Kucinich can and will beat Bush because:

If any Democrat has a history of attracting swing voters and "Reagan Democrats" in winning elections against better-funded Republican opponents, it is Dennis Kucinich. He has repeatedly defeated entrenched incumbents. He beat a Republican incumbent for mayor in 1977, for state senator in 1994 (overcoming the national right-wing tide) and for Congress in 1996.

His Congressional district includes the suburb of Parma, Ohio, described as "one of the original homes of the Reagan Democrats." An Ohio daily calls it a "conservative Democratic district," which he carried by 74% in 2002. Being a success there may be a better predictor of national success than holding statewide office in a liberal stronghold like Vermont or Massachusetts.

Kucinich is a winner because he builds Wellstone-like grassroots campaigns against bigger-spending opponents. He is a winner because of his blue collar roots and populism, reflected in his battles for heartland voters against unfair, corporate-friendly trade deals.

He is an unabashed progressive who wins because swing voters who don't agree with him on every issue still see him as a fighter for their interests, as someone who will put the interests of workers and middle-class consumers ahead of big-money interests. No Democrat is better positioned in 2004 to attract 'Reagan Democrats' and swing voters with a frontal attack on how Bush policies hurt them and favor the rich.

Republicans use "wedge" issues to pry away traditionally-Democratic white working class voters -- a tactic that has not succeeded against Kucinich. In '96, for example, Republicans used his support of gay rights as a wedge, and he stood firm and triumphed.

On the other side of the spectrum, no other candidate can attract disaffected voters, 3rd party voters and Ralph Nader supporters to the Democratic column like Kucinich. Across the country, Nader 2000 voters and Green Party sympathizers are joining his campaign, as are other 3rd party supporters.

<snip>

More at:

http://www.kucinich.us/electable.htm

A proven record of winning with a broad spectrum of voters. A platform that brings hope back to the hearts and minds of the people.

electablecapable of being elected (as to public office)

-Webster's 10th collegiate.

He is obviously capable; he's been doing it since 1977, and he can do it again in '04.

:toast:

living in a fantasy. The sooner we can get a Person to beat Bush! Sorry to say Kucinich is not it.

How is he going to attract "Reagan Republicans"?

Dean is the only candidate inspiring passion across a wide, grassroots base.

his district isnt that liberal really. If people just listened then they could accept, Dean is good on social issues but his views on economics trouble me, odd in my opinion I see many trash the DLC for becoming republican like then I see some saying they support Dean because to paraphrase well I like Kucinich but hes too liberal. He was a mayor yes but a mayor of a city not a small town then I would see that.

1. I am a democrat. He has attracted me. And a whole host of others I've met with.

2. The same way he already does it in Cleveland.

3. Dean is one candidate generating grassroots energy. He is not the only candidate.

I understand that Dean is the candidate you've chosen to throw your energy behind. That's fine. I also understand that you are aggressively campaigning for him by attacking the candidates you perceive to offer threat. That's fine, too. DK can take it.

I've noticed that the Dean supporters who have repeated "unelectable" over and over and over, ad nauseum, can't seem to find a real issue to debate. The Kucinich platform doesn't have the holes, so detractors are reduced to deriding physical appearance and "electability." Of course, DK didn't start his campaign as soon as Dean; he hasn't been at it as long. He didn't resign his job to campaign, and he hasn't been leaving his seat in the house empty while he drums up voters, either. In spite of all of this, the campaign is catching fire. More and more people are sitting up and taking notice.

There's energy, and then there's energy. I noticed the energy that Dean was gathering in the beginning; I took a close look. What I've seen has convinced me that it's not the energy I choose to support. Shouting out soundbites over and over, thinking that volume will drown out truth. Excusing problematical issues, and following a candidate like a prophet. That's not the energy that attracts me.

If Dean gets the nod, I'll be there with you, voting for him. Meanwhile, I think we've got a better candidate. He generates enthusiasm because of who he is. Because he walks his talk. Because he's been standing up on that platform since long before his grassroots supporters convinced him to run. I've looked closely; I've found 2 votes in the house that I don't agree with. That's not bad; until a candidate can do better, I'll stick with Kucinich.

please accept this standing ovation.

but you and he should know it is going to get a lot worse.

I believe the Democratic primaries need to be as mean, vindictive and cruel as possible because that is exactly what we are going to be up against in the main election.

Please remember Karl Rove's push poll in South Carolina accusing John McCain of fathering a daughter out of wedlock with a black prostitute. The daughter in question was one McCain and his wife actually adopted from the Mother Thesresa orphanage in Bangledesh.

This is EXACTLY the type of stuff we are going to see in this election. So whoever gets the nomination must be ready for this kind of thing.

I am just a little afraid from what I have seen that Kucinich is going to go crying home to his mommy the first time Rove hits him in the face.

