Kucinich Camp Outraged By 'Overheard' Plans of Clinton, Edwards To Eliminate Candidates From Debates

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/24636

Kucinich Camp Outraged by 'Overheard' Plans of Clinton and Edwards to Eliminate Candidates from Future Presidential Debates
Submitted by davidswanson on Fri, 2007-07-13 10:32

DETROIT, July 13 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Top campaign officials for Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich tonight expressed outrage that rival candidates Hillary Clinton and John Edwards were overheard collaborating on a strategy to eliminate other Democratic candidates from future debates and forums.

According to the Associated Press, Fox News Channel microphones picked up Clinton and Edwards on stage discussing their desire to limit future joint appearances to exclude some rivals lower in the crowded field. "We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group," Edwards said into Clinton's ear following a Presidential Forum in Detroit hosted by the NAACP on Thursday.

Clinton agreed with Edwards, according to print reports and video footage of the exchange. "We've got to cut the number. ... They're not serious," she said. Clinton added that she thought representatives of her campaign and Edwards' had already tried to limit the debates, and "we've gotta get back to it," according to the AP.

"Candidates, no matter how important or influential they perceive themselves to be, do not have and should not have the power to determine who is allowed to speak to the American public and who is not," said Kucinich. "Imperial candidates are as repugnant to the American people and to our Democracy as an imperial President."

MORE

eom

I'd like to compare their track record on being right or wrong vs say Kucinich's any time. Then we could see who was serious or not. Effing politicians. Damn, they piss me off!!!

3 cheers for Dennis!!!!!

and Edwards and HRC are going to have to spend some of their valuable time removing the shit stains that their little tete-a-tete has inspired.

:popcorn:

His campaign is and the man fighting for the underdogs of society, then he is seen working together with those that are powerful to stifle those with less support now.

Edwards needs to realize that he has to count on some Gravel/Kuchinich people shifting their votes to him if he is to have a chance where he has positioned himself. He also should realize many of these polls are plus/minus 6 and his likely actual score is around 12% - what will he say after this stand when a poll results in a 6%.

against his message and against the sunny "nice" image of 2004. I had thought that his current image was activist/almost radical/outsider - but this insider move is contrary to that. Maybe the image he is aiming for is tough.

I understand thet each candidate would like more time to really differentiate their message, but it is too early to throw people out now.(I'm too lazy to look - but from memory, Dean was at about 2% in May/Jone 2003 before he broke out. By July, I doubt Kerry or Clark would have been let in. Edwards himself did not show better than Biden - so he should have been ekliminated.

I was migrating towards Edwards and then he does this. It's a like a peek behind the curtain during the Wizard of Oz.

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

Kucinich is very serious, and reflects the desires of those who seek truly progressive change.

The one who is not "serious", IMO, is Hillary, because her only concern is her career, not We, the People. :grr:

they have these words:

"We should try to have a more serious and a smaller group," Edwards said into Clinton's ear following a Presidential Forum in Detroit hosted by the NAACP on Thursday.


"We've got to cut the number. ... They're not serious," she said. Clinton added that she thought representatives of her campaign and Edwards' had already tried to limit the debates, and "we've gotta get back to it," according to the AP.

Why are these not added to the video? This would be much more believable if they would do that.

I, as well as many others can here this;

“But we’ve got to ....... … They are just being trivialized… You know, I think there was an effort by our campaign to do that. Somehow we got to get back to it. Because that’s all we are going to do.”

“Thanks, Barack!” and then another “Thanks Dennis!”

“So, our guys should talk.”

Really, these words could be about anything. What candidate would be stupid enough to talk of excluding others on a stage in a public forum........(also, it looks like Sen. Obama is close enough to hear part of it )


Wanna believe Faux without the audio to support this claim. Ok. This would blow the hell out of the "Murdoch supports Hillary" crap.


Just saying.

From the looks of it, Obama was not in on their scheming. Both he and Kucinich walk up to offer greetings to Edwards and Hillary, who are quick to put back on their smiley faces for the handshakes. How transparently fake this makes them look!

"...Edwards and Hillary, who are quick to put back on their smiley faces for the handshakes."

Hmmmm.

perhaps fox news has an implanted chip to control Edwards and Hillary during debates?

One of the factors that hurt Dean in that caucus.


http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/19/elec04.prez.edwards.kucinich/index.html

are the only candidates that are keeping HRC and JE from just spouting platitudes, imho. I hate it when some candidates assume they are going to be nominated and at this early stage think other voices should be silenced.

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

our candidates BEFORE THE FIRST PRIMARY.

Who's using Faux news here? Now theres a reliable source. :eyes:

Anyone actually hear this so called taped "overheard" conversation besides Faux news?

Dennis Kucinich is is pissed because Hillary is kicking his ass even in his home State, now thats news.

What ^ said.

I hope you didn't forget to strap on your extra-heavy-duty tinfoil hat.

How will you react when/if this conversation is validated by other media outlets or your precious Hillary herself?

Please post a audible link and then we will talk.

Marginalizing anyone right now would be the ultimate in NON-democracy (small "d"), and in no voter's best interests.

TC

At some point we should recognize that a candidate who can't get enough people to trust them enough to send $25 to come within even 10% of the leading fundraiser (and DK doesn't even have 1%) has not shown the ability to build an effective organization, manage their media presence, or develop a compelling message. Either that or they really are not serious about running and are just running to gain exposure to some cause, in either case, I think it is justifiable to start excluding candidates based on some criteria of success at some point. Perhaps after Labor Day, no more posers at the debates so that we can focus on getting more complete pictures of the successful candidates.

This is not really the kind of thing that candidates welcome. Campaigns might want the extra exposure, but for a candidate, it just means that much more bullcrap to deflect and overcome from every Geraldo Rivera wannabe out there with a cable modem and a TypePad account.

As a Democrat, we often locally talk about trying to reduce the field of candidates so that they don't damage each other too much and run out of funding sources before they reach the general.

Not the candidates....

:shrug:

Interesting take.

spreading bullshit.

Watch the video

more serious and "smaller" group does not mean less debates.

I have watched the video. I took the audio into "sound forge" and ran it through several different eq's and filters and a whole bunch of other stuff trying to isolate Edwards and Clinton. I didn't get much. I certainly didn't get what FOX NEWS is saying. You know, FOX - the network that has a vested interest in distortion and outright lying when it comes to creating division in the Democratic ranks?

Neither you, or Fox, know what those two were talking about. Maybe they were talking about narrowing the debate field. Or maybe they weren't. But saying that Fox new's word on this is to be trusted, which is what you essentially are doing, is bullshit.

"Candidates, no matter how important or influential they perceive themselves to be"

Oh the irony....

I'm sorry, but I've a hard time taking the word of Fox News as gospel... :shrug:

I don't at all agree with what is being reported in this story, and I would hope that other DUers do not fall for this nonsense. I agree with several posters above who said that the alleged exchange is not really all that audible.