If Kucinich has so little ordinary appeal (as claimed by some here)

[Mairead]

then why is the establishment working so hard to silence and disparage him?

Until the resurgence of the women's movement in the '70s, women were excluded from the more well-paying jobs by laws supposedly passed for our protection, because we 'couldn't' do certain things. That house of cards started to collapse when women started pointing out that if we really can't do certain types of work, then there's no need for man-made laws--physical law will be enough to keep us out.

To me it seems clear that the treatment being inflicted on Kucinich has the same sort of fraudulent basis: it's the realisation among the owning class that his policies do have widespread appeal among the proles that makes it so necessary to keep him silenced and out of the limelight.

[Nederland]

1. Question

What makes you think the establishment is working so hard to silence him?

[redqueen]

2. Why did CNN suddenly stop reporting the percentages

in Washington and Maine?

For the 10 previouc primaries, they reported on the bottom of the screen, all night, all the candidates and their votes and percentages.

Suddenly, when Dennis comes in third or second, that's no longer the way they do it.

You think it's coincidence?

[Nederland]

6. No

I think its a natural result of the fact that the primary process is further along and these later contests don't matter as much. If you look back at previous elections years, I'm sure you would find exactly the same pattern of reporting--later primaries get less press.

[redqueen]

12. So you're telling me that in previous years

the pre-Super Tuesday primaries were ignored?

They show the first 10, then stop, then continue with the Super Tuesday field?

Seriously?

[Nederland]

18. Super Tuesday is Different

Super Tuesday is different because so many delegates are at stake. Washington and Maine don't merit much coverage because they are small.

Tell you what. If on Super Tuesday we see CNN ignore states that Kucinich did well in I'll admit that they are biased. Fair enough?

[redqueen]

21. Sure, fair enough.

But I would still like to go back and check the coverage of the later states. I don't get why AZ, DE, MO, NM, ND, OK and SC were so much more pivotal than WA and MI, and later ME (which occurred 4 and 5 days later, respectively).

[Protagoras]

7. At least in maine

The caucus system had until Feb 15th to report the precincts. By the end of the night of Feb 8th close to 90% had been finalized but the remainder was still out. However the numerical results had already determined the delegate count regardless so the fact that CNN didn't update their page beyond that point is sort of irrelevant.

I can't speak for Washington...maybe someone who lives there or has read up on their reporting process can clarify it.

[vision]

47. Maine is still at 80% reporting

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/states/ME/

It has DK at 16% with 0 delegates. This seems odd since elsewhere if somebody gets over 15% they usually get at least one.

[evil_orange_cat]

3. I agree, if that were the case, he wouldn't have been invited to LA debate

Kucinich is a fringe candidate, but does serve a purpose because he can bring up third-rail issues because he has no chance of winning...

I wish Kucinich would bring up the drug war.

[no name no slogan]

33. He already has

visit his web site-- he has a whole page devoted to it. I sure don't see the two Johns talking about it, or any of the other candidates for that matter.

[Mairead]

5. I'll presume you're not serious

because plenty evidence has been offered over the past year, beginning with Nagourney's pronunciamento, issued a mere 2 weeks after DK declared, that DK is not a credible or serious candidate.

If you really can't remember, then I suggest you review the DU, NYT, WP, LAT and other archives.

[Nederland]

8. There is also plenty of evidence

that DK choses to not appear in venues that are hostile to him.

Its hard to listen to a candidate complain about lack of media coverage while simultaneously turning down a full hour of prime time media coverage on Hardball. The excuse he gave for this is that Chris Matthews was mean to him. I suppose he expected to run in a General Election full of right-wing media whores that were "nice"?

[redqueen]

10. Fair because of his response to Hardball? Really?

He turns down one hardly-watched show and to you that justifies his treatment?

And nice mischaracterization of his reason. It was not because Matthews was 'mean' (but I do agree that by using that term you get bonus points for belittling Kucinich as 'weak' or 'not a fighter').

It was because he correctly named Matthews' whore-fest for what it was. Unprofessional and unproductive.

Do you really think any of Matthews' viewers is going to vote for the Democrat? Really?

[Nederland]

16. Response

Your response is precisely why DK has failed to win a single primary and has failed to capture the attention of more than a handful of hard core activists. The attitude that you present is that because Hardball is a "whore-fest" Kucinich need not appear on it. The attitude is that because Hardball's viewer are to the center-right, he need not try to appeal to them. It therefore appears that DK's strategy is one of preaching to the converted. As his electoral non-success demonstrates, this strategy doesn't work.

[IrateCitizen]

19. Hardball is a complete nonfactor -- nobody watches it

The average nightly primetime viewing of MSNBC is only about 380,000 people. It's the lowest rated network between FoxNews (1.2 million) and CNN (800K).

Dennis's not going on Hardball is a complete nonfactor. If he had refused to go on, say, Meet The Press or Face The Nation, it would be a different story.

