why Kucinich?

he seems a nice enough guy,its not personal, but I don't understand the hero worship he recieves here.

he polls second to last
he's been running for president for 4 years and he's second to last?


IF he was as swell as so many here believe he is, why has he been so unable to get much support from 75%(being generous) of DEMOCRATS?


If he is as terrific as he gets credit for being here at DU, Then he MUST be terrible at getting his message out to the larger nation.


I have no candidate and genuinely would like to hear an answer from some of DK supporters.

PS don't say its a media conspiracy

some influence on that particular situation?

and I think the same thing now.Except its dems like you making wild claims.


The corporate media doesn't care about politics.
All they care about is viewers and shareholders.
They go where they think the audience is.

3 hours every night while Phil Donahue gets canned with high ratings?

buy a frickin' clue

smart guy like you? I doubt it.


just a bunch of folks talking about it,it gets pretty gamey.

have you been paying attention to DU recently?

We've been outplayed by the right and now have to move that way to get the middle 20% of voters.

I voted for him in 2004 because I agree with him more than any other candidate. But I am also realistic to know the masses are ready to jump that far left in one leap.

It is the cultural trance.

Everyone *knows* he's not electable.
Ask yourself, 'How do they know this?'

Perhaps it's elves whispering in their ears while they sleep.
After all, once you lock occams razor in the medicine cabinet, anything is possible.
Hell, everyone knows saddam was responsible for 911 as well.

Damn those elves, anyway.

...who is running for president.

He also introduced a bill in Congress to create a Dept of Peace.

He is not beholden to corporate clutches. He managed Cleveland brilliantly. He wants to repeal NAFTA. I can't find one thing I don't like about him. He may have waffled on the abortion issue. But he has a list of other things that I like, but I"m making dinner right now. Excuses, excuses. I know.

If polls are so meaningful, then why even vote? My first rule is to ignore the hype. Polls are hype as far as I'm concerned. Numbers on a page which were created in a manner in which we have no information. And in fact may have literally been made up without any research. Do not trust polls. Hell, we can't even trust our own votes these days.

Didn't he barely survive a recall vote? Wasn't he voted out after only one term in office?

but, look at the reality...

Kucinich has been attacked for bankrupting the city, which, admittedly, he did.

HOWEVER, he did it to protect the interests of the citizens from the privatization of the electric system. He was blackmailed by the banks in the city - which were needed to extend credit to the city government - because the banks held a financial interest in the private electric company trying to take control of the electric system.

For more detail, read for yourself: http://www.dennis4president.com/about-dennis/

He certainly can be commended for standing by his principles.

Especially when he knew it meant his politcal career (supposedly). That's principle for you.

He went up against an existing mob. It's what he stood for that has me cheering. He disassembled a gang of criminals, essentially. That is another reason why I want to see him as president. Granted it's quite unreasonable considering how widespread that kind of thing is in our government.

I agree with your points, however, I don't know that I would say that he managed Cleveland brilliantly. Even he would concede some major stumbles and missteps during that tenure (In addition to the many courageous actions he undertook which he continues to discuss with pride).

That's not necessarily a bad thing, seeing as how he was vindicated on the major issue involved (refusal to sell the public utility). If you are looking for negatives from his mayoral years, you'd do better questioning his interpersonal skills.

Wasn't the Muny Light controversy after he survived the recall vote?

I can't give you a timeline. But it has been my impression that the difficulty with Muny Light was pretty much an ongoing issue during his mayoralty. The recall did have to do with the firing of the police chief, but, it seems to me, it was only the upfront issue--it was the most convenient one since DK had fired the chief on live tv. The firing was for "insubordination," and DK was, from what I have gleaned, faced with city staff and political elites who apparently expected him to be a dauphin because of his age. So, as is usual with municipal recall elections, the real issue was the loss of control felt by the local insiders. So, again, it gets back to DK's interpersonal skills and ability to play politics as expected. That is a valid concern to have regarding DK. And it is easy to be of two minds as to whether his damn-the-torpedoes approach is appropriate, and in what setting.

and won the recall. He also saved their municipal power company from being privatized. He stood up to the banks and corps that wanted to rid Cleveland of it's power generating utility. That's actually probably more than most mayors who've ever run cities can say.

He holds dear everything the Democrats value without compromise.

and he scares the hell out of the MSM.

to your general question. And I'm not an expert on either Kucinich and where he stands or the Polls and how they're run. I can only answer based on my opinion. And, quite honestly, I watch Kucinich speak, I see him standing next to other Candidates and I just cannot for the life of me see in him anything "Presidential". His mannerisms, the way he speaks ... none of it inspires in me a sense of confidence in him as a Leader, someone to trust. And, please, I'm not asking to get flamed here (as I've already admitted I know little about him and am going on gut instinct here), but I just don't see him as President.

