Kucinich says slow and steady will win the race

Kucinich says slow and steady will win the race
By Holly Ramer, Associated Press Writer, 1/16/2004

CONCORD, N.H. -- The way Dennis Kucinich sees it, keeping his presidential campaign alive depends simply on staying alive himself.


"I will have exceeded the expectations of the media if on Jan. 27 I have a heartbeat," the Ohio congressman said Thursday when asked what threshold he has set for the New Hampshire primary.

During an interview with The Associated Press, Kucinich rose from his chair and stepped over an imaginary line on the floor to illustrate how he will surmount the low bar most of the national media has set for his candidacy.

"I can just kind of walk over it, and say, 'On to the next election,'" he said.

Stuck in single digits as the race tightens in Iowa and New Hampshire, Kucinich said his strategy is focused on slow, steady movement. He insists a nominee won't emerge before the Democratic convention in July and that by then, he'll have picked up enough delegates here and there to win.

~snip~

more: http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/kucinich/articles/2004/01/16/kucinich_says_slow_and_steady_will_win_the_race/

_____________________________________________________________________

agree with DK on this, slow and steady wins the race!! :)

The delegates committed to an antiwar and anti-PATRIOT candidate could end up being the key as to who gets the nomination, and under what conditions will their support be predicated.

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

to rephrase that - it's unnecessarily pejorative towards a candidate who has quite a respectable proposition, and more than plenty of highly respectable backers.

I think there are more respectful ways to express your idea of DK's electability.

...imagery in this New Hampshire news story!

However, I have to ask it again: When does he really expect to do his Seabiscuit "surge"? At the convention? Even if he makes it to Boston, what then? However divided and deadlocked at the outset, the convention won't be a "smoke-filled room" where a few brokers choose a compromise "dark horse" just so they can go home.

Has anyone written "How Dennis Kucinich won the nomination"? I'd love to read someone's imagined report of how it came to pass. How many ballots and all that stuff. How many candidates were still in the race? What endorsements and defections happened? Somehow I can envision the following chapter more easily ("From Boston to the White House").

I keep asking: When we in this campaign speak of "winning", do we agree that we truly mean Dennis will become, first, the 2004 nominee of the Democratic Party, then the next President of the United States?

And I think it will be slow indeed, as more people start looking more closely at the candidates. Healthcare (not insurance) and free trade will become more important, as costs go up and corporations continue to leave American families in the lurch, looking for cheaper labor so they can reap higher profits.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

"You must be the change you want to see in the world."

"To believe in something, and not to live it, is dishonest."

"To believe what has not occurred in history will not occur at all is to argue disbelief in the dignity of man."

"Man often becomes what he believes himself to be. If I keep on saying to myself that I cannot do a certain thing, it is possible that I may end by really becoming incapable of doing it. On the contrary, if I have the belief that I can do it, I shall surely acquire the capacity to do it even if I may not have it at the beginning."

- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

I already understand about living consistent with beliefs. I don't fault Dennis!

I just want to imagine what his "winning" could look like it the real world. If you say it happens at the convention, that's not years and years away.

Please offer a scenario--an imaginary report from a post-convention perspective. That's really what I asked for. Thanks!

And I'm not really sure what you're looking for, so... ?

But what I hope for is the support of the people who have been hedging their bets and supporting other candidates, or staying undecided, but who have been secretly wishing Kucinich could be the nominee. I can imagine as Kucinich's support grows, that little by little, more and more of these people will decide that maybe he does have a chance after all, so they decide not to pass up an opportunity which we may not have again.

I know that I've talked with many, many people who only hold back due to thinking he doesn't have the support to win. As more and more people start supporting him, I can see his chances steadily increasing, and the debate turning more and more focused and serious about the issues which are challenging us now.

they fight him, then he wins!!! And the fighting has begun. ;-)


"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Gandhi (more or less -- may not be exact wording)


THE DARK HORSE COMETH DENNIS KUCINICH 2004

...but it's an outline, hardly a scenario.

You said: "So far, DK has been ignored and laughed at, so next they fight him, then he wins!!! And the fighting has begun."

