Contrasting events: Kucinich and Obama

Both candidates visited my city this summer.

Kucinich's event was free and there was virtually no security at the doors. In fact, the doors to the auditorium stayed open throughout the event. No tickets necessary, free musical entertainment beforehand, and the overall feeling of a small town meeting. Mrs. Kucinich sat in the audience, not backstage. Several of the people who went to the microphone to ask questions were invited up to the stage to shake Kucinich's hand or even hug him.

Obama's event cost $25 and tickets were required. In addition, it was required to give the names of everyone attending. According to the newspaper, he "spent a little extra time posing and chatting with those who donated bigger bucks."

Nothing wrong with holding fundraisers. We all know no one can become president of this country without raising millions.

I just thought the contrast in styles and feel of these events was very interesting.

Well, it's obvious who doesn't stand a bat's chance in hell of winning.

Kucinich! There was no security because no one has to worry that he's going to win. ;-)

ought to be willing to meet those they represent on equal ground.

Perhaps he walks his talk. :shrug:

Having been to some events he attended, having had the opportunity to chat with him one-on-one more than once, I know that he treats those around him like real people he is working with, not like people he needs to protect himself from.

has nothing to do with recognizing that there are crazies out there.

You can recognize that there are "crazies" out there, as he did when under threat as Mayor of Cleveland. When there is need, he will use extra security.

That's a big chasm away from automatically assuming that the people who show up to talk to you are a threat, and separating yourself from them. Dennis Kucinich consciously chooses to see the best in people. It's part of who he is, and treating his supporters as less than that would not be in character.

Obama's event was a fundraiser. He holds free rallies also.

Aren't campaigns supposed to have donor names for disclosure purposes?

Even if one person bought the tickets, the names of all the people recieving those tickets had to be given. So it seems to me only one person is "donating". I could be wrong on that.

... between 'of, by and for the people' <DK> and 'of, by and for the donor' <the party-driven-candidates>.

I elected you, I'm not paying to see you. You work for me!

He stiffed the regular working class and students in Portland. I'd like to take my family to see Obama (and Clinton, and Edwards, etc.) but I sure can't afford $125 each time.

That wasn't the point. The point was the overall feel, the feeling of being welcome and open at Kucinich, and the more controlled feeling of Obama.

Obviously they both hold fundraisers.

Kucinich rally at a nearby small town: a smallish gathering of people with signs, buttons, bumper stickers, and enthusiasm; Dennis climbed up on a wall to speak, and then addressed questions one-on-one, and everyone got to shake his hand. I didn't see any noticable security presence, nor any "counter-protesters."

Kerry/Edwards rally just after the announcement of the VP choice: huge gathering, there was no entrance fee but we waited in line for hours to get in, then went through a major security checkpoint, and ended up way in the back where I could barely see. A whole line-up of local politicians gave intro speeches before we ever saw the people we'd actually come to see. Still, plenty of enthusiasm there too, and along the fringes some scattered groups of anti-abortion-rights loonies with desperately attention-seeking signs. The event ended with a shower of confetti, and I collected some of the pieces and kept them as mementos (I still have them).

Both events were positive experiences, but very different in theme and atmosphere.

Obama should've done a free event while in Portland, too.

the middle ground is a small dollar fundraiser, such as John Edwards having "Small Change For Big Change" events. He has had a couple of these in Florida. However, those are more like a rally and he doesn't come out and talk or take questions like he does at events in Iowa and New Hampshire. Even so, at the one in Orlando he did walk out through a front/public entrance and was absolutely mobbed. It was insane. There was no visible security.

In defense of Obama though, if he had a free event, I bet thousands would attend. If I understand correctly, Obama has received threats and is now under Secret Service protection. To my knowledge, no other candidate (except maybe Hillary) has received such threats. That protection adds a whole new level of complexity to events, and separates the candidates from the people. The candidates aren't snobs or distant on purpose, but have to put up that wall of protection.

I saw Obama in 2005, he came to a church in a predominantly African American community in Central Florida to help Senator Nelson. There were maybe a couple hundred people there and he did take some questions from the attendees. His speaking style was different from what we see on t.v. - less polished, more informal. He was definately adapting to his "audience" but it didn't seem fake.

I like to think of that as the kind of event Obama would want to have.

...and I want them to have that security. There are too many crazies out there these days - and while it's a bit disappointing to be so far back in the crowd that you can barely see, let alone have half a hope in Hades of exchanging a word with a candidate, I'd rather put up with that than risk letting someone with malicious intentions get too close to them. I'm not saying one kind of event is "better" or "lesser" than another - just different.

I would love to see Kucinich. Where is he campaigning at? He doesn't seem to campaign in Iowa. I've been looking for him.