What would it take for kucinich to win?

[Mass_Liberal]

I'd really like to know what kucinich voters think.


Peace:kick:

[Rainbowreflect]

1. Get more votes than the other candidates.

And that means getting the word out.

[Mass_Liberal]

4. I sort of meant in terms of states he would have to win.

[no name no slogan]

36. Very simple-- the states Gore won, plus Ohio, his home state

...and he'd still have some margin for error in the electoral college, too.

It's actually that simple.

[davhill]

70. Denial of a Great Reality

It is a fact that a large number of people who voted for Gore in 2000 are now secretly or openly glad Bush kicked some Arab butt after 9/11. They don't care that it was the wrong Arab butt. Any Democratic candidate must either win them back, or appeal to the thinking conservatives who have become disenchanted with Bush over the quagmire and deficit. The only ones I see able to do either are Graham or possibly Clark.

No Blank Check

[LWolf]

71. Sure.

I see that.

I also see plenty of disenfranchised voters on the left going elsewhere or not voting at all.

What % of the voting population actually votes?

Going after the conservative vote moves us further and further to the right. And marginalizes those of us on the left even further. I'd rather bring the left and the nonvoters back in than pander for conservative votes. Just me.

But that's because I'm one of those disenfranchised leftists.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. Become visible in the media

Even Farm Aid didn't get him plastered all over the news channels. :^(

Wish I could think of something he could do that would get him covered that wouldn't look gimmicky.


But grassroots is important too. I keep telling my friends and family to vote for Dennis in the primary. They really like him but fear that he's "unelectable". I told them that if everyone who thinks he is right for the job but buys that unelectable line votes for him, he'll win!

[rbnyc]

7. So, from your screenname...

...can I deduce that Dennis has brought you back to the party, or that you may not be planning to vote in the democratic primary if it weren't for Dennis?

I'm just wondering because I think it's important to realize that we're not just looking for votes from the "proven market". We need to bring more people in.

[GreenPartyVoter]

29. Well I've never been a Dem before

but I will be one for the day of the Primary here in Maine.

Actually, the Green platform allows for dual party membership, but I am not sure if my state ore the DNC also do. Otherwise I would register as both.

But as far as I can tell an awful lot of Greens like Dennis. And many of them HATE Bu$h. So, hopefully many Greens and liberal independents will lay aside their animosity toward the DLC and pull for Dennis. Thing is, if we don't get them to the primaries, then we have no chance of seeing him on the ballot.

THIS round is going to be the hardest one for Dennis, not the actual election where so many people who are sick of Bu$h will vote for any Dem cadidate.

[LWolf]

32. You're right.

The primary is the more difficult round in this fight.

Many of Dennis' supporters are independents or 3rd party candidates who are coming back to the democratic party for the express purpose of voting for him in the primary. I'm one of them; I've never belonged to a political party before.

The fact is that there is a huge pool of potential voters out there; the folks who never vote because they've given up believing in the process. They've given up hope. The folks who have drifted off to 3rd parties because they didn't feel represented by the DLC dems.

The Democrats have a choice to make right here; does the party continue to drift to the center/right to appeal to moderates and conservative dems, or back to the left? With the first choice, they can pick up disgruntled repubs. But they become more and more like repubs in the process. With the 2nd choice they can bring back their progressive base, or risk losing those on the left.

How about it, dems? Do you welcome a disenfranchised liberal like me into the party, or do you wish I'd stayed Independent?

Do you want us to stick around and support dems, or go back to where we came from?

[rbnyc]

3. The real question is...

...what do we have to do?

Kucinich is running a grassroots campaign. That's us. What he has to do is inspire us to act. What we have to do is our best. Have fundraising parties. Write letters to your friends and family explaining why you think it's important to Support Kucinich. Talk about Dennis to your neighbors, bank tellers, cab drivers, etc. Get people registered to vote. Those are just the most simple things I can think of.

It's viral advertising, baby.

