementary endnotes. ;-)

FOREVER. if you do not vote for the lesser of 2 evils, YOU GET EVIL. and Bushit and his masters are DAMNED evil bastards.

It is difficult to imagine a candidate taking not only corporate contributions, but REFUSING the pledged to abide by caps required for public financing, thanks in large to a heap of AIPAC influence, being anything like GENUINELY against the "war". In what is a TYPICAL Democratic pattern, it is common for individuals, or the party as a whole, to squawk in opposition to heinous acts they usually assent to, while reaping the benefits of said heinous acts in the light of CRIMINAL MISINFORMATION and failing to redress or prevent future heinous acts. As Iraq plays out, the American people are going to look for an anti-war candidate, and you are trying to give them an AIPAC wolf in doctors clothing.

because we lost in 02 for rolling over like dogs to their owner Bush when people were SCREAMING for Congress to JUST SAY NO.

because hes the last guy in the race you could call a republican lap dog. He said no to the war and the patriot act.

because hes the last guy in the race you could call a republican lap dog. He said no to the war and the patriot act.

Because the people in his state were opposed to the invasion?

(Then why did a Republican win?)

was thrown out the window like it didnt exist. I really admire Max Cleland. I have loads of respect for him, hes a good man, too bad Georgia lost him.

Die

Bold

Two more: Rovian slander

Two more: It's Georgia.

Since you've addressed this to Dean supporters:

Accusations like:

* taking corporate contributions

* REFUSING spending limits (hint: he's contemplating it, hasn't decided one way or the other, and the reason he's contemplating it is to stay competitive with Bush)

* "heap" of AIPAC influence

* and just whose CRIMINAL MISINFORMATION are you referrng to?

Eloriel

Aside from the last one you cite (because I'm not sure what the poster meant by that) all of those "accusations" came from Dean's mouth.

of course the criminal misinformation was officially courtesy of GWB.
The historical patterns of Democratic complicity shouldnt be denied despite the squawks of outrage that substitute poorly for opposition.
I do not see Dean's campaign delivering a peace platform made of anything sturdy, when their loyalties have clearly been decided.
They arent contemplating big contributions because they need that to keep up with Bush. Their gonna take them because they can, and intend to earn them.

I'd prefer not to debunk it again, but go ahead and have a look if you like.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=21170

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

Hey, let the chips fall where they may. I believe all of the candidates have good issues...yeah, even Al Sharpton and Joe Lieberman. It may be a good thing that each candidate has a strong set of delegates come convention time. This way, the eventual nominee will have to incorporate these various issues into his/her platform. The result, I believe, will be a super strong candidate. If any of these issues are ignored, then the candidate does so at his/her own peril. Oh, and the Greens should not be ignored either. They have very legitimate issues that need to be addressed and considered. The Democratic base is a wide one, it is not all centrists or liberals. So, the successful candidate must be able to incorporate all of the major issues, across the board, or perish.

You are right the greens do have legit issues and although I count myself as a democrat I have many green tendecies however.

since you posted that and some of them would appreciate the information, I'm sure.

Worth reading the entire article.

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0825-01.htm

Published on Monday, August 25, 2003 by CommonDreams.org
A Progressive Case for Dean? Not Yet, Kucinich Is Still Our Man
by John Turri

To Dean or not to Dean: that is the question.

Should progressives be supporting Howard Dean? In a recent article on Common Dreams News Center, Nico Pitney argues that they should. Pitney's article has been reprinted on left-leaning and progressive websites. His case is being repeated on discussion boards and across the blogosphere. We probably all have progressive friends and acquaintances who share Pitney's view, if only tacitly. It is worth our time, therefore, to carefully consider Pitney's intelligent and energetic "progressive case for Dean."

I will argue that Pitney fails to make a persuasive case. Rather than Dean, progressives should be supporting Dennis Kucinich.

<edit>

Nevertheless, my guess is that most people will agree with Pitney here. So let's grant that progressives should only support an "electable" candidate. That still doesn't rule out Kucinich. An August 23 Newsweek poll of registered voters indicates that only 44% believe Bush deserves re-election, whereas 49% believe that he doesn't. That's a six-point swing from the previous month, and the worst re-election numbers for Bush yet. According to an August 20 Zogby poll, 48% of likely voters believe we need to elect a new President in 2004, as opposed to 45% who think Bush deserves re-election. Strikingly, 43% of likely voters would prefer any Democrat to Bush, while 43% would prefer Bush. That "any Democrat" is an empty vessel. Progressives should seize this opportunity to help pour progressive contents into that vessel.

