Kucinich Hopes to Get Ex-Dean Supporters

WASHINGTON (AP) - Calling the doctor out, Democratic presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich is hoping to capitalize on the possibility that rival Howard Dean will skip public financing.

The Ohio congressman urged those who backed Dean because they thought he'd take the federal funds to support Kucinich instead. He announced the creation of a new Web site, ``The Dr. is Out,'' aimed at attracting former Dean supporters.

Kucinich released a statement criticizing Dean, noting a March story by The Associated Press in which Dean committed to accepting public financing and said he would make it a campaign issue if other Democratic hopefuls opted out of the system.

``I'm making it an issue now,'' Kucinich said. ``Dr. Dean may feel that he can drag his supporters into agreeing with his preconceived decision because in the end he believes they have no other place to go. Well, he's wrong. Our campaign is reaching out to them.''

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-3357612,00.html

<>

...but what is wrong with public financing?

Bush will spend $200 million to the D's $45 million.

Kucinich can make a big deal out of it because even with matching funds he won't reach the limit.

Political opportunism, and it won't work. The question at the website was not leading at all. In fact, based on the stories about it here, it was shockinly not leading.

and makes it impossible to beat Bush at the PR game in the general election because he's expected to have 200 million.

We're gonna have a gunfight, you and I. I am going to use a 5 shot revolver, and you are going to use a two-shot derringer. We both shoot until our guns are empty.

* has $85 million already, but any Dem who accepts public funds has to stop at $45 million, until after the convention. Whoever takes public financing will be 'silenced' after their $ runs out.

He must love the status quo and be against CHANGE!!
;-) Hehehehe.

Strikes me as *very* interesting that Dennis has been so hard on Dean.
Dean is not a DLC playpal.

He seems to genuinely not like him. Not sure what to make of this, actually. An entire site about Dean? From Kucinich?

on his own message in favor of making Dean the issue.

<>

...and probably feels like Dean's stolen what should be "his" supporters.

Later.

RJS

It's a couple of pages on his site right now.

Dean has more in common with the DLC than Kucinich, if that's what you're asking. He was their Golden Boy to help win more Governorships in 2002. Up until the IWR, he was one of them-- practically their poster boy for business-friendly big money Democrats.

I was kind of chuckling to myself about how Dean supporters can square tension between the DLC AND liberals like Kucinich.

you will see just HOW DLC Dean is. So DLC I would give Lieberman the highest odds as running mate. Dean cant beat Bush, Kucinich can. And will.

I meant to say KUCINICH isn't the DLC playpal.

I know Dean is one DLC scooba dooba.

Not because they were more convenient for candidates, but because they were right for democracy.

But these aren't clean election laws. I hope you would agree that campaign finance as wellstone and kerry saw it has NOT been realized. I don't think that Dean is wrong, and I don't think this will prevent him from pursuing campaign finance reform if he becomes president.

I'm completely open on this subject. I really want to know more from the other perspective about why this is an issue in the current political climate.

Because the whole problem with our kleptocracy is that it's become all about chasing after the almighty dollar. Our country has been bought and sold to the highest bidder, and it's the workaday Americans that are hurting for it.

You buy into the game of big money, and the masters of that game will beat you every time. They know the rules better than anyone.

The game they can't compete in is the game where principles and integrity are the stakes. This is the competition that people have soured on, with each election seeing fewer people participating even. They know which candidates are bought and sold. No amount of spin or shine covers it. The hopeless feeling as they watch the candidates they've supported siding with big energy, big media, insurance... whatever... that kills a persons' trust in the electoral process. Who cares who you vote for, if they all sell their office to the highest bidder?

The GOP cleans house in the personal donations game. They've always kicked Democrat ass in that regard. Democrats have been dependent on soft money BECAUSE they represent the people who can't afford to give 1000's of dollars. Now that Dean is in the race it seems like the game may change, but I'm not buying it. I've seen a lot of Republicans get elected promising the moon and the sky to their constituents, then they turn around and do whatever the best funded lobbyists tell them to. Luckily Republicans don't have to worry about their constituents turning on them, because a lot of them are just too committed to the 'team' to give up on 'em.

I hope we don't become the same way, but I fear I'm behind the curve on this one, and we - for the most part - already are.

Sorry for the rambling ...

And not rambling! But isn't there an argument to be made that in this political climate it isn't as much an issue? The flaying field is already not level. I wouldn't care if any of them denied matching funds because I know that there will be a lot more progress in CFR with a D president.Right now, CFR doesn't seem to do any good at all.

So why try to beat them at their own game?

We win on issues. We should fight on them. Not halfway, either.

People's eyes tend to glaze over when they're told to analyze two very similar positions and ferret out which one is best.

It's much easier for them if there are clear, fundamental differences.

That's why Kucinich has the best chance to beat *.

Not "I would have waited a month or two before invading, vote for me!"