EDIT: I wrote this before your edit when you asked what Kucinich would have to do to win. ;-)

[E_Zapata]

5. For the American public to evolve 20 years in 12 months.

To evolve into their conscience and sense of justice.

I don't think the public is quite ready to exchange the War on Terra rah rahs to "we must bring real justice to everything we think and do, individually and as a nation."

[diamondsoul]

10. They already are, it just scares the *insert favorite function here*

out of them. People want it, they just have no faith or hope left. No kidding that's what I see and hear all over.

What would it take, state by state? I don't know except people who value his goals getting UP and yelling he's the man. And he is the man.

[blm]

17. An evolved electorate. You said it.

Too bad the corporate media won't allow it.

Still...fight on whichever way we can to bring his words to others.

[Langis]

6. Spend more time campaigning

He needs to start missing more votes, that the only way to do it. Put his current Job on the back burner and get out and campain! It's not like the republicans have the majority in both houses, and we need ever democratic vote we can get.

Seriously though, I think he needs to get more face time, so people know what he stands for. I didn't really know what he was about until I heard the first 2 debates, and I totally support him now.

[rbnyc]

8. Hi Langis.

Welcome to DU.

:hi:

[twilight]

9. also donating to his campaign

that helps a lot!!

http://www.kucinich.us

[Mairead]

28. Donating might be the single most important thing we can do by ourselves

So anyone who has a job and can afford it, please be generous!

[mndemocrat_29]

11. To gain more seniority in the House over the next eight years

And run in 2012.

[lams712]

12. A Media that gives fair coverage....

...but that will NEVER happen. The media has annointed Howard Dean as THE candidate of the progressive wing and has all but written off Kucinich. Until he gets some fair coverage, he won't move drastically in the polls. So much for a "liberally-biased media" if that were true, Kucinich would be a top-tier candidate.

[sandnsea]

13. Idealism to Realism

When I think about it, his views are cut to the core realistic.

The cost of health care is bankrupting this country. Why don't you have enough tax dollars to fund local projects? The health care premiums for civil servants combined with the health costs going to Medicaid and other county health programs. Business is being hurt by health care, part of the reason we're losing jobs overseas is health care. It's realistic, not idealistic. We have to get profit out of health care.

Is NAFTA hurting American jobs? Yes. If bilateral trade worked better for everybody in the world, go back to it. That's realisic, not idealistic.

If you don't want a world forever at war costing us trillions of dollars, you better start getting serious about peace. Realistic.

Maybe if he changed his message to cut out the pie-in-the-sky millionaire bullshit and look at your life the way it really is, he'd appeal to more people. Realism, not idealism.

Just a thought.

[genius]

14. Kucinich is a centrist who just needs to get his mesage out.

The right wing media is backing the right-wingers like Dean currently because they want the race to be Bush vs Bush clone. However, the word is speading about Kucinich. He is the one candidate who really cares about real peple and about what they want. It will take a lot of people dedicated to the future of America. I believe there are enough people concerned about the future of America to make him the winner.

[ButterflyBlood]

65. Dean's a complete Bush clone huh?

is that why he wants to repeal the whole Bush tax cut?

and yes, by calling him an ultraliberal and next McGovern the media sure is pumping up Dean. You Dean haters have no sense of logic.

oh yes, Kucinich a centrist? ahahahahahaha

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

15. A miracle.

Unfortunately.

[AP]

16. I hate to say this, but I think if there were a RFK'68 sort of scenario

with a front running progressive other than Kucinich getting assassinated, I could see how Kucinich might turn the whole election into a referendum on the creeping fascism in America, and could win the election.

Although the velvet coup of 2000 and Wellstone's death didn't raise many eyebrows, I think the mysterious death or outright murder of a Democratic frontrunner might cause Americans to really start asking questions.

[Mass_Liberal]

18. people aren't really responding to the question

what STATES does kucinich plan to win, and what is his strategy in that arena?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

20. He needs 268 Electoral votes.

Any combination will do.

His strategy: Get more votes.

[AP]

30. And I'm saying he won't win any states unless something dramatic

happened which made people warm to his message.