I like the way you framed your response. Simple. Effective.

but assuming the entire Republican party fails to wander off the Edge of the Earth, he'd be lucky to get Congress to agree with him as to whether it was day or night. The only way a real progressive can have a sucessful presidency would be to emulate the Big Dog in the White House, then focus on building the party at state and local levels in hopes of shifting the psychopaths out of congress over the next decade.

Do we have that much time?

yella

the gop did in 1933 people just will be so mad and we will have congress and the presidency. Maybe thats unrealistic but I can see people are fuming.

And that is exactly why we lost.

Even if we enter a new Depression, America would never elect a Kucinich - he is no FDR.

ThorsteinVeblen.

Dean appeals to me on the social issues but he doesnt appeal to me economically and hearing that he cut aid to the disabled doesnt really make me too pleased.

x

I didnt say he was FDR but he has a lot of good ideas and good work ethic too maybe he may be NOT charismatic enough for you but his issues and ethic appeal to me above all.

continue to exert his influence where he can.

I'd say there are some holes.

1. He has said that he is just fine with mounting deficits if they are 'temporary.' Sounds a bit much like Bush on the economy to me?

2. He has said he will cut the Pentagon budget (after 911) this will be popular? :eyes:

3. He has changed his position on choice, just before the election? His supporters say he 'evolved' which may be, but it's a bit questionable.

I don't follow him closely as Dean is moving up in the polls, and he's the candidate who's got my intersest but...

These things are a concern to me. I don't think DK is the total package.

I guess I wasn't clear. I think he should remain in his present position. In other words, we are on the same page here. ;-)

1. I couldn't find a quote about "mounting" deficits; do you have a link? I know DK believes in investing tax dollars in public projects, infrastructure, and investment as a policy that benefits the nation as a whole in the future.

<snip>

If government is determined or obliged by law to maintain a balanced budget, a capital budget rule which discounted investment spending (in calculating what would in effect be an operating deficit) would imply that the correct level of net Federal borrowing was whatever investment had been planned. To the contrary, I would urge this Commission to forego such antiquated, pre-Keynesian economic notions. The Commission should emphasize the Federal government's obligation to run a fiscal policy which promotes full employment. The level of capital spending should have no automatic consequences for allowable deficits. We should stipulate that net investment levels would ideally approximate the level of borrowing, but not constrain it.

http://clinton4.nara.gov/pcscb/wt_kucinich.html

This is definitely a departure from Dean's position, but it is certainly nothing like the Bush take on economy: spend more on global empire building while cutting taxes for the rich and gutting social services at home.

2. Why wouldn't it be? 9-11 didn't occur because we weren't spending enough trillions on the military. And, with all the $$$ we've spent, more than the rest of the world, and certainly more than the attackers, it didn't prevent it.

3. It's not his supporters; it's what he says:

support Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to choose, and will select Supreme Court justices who affirm this Constitutional right.

I’ve had a journey on this issue that a year ago, before I became a candidate for President, caused me to break from a voting record that had not been pro-choice. After hearing from many women in my own life, and from women and men in my community and across the country, I began a more intensive dialogue on the issue. A lot of women opened their hearts to me. That dialogue led me to wholeheartedly support a woman’s right to choose.

I have come to believe that it’s not simply about the right to choose, but about a woman’s role in society as being free and having agency and having the ability to make her own decisions. That a woman can’t be free unless she has this right.

The decision to terminate a pregnancy is one of the most serious decisions a woman might make. It is deeply personal. In our society, all women and all men have a right to make difficult moral decisions and make personal choices. But women will not be equal to men if this constitutionally protected right is denied.

And because I know that the right to choose is under attack -- as President, I will only support someone for the Supreme Court if he or she agrees to uphold Roe v. Wade.

(April, 2003)

Kucinich's district conservative. His district has been represented by either a Democrats or a majority Democrats for at least the last 40 years. Back in the 1960's some parts of his district were represented by Ed Stanton and in 1992 and 1994 Martin Hoke won his district. I would assume that Stanton represented mostly suburban parts of Dennis' current district (Ohio has lost 5 seats almost all in the Cleveland area since the 1960's). Hoke won against an indicted incumbent (Mary Rose Ockar) and a man who single handedly bankrupted the county (Paul Gaul in the derivative scandal). Given that competition Hoke was never able to get more than 55% of the vote.

There are 9 State House seats and 3 State Senate seats in this district. The division is 7 to 2 and 2 to 1 in favor of Democrats repectively. Gore carried this area 2 to 1 and Hagan carried it while losing by close to 20 points statewide.

This district includes the West side of Cleveland (200-225k), Lakewood (50k), and several other suburbs. Parma is around 80k. It is maybe a seventh of the district.

Here is a link which shows what political reports say.

www.dcpoliticalreport.com/2000/OH00.htm