And Bush's tax cuts won't save him if faced with a progressive challenger. According to a recent Pew Research poll, "72% of Americans agree that the government should provide universal health care, even if it means repealing most tax cuts passed since Bush took office." Democrats support it by an impressive 86% to 11%. Republicans even favor it 51% to 44%. (In light of those numbers, support for universal health care among progressives must be running about 99% to 1%!) Dean does not support a universal health care system. Kucinich does. According to Dean's website, Dean's plan would leave at least 10,000,000 Americans uninsured. Single-payer, universal health care is the centerpiece of Kucinich's platform, and he has a proposal in legislative form ready to go. It doesn't hurt that we can accuse those who oppose Kucinich's plan as big-spending conservatives because a single-payer plan will actually cost less than what Americans currently spend on health care.

If we cannot hope to field a viable progressive candidate in light of those poll numbers, the Bush administration's calamitous foreign policy, rapacious tax cuts, abysmal environmental record, civil rights record, sputtering economy, etc., then progressives might as well pack up and forget about electoral politics for a generation or so.

more...

He's the right dude for the house.... and i want to send a lucidly clear message to the democratic party that it is wrong to support the drugs war, and wrong to support corporate welfarism, and wrong to insist on asserting a global empire.

If <whoever> wins the primary, i'll vote "strategically" in the runoff for whomever is the democratic choice.

People i trust more than dean:

Kucinich
mosely braun
sharpton
kerry

Dean may be the candidate and i will be overjoyed if he is the inaugurated president in 2005... but in this primary, the democratic party must learn to value its left, or lose it.

Its no offense to Dean's supporters but all said and done I prefer Kerry to Dean.

I can tell by how sick i feel in my gut looking at the mugshots of these various characters... some like shrub in the debates made me so ill, i turned him off... and i never watch him, ever. Dean leaves me a little queasy... something about him concerns my intuition.

Contrast that to kucinich, an authentic leader... and middle ground might be kerry, who has spilt his heart out for this nation many times and leaves me honoured to speak his hame... not just in vietnam, but in the hard fight.

I donna know about the runoff, as i'll vote democrat... and it is unlikely based on poll numbers that DK will be a winner, but i must conscience with those of like spirit who support an authentic man who genuinely represents us.... if its kerry after that, then he'll know that to trod on DK's policy base is to cross his own voting base... i don't think Dean would know that.

Not only that, you must also go out and campaign for your candidate. It doesn't matter who he/she is. The more people you bring into the process the better off we will be come November 2004. People need to be excited about their choices among the candidates. Right now, only a few motivated people--eg, DUers--seem to give a damn about our side of the equation.

Last time around we heard that the choice between the lesser of two evils still gives you evil. Well, we really go evil didn't we. Now the choice is between really fucking evil and arguably, somewhat, maybe not so evil afterall. Don't let apathy kill our only chance.

It's simple, we lose, game over. All Hail Ceasar! All Hail Cometus!

You are new and I welcome you, and I am a fellow liberal on economics. Now what I was gonna say is that many here like DK but believe hes "unelectable" sigh I say to do that he was elected in a republican district and gets 50% of the GOP vote. Hes a good guy.

There are large numbers of people in the Kucinich Krowd who are not for Dean, and those who are moving from Dean to other candidates as his record on the types of issues that Kucincich supports are so far from Deans actual record.

Dean still has vast numbers of people who are convinced that he is somehow liberal or progressive, but real liberal and progressives in Vermont despise Dean as much as they do Bush.

Among Vermont Progressives & Greens:


Those of you who feel you must go Democratic, should probably work uphill for Kucinich -- the guy who actually is what Dean is supposed to be. But I intend to work toward the longer-range goal of establishing a national political party independent of corporate control, one embracing not less-evil alternatives, but values I truly believe in: I will be working to establish the Vermont Green Party.

My thoughts about the behavior of a Democratic or Dean presidency are speculative, but I am not as convinced as Ron, that it would necessarily be an improvement over that of the current maniacs -- especially after another 9/11-like attack. Democrats have always to prove they are not soft on crime, defense, etc.: the Gore campaign proposed even higher military expenditures than Bush's. It was a Democrat that gave us welfare "reform", and suffocated habeus corpus, and wagged many dogs worth of tonnage. I won't argue this here in detail. I think the world must now get through a profound historical moment of contraction -- of imperial reach, of economic coercion, of environmental footprint -- and that the powerful of the American status quo will fight these changes tooth and nail, be they Democrat or Republican. But the changes we are experiencing -- in global consciousness, in planetary pathology -- are ineluctable. Bush & Co. are providing the clearest possible teaching moment, which, for all we know, may shorten the time needed for change. Another Clinton-like Dem, cloaking his malignancies in liberal rhetoric, may slow these changes down. Who knows? It's going to be bad, either way, for at least a generation. But if the world gets through it, the US will need a politics that speaks to a healthier future. Thus, I turn to the possibility of the Greens becoming a strong public voice. See http://www.vermontgreens.org.