But Hardball? Please. Even if he HAD shown up, it's not like anybody even would have noticed, because nobody watches the show!

[redqueen]

20. The problem is that most of the electorate is so jaded they don't care

It's not that he need not appear on it, it's that it would be counterproductive for him to appear on it.

He does appeal to center-right voters (have you not noticed he's the ONLY candidate not alienating them straight out of the gate?). He just doesn't see the need to do it in such a self-destructive way.

All his electoral success demonstrates is that the media has done a brilliant job of ensuring that the majority knows little to nothing about him.

[no name no slogan]

32. Let me tell you about last weekend in Minnesota

Dennis Kucinich toured our state and drew 4,500 people to several events. His largest event, at Northrup Auditorium on the U of MN campus on Saturday, drew over 2,300 people. He also appeared at events in the northern part of the state, as well as at a morning event in St. Paul and a noontime event in Northfield, MN, at the college Paul Wellstone taught at.

John Edwards had an event here at the same time as the Northrup event, across town at a union hall in St. Paul. His event drew nearly 2,000 people. Do you know what the newspapers and radio reported?

"Edwards draws almost 2,000 to afternoon event, Kucinich draws 100 to St. Paul morning event."

Talk about dropping the ball! This same story went out to the wires and was repeated throughout the nation, with NO mention of Kucinich's bigger rally that afternoon. The paper had no excuse for missing this event, as it had even published DK's statewide schedule in the paper the previous day!

The Minneapolis newspaper is "making it up" to the campaign in a small way, by devoting its reader representative column this Sunday to its (mis)coverage. However, it would have been much better if they had actually covered the story correctly in the first place.

[scarletwoman]

40. Even the Lou Gelfand "correction" is condescending

http://www.startribune.com/stories/782/4634286.html

Reporting attendance figures for a presidential candidate's speech is what nourishes both the candidate and his supporters, maintains John Sherman, a Dennis Kucinich believer. (emphasis mine)

What's with this "believer" bit? I've already sent an email to Lou, thanking him for at least (belatedly) publishing the Northrop numbers. But I also (politely enough, I hope) called him on his choice of words:

Me: Kucinich "believer"?!? What an odd choice of words. Why not "supporter" or "campaign worker"? It's a political campaign, not a religion.

Maybe I'm being over sensitive (am I?). But that use of the word "believer" felt patronizing and condescending to me. It just seems like one more subtle way of marginalizing the Kucinich campaign.

One thing for sure, this is a real test of the grassroots. I sure hope we can pull out a big surprise on Tuesday here in Minnesota!

sw

[eridani]

45. Same crap in Seattle

Dean fills Town Hall to 1500 capacity on Monday with enthusiastic supporters, and Kucinich does the same on Wednesday. Not mentioned, except the A&E weekly referred to it as a cult meeting.

[scarletwoman]

46. "Cult"?!?! Oh that's cute...

That's pretty damn low, even by the degraded standards that pass for "conventional wisdom". Bleeeeccchhhhh!

sw

[dpbrown]

49. The Strib reporter Q&Aed DK "while he was waiting to go out at Northrop"

That little tidbit of information was in one of the opening paragraphs of the Q&A with Dennis in the Op Ex section today (Sunday).

So all the "excusing" and "I'm sorry I didn't check the numbers with the campaign" is just more squat, because the reporter was there with Dennis.

Along with Gelfand's "believer" disrespect, this makes the case for complete media bias against Dennis.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Kanary]

50. Do you have a link?

Thanks for that info.... makes the case, indeed.

Kanary, mad as hell and not gonna take it anymore

[scarletwoman]

55. Here's the link to the Q & A article

http://www.startribune.com/stories/562/4636435.html

Q&A: Dennis Kucinich

Published February 29, 2004

Editor’s note: Last weekend, as he was preparing to speak to an estimated 2,500 people in Northrop Auditorium, Rep. Dennis Kucinich spoke backstage with Commentary Editor Eric Ringham about his race for the Democratic presidential nomination. The following is adapted from their conversation:

Q A speaker on stage just now quoted the first President Bush as saying the American way of life was nonnegotiable, and said that, by contrast, you’d be willing to put an “indefensible way of life” on the table. How do you react to that?

A I think the issue really is about sustainability. We can sustain our economy if we make a transition to renewables. We can sustain our world if we make a transition to peace. We can sustain the health of our people if we make a transition to a not-for-profit system — universal, single-payer, Medicare for all. We can sustain global fair trade if we move away from NAFTA and the WTO, which gives corporations the ability to drive down wages.

(lots more...)

sw

[scarletwoman]

53. Yeah, I read that piece this afternoon, had the same thought!

I also noticed that the interviewer wrote that there were 2500 people at Northrop -- a bigger count than the 2300 that the Kucinich "believers" have been touting! I thought that was kind of interesting.