[no name no slogan]

41. Respectfully,

that's bullshit. His message is the same message that has been part of the Democratic platform since the 1960s. Why is that so hard to see?

Seriously though, he could easily win all the "blue states" (traditionally democratic), and probably win a red state or two, as well.

After all, Kucinich is a DEMOCRAT. He believes in almost all of the same things the other candidates do. He is not some martian that landed here from outer space.

Given the choice, would staunch Democrats abandon the party in 2004 to vote for Bush? I highly doubt that.

[no name no slogan]

39. See above

All he needs is the states Gore won in 2000, and his home state of Ohio. I think that's the easiest way to put it.

[renie408]

50. So who do we sacrifice?

[DJcairo]

19. ...a miracle.

[sandnsea]

21. Oooh, Oregon

for one. You didn't ask which STATES in your original question.

I really don't know what states he would have a chance in at this point. I still think he'd have to alter his message just a tad to begin to be taken seriously. He can't even consider winning a state at this point I don't think.

[lcordero]

22. an honest election

I think that he will get "diebolded".
I've already talked to my mom and brother about him and they are going to vote for him.

[JohnKleeb]

31. got my folks supporting him too

[RowWellandLive]

23. He cannot win

under any circumstances.

[CoffeePlease1947]

24. He gets elected to Speaker and the President and VP die on the same

day. Either that or he is put in a time lock for 50 years and runs in 2054. Then maybe people would be at his level of thinking. Other than this. Not much of a chance.

Mike

[Tim The Enchanter]

25. Drawing a line in the sand

Kucinich represents what the Democratic Party is supposed to be about. I don't personally know anyone who could really argue that,

But he represents everything the Bush Administration isn't. So many Americans have been conditioned to seek "protection" from this president that, if you draw a line in the sand, not enough people will see the truth through the fear to embrace someone like Dennis. We would probably need a depression to arouse America's heart again. Post-911 America is so steeped in paranoia, I think we need a buffer Democrat administration to precede Kucinich.

It's still early, so, although I am currently supporting Dean, I am keeping my eyes wide open, and I'll wait too see how the race evolves.

[Desertrose]

26. a buffer Democrat ....

thats an interesting thought.....
but it seems to me that a "buffer Democrat" is not really a true dem...

again IMHO- idon't think we can afford someone who is another side of the corporate coin...we just don't have the luxury of time...its not a dem/repub thing as much as it is a have/have not thing....an the haves are certainly making sure they keep what they got while the rest of us fall farther & farther down...

... but yes I know this thread is about what would it take for DK to win...I really feel it he gets some media coverage & keeps up the grassroots-which BTW from what I hear...is really picking up steam bigtime..that it CAN be done.

I don't want to "misunderestimate" the power of awakened Americans!!!

Peace
DR

[whirlygigspin]

27. he needs a lot of things

1-for the rest of the dems to keep tearing at Dean
2-Ralph Nader as his VP
3-to stop screaming
4-to court the dissafected votes from the other camps
5-Bernie Sanders
6-more money
7-an apperance on Letterman
8-changed position on Nafta

[Lydia Leftcoast]

33. "Buffer Democrat"?

Alas, I fear that four years of a half-assed (only half a donkey?) Democratic president who continued to act as if his main task was not scaring the Republicans would only convince voters more than ever that there is no difference between the two parties.

On the other hand, a Kucinich administration might run into the problem portrayed in the Masterpiece Theater drama of about 15 years ago, "A Very British Coup," that is, deliberate sabotage by the elites leading to chaos and then a military takeover.

But I'm sure that Kucinich has been in Washington long enought to realize this.

For me, the most frustrating obstacle to Kucinich gaining any headway is the lack of media coverage. It's the self fulfilling prophecy part of the "horse race syndrome." Kucinich is not doing well in the official polls, so they don't cover him. If a newspaper article is about Iraq, it acts as if only Howard Dean was opposed to the war. If the article is about health care, they compare Dean's, Kerry's, and Gephardt's plans and don't even mention Kucinich's. (I guess it would scare the insurance companies almost as much as they scare us.)