Those of you who feel you must go Democratic, should probably work uphill for Kucinich -- the guy who actually is what Dean is supposed to be. But I intend to work toward the longer-range goal of establishing a national political party independent of corporate control, one embracing not less-evil alternatives, but values I truly believe in: I will be working to establish the Vermont Green Party...

I know that a lot of you are going to vote for Dean -- he talks a good game; he can be charismatic and charming. But I'm warning you. This man will tell you what you want to hear, or at least tell you something that has some little kernel of something that you can interpret as support for the things that are important to you. But when the time comes to stand up and lead on the issue, to take on the money interests and backsliders in his own party, that stiff little spine will turn into a slinky.

If you vote for him, it's your job to stand behind him with a poker and keep him headed in the right direction. Don't give him any honeymoon period, either--keep the pressure on from the second you drop that ballot in the box. The minute you relax, he's going to turn right back into what he really is...a privileged, arrogant, middle of the road republican. Put your political energy into getting some truly progressive folks into the House and Senate, and into State legislatures around the country so that there will be more pressure from more directions. We need to get together our sophisticated progressive thinkers to develop policy ideas in every area, so that we're ready with real, well-thought out counter-proposals for the incremental changes a Dean administration might put forth. If you feel you must, support Dean, do--but then go do the work necessary to make real change.

Ron Jacobs, Donna Bister and Marc Estrin comprise the OLD NORTH END RAG collective. The RAG is an agitational community newspaper serving the Old North End of Burlington, Vermont. This neighborhood is a primarily working class section of Vermonts largest city that has a history of political activism

http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs08292003.html

Among Greens:


Meet Howard Dean
The Man from Vermont is Not Green (He's Not Even a Liberal)
by MICHAEL COLBY

For Vermonters who have seen Howard Dean up close and personal for the last eleven years as our governor, there's something darkly comical about watching the national media refer to him as the "liberal" in the race for the Democratic nomination for president. With few exceptions in the 11-plus years he held the state's top job, Dean was a conservative Democrat at best. And many in Vermont, particularly environmentalists, see Dean as just another Republican in Democrat's clothing.

As the son of a wealthy Long Island family (his father was a prominent Wall Street insider), Dean's used to having his golden path well greased. After dutifully attending Yale and then medical school, Dean looked for a state to launch both a private medical practice and a political career. He chose Vermont as much for its beauty as its lenient mood toward carpet bagging politicians, thus joining Brooklynite Bernie Sanders as a born again Vermonter.

Dean became Vermont's accidental governor in 1991 after Governor Richard Snelling died of a heart attack while swimming in his pool. Dean, the lieutenant governor at the time, took the state's political reins and immediately followed through with his promise not to offend the Snelling Republicans who occupied the executive branch. And Dean carried on with his right-leaning centrism for the next eleven, long years.

With his sights now set on the White House, the Dean team has been doing its best over the last year to polish up a mediocre gubernatorial record. They're also trying to position Dean as "the liberal" in the Democratic field so as to grab the much-coveted early primary voters.

http://www.counterpunch.org/colby02222003.html


The problem is that everyon is listening to Deans campaign talk. He is saying what they want to hear. And after they are suckered into it, No matter what Dean did as governor that was ultra conservative, his supporters will stand logic on its head in order to defend his pro mega-corporation, pro-big -business, anti-environmental behavior, anti civil rights behavior. Thats a demagogue.

What's your take on the revolutionary democratizing potential of Dean's interactive grassroots, micro-donor driven people-powered campaign?

Are you afraid of it? Because you seek to preserve the current, almost completely rigged, corporatist, rich-always-get-richer, political establishment at all costs?

Just curious.

best serve your interests, is my suggestion. If the day before the PA primary Kucinich is running strong, then he's my man. If he is already out of the running and it is close between Dean and Lieberman, then I'll vote for Dean, to avoid a Lieberman candidacy.

who are going to be really disappointed with dlc dean IMHO. if you dont believe me then just ask the people of vermont who know dean for what he really is "economic conservative,social liberal" the same as lieberman

I've been critical of the divisive nature of Dean's campaign, and the childish way some of his staffers and supporters have acted. But I have to say, I watched the C-Span coverage of his "Sleepless Summer Tour" and I was really impressed by the man, his ideas for America, and his way with people- his bedside manner, if you will.

He's still not my 1st or 2nd choice, but I would fully support him if he got the nomination. Not that I wouldn't have voted for him before, but now I would wholeheartedly support him.

I am a Green Party member and I plan to vote for Kucinich in the primary. I like his stands and if there were more like him in the Democratic leadership I might not have left the party.

I hope the Kucinich supporters stick with him to the very end and don't fall for the "you need to compromise" line that is being thrown at them.

One of my favorite songs has a line, It goes someting like this "you got to stand for something or you will fall for everything". and the Kucinich supporters are standing for what they believe

Welcome to DU. We plan to stick with him, I will never deny that this cause the cause for Kucinich is wrong. Hes right on so many issues.