Come on, Kucitizens, surely we can flesh out this story line.

(Unless we're kidding, it's got to come true by July.)

I don't have enough posts to start a thread....but someone please prove this wrong...

Someone at my work told me that Dennis Kucinich sponsored or backed a bill that would make it illegal to speak out against Israel. ????

This sounded outrageous to me, and I just couldn't believe it. I have been looking on the web for over an hour trying to find anything like this, and I just can't find it. This doesn't seem right to me.

Can someone explain? This person that told me this must have been mistaken. But, I asked several times, "Kucinich?" and he said, "yeah."

I've never heard that.

Anyone have any idea what this person might have been talking about?

But its impossible to prove a negative, so please take it on faith.
Kucinich has very strong support among arab-americans.

http://www.kucinich.us/issues/arab_americans.php

http://www.muhajabah.com/muslims4kucinich/

http://www.minnesotaforkucinich.com/extras/KucinichTenPointsARABIC.pdf

http://www.muhajabah.com/muslims4kucinich/archives/007913.php

Pakistani-American PAC endorses Kucinich
MOST FAVORABLE DEMOCRACTIC PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.

PAKPAC has been in communication with all the democratic presidential campaigns since October 2003. The issues of concern of the Pakistani American community were communicated to the campaigns in detail. Positions of different candidates were discussed on issues of concern.

PAKPAC continues to have an ongoing discussion with the presidential candidates at this time.

Some campaigns have not been able to make a formal policies related to our concerns. While we wait for some of these campaigns to formulate their responses and views, we feel that it is important to identify a favorable candidate to help the Pakistani Americans across the country decide who to vote for in the primaries.

PAKPAC will be in communication with the Republican Presidential campaign as well. At this stage PAKPAC feels that all the current democratic presidential candidates are excellent contestants and do have the capacity not only to lead their party, but this country in the positive direction. Based on the review of the existing responses and the official views of the candidates who have formulated their views, we feel that that Representative Dennis Kucinich is the most favorable candidate for the Pakistani American vote.

having anything to do with it. I read that Congress passed such a bill, which seems crazy. If there's any truth to it, it could have been snuck in as part of one of those bills that has so many parts it's nearly impossible to sort out. The story may be completely bogus, though. I'll see what I can find out.

If you mean HR 294, "Condemning the terrorism inflicted on Israel since the Aqaba Summit and expressing solidarity with the Israeli people in their fight against terrorism," he did not vote for it. He voted "present."

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2003/roll317.xml


This bill didn't make it illegal to speak out against israel. It did, however, among other things,

7) calls on all states to cease recognition of and political and material support for any Palestinian and other terrorist groups;

(8) calls on all states immediately to establish effective mechanisms to ensure that funding from private citizens cannot be directed to terrorist groups for any purpose whatsoever, including ostensible humanitarian purposes;

You can read about any bill in the house at their website, and get info about who voted for what. If this is the bill you are referring to, you can read the whole thing here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:2:./temp/~c108kkIT4B::

If not, ask your colleague what bill he/she is referring to, and do a search at the site to find out.

In any case, Kucinich did not vote for a bill that curtails the first amendment; he is a strong supporter of the bill of rights.

I will disspell the rumor in my colleagues mind as soon as I can.

Yes, I found the bill where he voted "present." And loved his speech on the subject by the way.

I have also found that he seems to enjoy terrific support from Arab-Americans. This is why I just couldn't believe it.

and ask him to straighten out his source.

"I'm not subject to the same laws of political physics that other campaigns are, where they have to maintain a momentum in order to keep going," he said. "My time hasn't come yet. Every candidate's had their little day in the sun, but I haven't been there yet. When I am, the whole dynamic will change in this election."

And I believe him.

I'm also laughing my ass off at the image of him taking a step across the stage and saying "on to the next election." And you know, he's right. With expectations so low, he can exceed expectations easily, and gain some press in the process.

LOL This is not the first time I've seen something in print within days of saying or posting something similar myself. Either Kucinich and I are more on the same wavelength than I ever suspected or he's seen some of my comments...or maybe a little of both. Very cool, but very disconcerting, too.