Anyone who isn't Kerry, Gephardt, Dean, or Lieberman is invisible.

That may change. I think Kucinich will do better in Iowa than the polls indicate, and that will earn him more press coverage--maybe. But on the whole, anyone who is too different from the conventional wisdom has an uphill battle getting noticed.

[JohnKleeb]

34. I feel simliar

For example I read an article about the patriot act, and you know what Dennis wasnt mention and he is the only candiate to vote against it and he wants to repeal it. You are so right about that, seriously the frigging media should mention him. Christ all mighty, I think that is what gets me the most angry.

[Tim The Enchanter]

35. "Buffer" the Repbublican Slayer

By "buffer" I mean more along the lines of Clinton. Lieberman would be unacceptable. Clinton went in quite the centrist, but many knew his potential. He greased the wheels for a lot of progressive legislation. If he didn't drop the ball by putting himself in a position to be lynched by the GOP (that's my opinion anyway), Gore might be in the White House now. I know Gore did win, but he could have REALLY won (a lot of was his own fault). Who knows- 911 may have never happened. Maybe our country would not be in this fog of right-wing fear. Maybe someone like Dennis would seem like the right choice for the U.S. after a Gore administration. The idea of Kucinich threatens "the powers that be" and right now things will be manipulated to keep him "unelectable". I don't want to sound paranoid, but we have a voice as long as it doesn't interfere with the imperialism of the U.S.

I do want my rotten tooth pulled out, but I would like some novocaine first.

[no name no slogan]

37. destined to failure

IMHO, "buffer" Democrats like Clinton and the DLC are the reason that the party is in such a sorry state. Look at the last decade: we lost control of the Senate, the House (after 38 YEARS IN THE MAJORITY), and didn't win a presidential election with a majority popular vote.

It's PRECISELY the policies of these "electable" Democrats that has brought the party to its present Republican-lite status. The Democrats still refuse to be "for" anything-- they're just kind of against the Repubs-- BUT NOT COMPLETELY AGAINST.

Given a CLEAR CHOICE, the voters will vote for a Democrat. Look what happened to the wishy-washy House and Senate members up for re-election in 2002: most of them lost their seats, while the true liberal democrats all won, even in traditionally Republican districts.

[JohnKleeb]

40. being told to wait reminds me of a lyric of U2's bloody sunday

"how long must we sing this song"
I forget exactly how it goes.
That said thats one of my favorite songs.
I am sick of being told to wait, this is the moment people, it belongs to everyone of us.

[no name no slogan]

42. Good analogy, John

I'm not sure if you know what the song's about, but it's a good analogy. Bloody Sunday happened on January 30, 1972 in Derry (aka "Londonderry"), Northern Ireland, when British soldiers opened fire on peaceful, unarmed protestors, killing fourteen people. To this day, nobody in the British armed forces has been brought to justice for this act.

I'm a few years older than you (I'm 34), but we've ALL been waiting too long for this. We honestly have a chance at changing things for the better this time-- the best chance we've had since 1968.

[JohnKleeb]

43. its about bloody sunday

I know about it. I have seen the movie. BTW I find the fact no british forces have never been tried outraging. I am part Irish myself and seeing the movie which was great but so sad. Since '68 you mean Bob Kennedy, him and Wellstone are two of my greatest heroes along with Kucinich and of course I like FDR and Truman. I know what the song is about and thanks though, so how long must we sing this song.

[Tim The Enchanter]

51. Americans are too comfortable

I suppose my faith in this country has been faltering. I know too many people who are comfortable in this gluttonous economy of mindless consumerism, and they are content with this administration. Why should anyone fight back? We've got Wal-Mart, SUV's and DVD players to keep us cozy. Why should we pull together for each other? We're not in a depression. Why should we question the government? That would be unpatriotic. The scary thing is that the comfortable people I know are basically good people. It's like Invasion of the Body Snatchers. I am horrified when I find that someone I care about begins voicing support for the actions of GW and his cronies. I know that they are not too blame- there is a mountain of money invested in brainwashing the public-at-large. Where is this country's soul? Bought and sold in a service economy that is teetering on the exploitation of the third world.