But "I would not have invaded, because there are diplomatic ways to solve the worlds problems unless a nation is waging wars of aggression" (gee who does that describe?)

So why try to beat them at their own game?

Because there's a good chance we can't beat them if we don't.

We win on issues. We should fight on them. Not halfway, either.

We won't win on this issue. We have bigger issues to win on.

People's eyes tend to glaze over when they're told to analyze two very similar positions and ferret out which one is best.

It's much easier for them if there are clear, fundamental differences.

That's why Kucinich has the best chance to beat *.

You and I will have to agree to disagree on this. I think that pragmatism plays a bigger role. But I could be wrong, I don't think there's a clear "right".

Not "I would have waited a month or two before invading, vote for me!"

I think you're being unfair here. Dean never conveyed a position that war would have to be imminent. Every day that passed back in february proved more and more that war was not necessary. Dean's position follows that. Honestly, I never thought Iraq posed a threat, but if I were in a position of power, I wouldn't rule anything out until the facts come in. My anonymity allows me to be more brazen in my skepticism and suspicion.

:thumbsup:

Until his earnings exceeded his expectations.
*cough*hypocrit*cough*

You don't solve a problem by becoming part of it. I guess that's the bottom line.

but he doesn't. Is this election really so unimportant that Democrats can afford to let Bush outspend them 5 or 6 times over if they don't have to? It's not like Dean is getting his money from the sources the reform is meant to prevent from having so much influence. His money comes from the people. I think it will help the reform get more support if Dean is able to prove to other politicians that contributions from average Americans CAN compete with corporate special interest contributions. Getting rid of Bush is THE most important thing in this election. Sometimes sacrifices have to be made for the better good...sending Bush back to Texas. And afterall, it's the people who sent Dean that money who are deciding this, as well they should.

Isn't he waiting for Dean to make his move so he can follow and tap into his wife's millions?

Most of us agree taking the funds is limiting compared to what we've been able to raise so far.

Nice crowd Dennis has at a personnal appearance there by the way

in line for the men's room at the movie theater.

*lost it* LOL!

Later.

RJS

See? And there's a Dean supporter bitching in Politics & Campaigns about how horribly nasty people are.

Really?

Gee, wonder where that's coming from.

/sarcasm

On a picture the person could have freely chosen NOT to post?
In a post slamming Dean Supporters?

OH-Kay.

That line of reasoning's logical -- I guess -- somewhere in the universe.

I was not aware that discussing an article wherein a candidate who earlier in his campaigned claimed that public finance rules were important enough to vow to make an issue of any candidates that went outside the system, but later in his campaign opportunistically decided that maybe that principle wasn't so important after all... was a slam. I thought it was just observing current events.

Strange how it's OK with Dean supporters for him to want to make it an issue, but when the tables are turned, it's a 'slam'.

:eyes:

Kucinich is making an anti Dean website about it? That's pretty shallow. This is a difficult and important debate, and Kucinich is marginalizing it with his website.

Kucinich is welcome to make an issue out of it. He has a right. Dean changed his position after making a strong statement, I can't deny anyone the opportunity to bring it up. But I doubt Kucinich's website will engage in a dialog about it. I have a feeling it's going to be more like Gep's website, juxtaposing Dean's former comment with his new one. It will focus on "flip flopping" instead of the actual debate, whether or not CFR make a difference when one side doesn't abide. That will be a shame if it happens.

:shrug:

He announced the creation of a new Web site, ``The Dr. is Out,'' aimed at attracting former Dean supporters.

A new web site? Or a page on his website. You both could be right, but the article says what it says.

:shrug: Thanks for not dissing him though, I really dont like when people play by that game, I dont play it.

nevermind. :)

was put up by a Kucinich supporter. Dr F is a Kerry guy, go jump on him for the "Dean slamming."

We should be getting straight on the overall issue.

are stupid as stupid gets.

Does anyone here really believe that any of these candidates will raise anything even close to what * will raise?

Okay, then.

If it's about money, * has it wrapped up and ready to go.

Democrats have to fight on the issues.

More than >45mil is better than <45mil.

I'd love for you to answer my question in the reply to the good Dr. Funkenstein. All imput is desired.

If there are any who withdraw their support of him, they will likely be picked up by General Clark.

Is there such a thing as an ex-Dean supporter?

I think they're few and far between. :)

DK would be about last choice. Barely nudging out Lieberman in the other extreme.

And my favorite unelectable isn't even DK.

My favorite unelectable is CMB.

I've never wanted to hug a pres. candidate before her.

He is the only true anti-war candidate and will do the best job running this country

It says a lot about Dean's integrity that he so easily changes his "campaign issues".
A true President doesn't do that until after the elections. lol

Kucinich is right in bringing this to our attention.

As for the whole financing issue, this once again demonstrates how desperately we need to reform this process. It will not be reformed by following the Republican example.

If we have to win this election on a buget, then that's what we'll do.

Little guy just can't pander fast enough!

Dupe