Perhaps it's a failing on my part? I don't know. But Clinton, Obama, Edwards I could easily see stepping into those HUGE shoes and sitting in the Oval Office. Kucinich? Not so much.

Just my opinion, of course.

I just don't see Kucinich as "presidential". Nevertheless, I trust him, and believe he's right or on the right track on nearly every issue of importance. And not just right when it was popular to be so; right beforehand. He's ahead of the times. On the other hand I can see Hillary, Obama, and Edwards -- just to name the top three -- as President, and I don't trust a single one of them as far as I could throw them.

to power and is willing to beard the lion in his taxpayer funded lair, taking stands that are unpopular because people are chickenshit.

So, let's see; thoughtful, heroic, goes to the heart of the matter without a lot of cover-your-ass bullshit, takes stands that make sense in human terms rather than in terms of political gain, doesn't get caught making conflicting statements because he isn't conflicted on what works and what's right: maybe that's enough to grant him the title of serious contender for the presidency.

Unfortunately, his stature arouses jokes about applying for a job with the Keebler elves, as well as arousing a sensitivity to the "little man syndrome," which makes male humans so compensate for their own sad view of their own stature that they take unnecessary chances and run a "cocky" ace that irritates bigger people.

People just don't take him seriously, pity. He was right about every issue Kerry was wrong about it '04 and he is right about many of the issues that the current candidates are too cautious, too uninformed or too republican to show up with as genuine liberals or progressives. Because of a prejudice against little people, especially those who boldly jump up on the nearest box and hiss, he is not, in most people's minds, a serious contender.

But it is a media conspiracy. Oh, not the kind where a bunch of evil men sat together to draw up a plan. Just the usual kind where media elites, generally viewing politics from their own narrow class and occupational angles, have decided on what the important issues are. I don't have the hero worship for DK, and when I read some of the gushing from other DK supporters, I tend to rethink my support rather than be confirmed in it. But the fact of the matter is that there are no other candidates who consistently and often speak out in favor of the things that DK does. I support him simply because I want someone with a national platform to be saying those things, influencing the direction of the national political conversation. We need a government that is responsive to the needs of the people and not to the long-range political and financial aspirations of insiders, which is what we have now. Hillary comes off as running to represent insiders. Obama less so but still very keen not to upset them too much. I have a lot of hope for Edwards coming more firmly out on the side of the general public, and so my support for him is growing. (Yeah, I can support more than one candidate, and for entirely different reasons.) I want DK to stay in the race, to make his fellow Democrats uncomfortable by bringing up impeachment and getting out of NAFTA and the WTO. I want them to have to respond, instead of ignore those issues. I want them to justify their stances. I want the news media to give DK more opportunity to get on his soapbox. If I thought he could get any attention at all for his ideas while not running for president, I'd prefer he do that, but it's obvious that isn't going to happen.

Is the Kooch going to get the party's nomination? No, that isn't going to happen. And so, he rather obviously won't be president, either. And that's just as well, because he isn't the sort of person who would make a good executive officer, IMO. But he is the sort of person who the executive needs to hear out.

are choosing not to vote for him, then that is their problem. Look at the issues for yourself and you will see that DK is the best choice from the field we currently have. He has voted the way most DUers would want a Pol to vote pretty much across the board. He is a leader by example.

I loved his '04 speech at the Dem convention, and his personal story (he lived in a car for a time as a child) is inspiring IMO.

Why is he running so far behind? Well it is very early. I personally only recently decided that DK was the best candidate. My GF hasn't even thought about which candidate to choose yet! There is still time for DK to gain traction. The RW machine will smear our nominee as a radical lefty anyway, so we might as well have a legit progressive!

I will work for and vote for our eventual nominee and DK is the best choice IMO. (BTW I think we have a very strong field of candidates.)

Take away the faces, the style, the "star" factor that the media creates for certain candidates and just vote issues.

Faceless.

Just issues.

I'm willing to bet that Kucinich would poll much higher with the left--at least the real left and not so-called centrists.

But that's all muddied by the "rock star" "cult" factor game that's played out on television.

It's a phenomenon of the times we live in. Ugly musicians would have a much more difficult time making it these days despite their musical talents--while someone less talented who looks good, or can get the "buzz" thing going can still make it.

Some people reject the shiny, flashy cover that detracts from the real issues. There's a movement to get back to substance.

People true to the issues tend to lean toward Kucinich.

Others are easily distracted by shiny things.