I suppose I am suggesting that, unless people have their backs against a wall, they are not going to truly stand up to this administration, a bring in someone like Kucinich. Of course WE would, but, believe it or not, there is an alarming number of people (even those with leanings to the Left) who just don't see how imperative it is that we take this country back. The "liberal media" has a knack of keeping the masses in the clutches of fear while at the same time lulling them into a lifless slumber. How do you roll this country's fat a* off the couch?

On the other side...
My uncle is a missionary priest, and he works in very poor ethnically diverse community. When I asked him if there was any evidence of political voicings in the community, he said that they were more concerned about being able to eat, and that election politics were of no concern (at least at this time). It's so bad there that Columbians are going back to Columbia where they and their families are constantly threatend by the drug lords. How do you mobilize the have-not's who are so f* over they have no use for listening to these politians?

Well, that is how I am feeling, and why I suggested a "buffer" Democrat.

[LuminousX]

38. Not a DK supporter

But if he wants to 'get into the mix' he needs to be more Alpha Male.

[LWolf]

44. Define that, please.

I'm trying to consider your input, but it occurs to me that my definition of or interpretation of alpha male might not be the same as yours or the general public.

For me, an alpha male is aggressive. Has to be in control, has to be on top of the pile/pack. Has to continuously prove his abundant manhood. Abusive. Likes to fight. Depends on winning fights to boost/prove that manhood.

I realize that my interpretation is biased...but it is based on my experiences. What do you mean by alpha male?

[JohnKleeb]

45. I think it means the sterotypical male I dunno

[LuminousX]

46. Fair Enough

The way I define Alpha Male (a term that also applies to women since I'm going far afield from the zoological term).

When the AM is in a room, people automatically defer to him. When he talks, people naturally quiet down. AMs are aggressive, usually Type-A personalities. Bill Clinton is the epitomy of the AM. You may dislike him, but you defer to him. You may not trust him personally, but you trust him to make good decisions for the group.

DK needs to be a bit more bombastic. He shouldn't end sentences with "I mean, hello!"

Every politician has the ability to be an AM so it isn't beyond Dennis, it is just something he needs to do.

[LWolf]

47. Ah...ok.

Funny, I can relate that description to a herd of horses better than to people. In a herd, there is an alpha; a boss who continously proves his/her dominance with teeth and hooves. Aggressive. The rest of the herd avoids the alpha. There is also what I refer to as a passive leader; an oxymoron if there ever was, but I'm not sure how else to describe it. No teeth, hooves, or intimidation. Relatively quiet. But the herd gathers around him/her, defers, and follows.

I realize we don't use the term "passive" leader to describe humans. But the leader who draws followers without effort; without threat...with the strength of who they are. Maybe I'm still not totally with you here, but I'm trying!

When you meet Dennis in person, or see him in a small group setting on tv, etc., he is very charismatic. I don't know about deference; I don't defer to anyone. I never have. Not even as a child. (My poor sainted mother...)I have learned to cooperate, but I don't defer.

Dennis does draw people to him. And that part of his demeanor hasn't been as readily apparent in the debates. I think that's a key; to get the real man, the in-person persona, out to a wide national audience.

[LuminousX]

48. I agree with you description of Dennis

He is a leader. All of these candidates are. Dennis has to be to do his job and get re-elected. He is now being compared to a different group of people than his opponents he faced for Congress.

I strongly agree with the 'passive leader' element, but in a heated campaign that doesn't come across on TV and in print.

The question is what can Dennis do to win. He fundamentally is on the right track. I rarely hear people say he is wrong on the issues. There must be another reason why he isn't getting that spark. I say it is this AM quality. In a crisis situation, I just wouldn't think to natural turn to Dennis to lead the way. That is just me, I guess, as I would be more naturally drawn to the Kerry/Gephardt/Dean types.

[diamondsoul]

49. I would be drawn to the Kucinich "type"

whatever that means. To me it means peaceful, more inclined to negotiate than attack, more likely to solve problems without battle.

Hey call me kooky, but that's WAY more Alpha than anything I've seen elsewhere.

[diamondsoul]

52. Editing window expired

and when I read this post over morning coffee it struck me as a little....pissy sounding. Sorry to anyone I came across that way to.

To clarify my meaning a bit, I think I'm inclined to follow a leader who considers the needs and well-being of everyone who may be affected by his/her choices. From my vantage-point, Kucinich is that leader. Only once has he cast a vote on an issue that I thought was a bad decision, aside from his previous PL stance, and when I read the text of the bill I couldn't fault him for it. That was the authorization of force in response to the 9-11 attacks.

The thing about that bill was that there was no country specified, no mention of all out war, and no time frame. The sole question was "Is it just to use military force to respond to this event?". Given that the vote was taken within days of the attacks and that information was still being gathered about who was responsible, I don't blame him for casting a yes vote. The way the bill was written it left a lot of room for hope that Bush still had some shred of integrity left, and I suspect many of our legislators were banking on that hope at that point.

In any case one argument against Kucinich has been that he's "soft on defense" and that vote, imo, proves otherwise. He was prepared to use force to defend this country once and I don't think that would chance if he were elected President. That'd be rather stupid!

To the original question posed in this thread, I haven't a clue what states it would take to elect him. In a general over-all situation, he needs all those pissed off, fed-up non-voters to turn out at the polls and select him in the Primaries.

[LWolf]

53. I agree with you here.

In considering the work that needs to be done to win the primary, I think public persona is important. I want people to see beyond the surface to the real man and the issues underneath. For many voters, who may never get a chance to meet him in person, and who may make their decisions based on sound bites, what they perceive when they see Dennis interact with his opponents may be the deciding factor. I've met him. I've listened to him speak in person. He embodies what I want in my president. I've also heard the responses of people who don't agree; mainly responses to his debate appearances. The poster made presentation an issue which could improve Dennis' election chances. I tend to agree with you on the alpha thing; negotiation and problem solving without conflict is a more powerful kind of leadership. I think that's what the poster was saying about alpha; an image of power. That's what people need to see when he speaks/debates on national tv.

[diamondsoul]

54. I do see him as powerful when he speaks or debates.

I think that's what amazes me, that others describe him as "shrill", etc.

I had never heard of him until we had invaded Iraq. I remember shortly after finding out who he is, there was a debate on Children's welfare and Education, I think. (for some reason I can never get that exact title down) By that time I'd read the campaign site and seen his positions and I wanted to see how he was in a debate, so I made a point of catching it. I have to admit laughing when I first saw him on the screen. He really did look like an elf to me. When he started talking, I stopped laughing. I saw a confident man in spite of his lack of recognition. To make him even more impressive he was speaking firmly and determinedly on subjects that are of great importance to me. The Iraq war and how would affect the children, education funding, the need to make sure our children don't have to go hungry, cold or anything else, and how we can afford to care for our people a whole lot better than we do.

He was a force to be reckoned with that night, and I think he continues to be even now, maybe even more so. In that debate, I saw a leader. More than that, I saw a potential President that I could be secure following.

*on edit, typos

[JohnKleeb]

55. I hate seeing him called shrill too

You really ought to see him speak to crowds, hes magnifacant.

[Northwind]

56. For Kucinich to win

There would have to be a terrible plague. All the Dem candidates would have to die, as well as all potential Republican candidates. In addition, most (like 90%) of the American population would have to die in order for his supporters to end up as a majority.

And then he still might lose.

[diamondsoul]

57. Yeah, we get it already.

YOU think he's a loser.

Meanwhile you are incredibly predictable and dull. Every time any thread starts about Kucinich getting the nomination, you have to tell us all what a loser he is.:eyes: :boring:

edit for typo

[Northwind]

62. Never once have I called Kucinich a "loser".

But no way, ever, period, no discussion possible could he win the White House in '04.

I am just trying to drive a point home that Kucinich supporters cannot seem to grasp, and that is that he is not going to be President. This is not a matter of opinion, it does not depend on "getting the message out," nor is it a result of a conspiracy. The simple fact of the matter is this: Kucinich does not represent anything within a billion miles of a majority of American voters. Period.

[diamondsoul]

63. And the message is identical to what I said.

Every single time anyone discusses Kucinich getting the nomination you have to poke your nose in and tell us he's a loser.

Here's what we hear in each and every one of your posts with Kucinich's name in it or referencing him-

*Hey all you delusional Kucinich supporters, you're backing a loooser!

Lather, rinse, repeat.

No, NW we won't accept your pronouncement and YOU don't determine what the majority of voters want. Accept it and get over it.

[LWolf]

64. Ok. So a majority of American voters:

*don't think everyone should have equal access to health care
*don't think working americans should make a living wage
*don't think everyone should have equal access to a full education
*don't think we ought to negotiate, build bridges and partnerships, and work as partners in the global comminity rather than sending in the guns blazing whenever we have a point to make.
*don't think we ought to be less dependent on foreign oil for our energy needs
*don't think we ought to fight the privatization of basic services like utilities, education, etc.
*don't think we ought to be able to count on social security
*don't want to repeal the patriot act
*don't support Roe V Wade
*don't favor small farms and businesses over corporate monopolies

Because these are all things that Dennis represents. I could go on. But why?

Your statement is not fact. It is your opinion. We don't share it. That doesn't make our opinion any less valid than yours.

Again...don't you have anything more constructive to do with your time? Trying to pass of a patronizing opinion as fact is not exactly going to change our minds. Why bother?

[Northwind]

66. Actually

The majority of Americans DO most likely support all of those things.

But if you think that elections have anything to do with issues then you are too far gone in your stupidity for me to help you.

[Desertrose]

68. You sure do have a way with words,NW

and gee, thanks so much for judging all Kucinich supporters as stupid....

Guess you know how to win friends,eh?

Yes I realize you are trying to get your opinion through to all of us "too far goners" and we should no doubt be grateful for your enlightening prose, but somehow...it just sounds a tad ...uhm...whats the word...oh yeah... condescending?


Peace....
DR

[Northwind]

72. Dearest

I was addressing only on person, not making a statement about all Kucinich supporters. :P

[LWolf]

69. Remember all those pleas for unity/civility?

Less flaming here at DU? Focus on issues and say what's good about your candidate instead of bashing and attacking the supporters of other candidates? Well, guess what. I've tried. I really have. I've avoided flame fests. I've focused on saying good things about my candidate, and have not criticized other candidates, except to say that I disagreed with their platform on one point or another. Remember Clinton at the steak fry?

I'm sorry, but I draw the line at being called stupid because I think an election ought to be about issues. The alert and ignore buttons are my friends in this instance.

[Northwind]

73. Sure, I remember them

Do you remember my responses where I said, "fuck all that, politics is dirty business?" You want civility, then stick to the hoary old rule of never discussing religion or politics. Otherwise, get ready to get dirty.

[jiacinto]

58. Heaven and Earth to collide

with Hell finally freezing over.

[Desertrose]

59. Gosh Carlos...you & Northwind there

ought to get together...start a thread of your own & see if you can outsnark each other!

Really ...I don't see the necessity for your continued negative comments about Kucinich...like Diamondsoul said..."we get it already"....

can't you boys go find something more constructive to do?? :)

Peace
DR

[ButterflyBlood]

60. he'd have to

invent a mind control formula and dump it into all major sources of water in the US. anyone who drinks the water would become a zombie who would automatically vote for him. that's about the only scenario i can think of.

[Northwind]

61. I almost like that one better than mine

:evilgrin:

[davidinalameda]

67. has anyone said hell freezing over

seriously, he has about the same chance as a snowball in hell of winning the nomination

he would be much better going back to Congress

as would Edwards, and as much as I hate to say this, Graham.