Anyway, it's rather telling -- they had a reporter ON THE SCENE at Northrop, but they couldn't be bothered to publish those numbers alongside Edwards', even though both events took place at the SAME DAMN TIME! Disgusting!

On the other hand, I DO see it as a small blessing that this article made it on the front page of the OPEX section today. Closer to Tuesday, fresher in people's minds, maybe. (Doing the hopeful thing here... ;-) )

Peace,
sw

(edited for typo)

[jpgray]

4. This is a chicken or the egg question

Is Kucinich marginalized in the media because his candidacy and stances have little public support? Or do his candidacy and stances have little public support because he is marginalized in the media?

:D

You can't prove either, so one can only pick a side and interpret things the way one wants to. My personal belief is that if everyone heard Dennis out, he would win this election (and the GE) in a landslide.

[Rainbowreflect]

9. I agree with you.

My husband is a perfect example. He read up on all the candidate and thought is was either Edwards or Clark for him. When we heard Dennis speak in person he changed his mind.
Now my husband is no where near as far left as I am and he said he had never been so moved by anyone before.

[redqueen]

13. Just another reason we Kucitizens are so intractable.

:)

[MuseRider]

15. My story is similar.

My husband was on the Dean bandwagon for so long (it was the Dr. supporting the Dr. thing) and he refused to look at Kucinich. After he could not keep up with the changes and inconsistancies with Dean he went to Clark. Then he went to Edwards/Kerry. No matter what I did he would give Kucinich no creedence what so ever. That has changed because he finally heard the message, I had barraged him with it. He will caucus with me for DK and we are solid and not moving from this. It took some time but in the long run he could not refute that DK was solid, had integrity and the best, most consistant message out there. The thing is, I had to do it. He was consumed by media stories for the others but until I gave him everything I had saved from the DK campaign he knew very little about the man or his message.

[corporatewhore]

11. he appeals to oldschool cons and libertarians

i volunteer with them down here in texas they like it that hw is against nafta/wto and the patriot act

[Chicago Democrat]

14. Kucinich appeared shrill because of his enthusiasm

and genuine conviction. He can come off as rude. The Senators last night were polite in their Senatorial way; that's why they're ahead also they are really great moderate Democrats.

Since Kerry or Edwards are both really great I feel like its OK to vote for Kucinich.. I will probably vote for him, if for no reason than to influence the platform and the nominee. I honestly can't decide between Kerry and Edwards; they are both so "commercial". I've been a far left liberal all my life and have had to vote commercial all my life because it matters so much.

I feel my vote always counts, even though that's insane. So I'm gonna vote for the geeky guy who has the left wing position. (Like voting for Paul Simon in 1992) If Kucinich acted more like the late Sen. Paul Simon he would do better. Also Dennis is still young. I think he's getting better from the experience of this campaign. Kucinich is like Sen. Dick Durbin has also been 100% right on votes (unlike Kerry or Edwards who I give a 90% favorable rating)

Kucinich's performance last night on the CNN debate was exceptional. I loved how he genuinely steered the other candidates to illustrate their various stands. NAFTA for example.

So unless things change Im tipping to Dennis. But of course I'll support the Edwards/Kerry or visa versa or whoever is the nominee.

[ludwigb]

52. You're right

Dennis has greatly improved over the course of the campaign. I'm glad that the progressive wing now has a nationally know figure that can carry on the fight in the years to come.

[RichM]

17. I agree with your theory, though I'd replace the word 'do' with 'would' -

As in "..it's the realisation among the owning class that his policies would have widespread appeal" if they were widely & clearly understood.

When you say "single payer universal health care" it whizzes by most people like a blur. Too many syllables. And other candidates seem to be saying things that sound similar, but aren't. For example, "extending health care access to ALL Americans" sounds similar. But it isn't, because it doesn't imply change in private sector insurance/pharma/HMO control of health care.

Also: most Americans don't really grasp the connection Dennis draws between "defense" spending, and the resulting lack of resources to devote to constructive domestic programs. It would take some real educating, to get most people to understand this -- and pathetic spectacles like last night are utterly unhelpful to the process.

In the main, your last sentence is spot-on. Dennis' ideas challenge the interests of the owning class. That's why he must be ridiculed, marginalized & silenced.

[littlejoe]

22. Wait a second. I have to go get my tinfoil hat!

[bowens43]

23. Well....

why is the establishment working so hard to silence and disparage

What evidence do you have to show that they are? What treatment are you talking about? You expect him to get as much media attention as candidates who can actually win a primary? That's unreasonable.

[no name no slogan]

34. See post #32 for one egregious example

I've also got some from last fall when he was here, too, and the media somehow "missed" a crowd of 1,400 that came out on a Tuesday afternoon to see him.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. So if they are working very hard to silence him, they must be

working overtime to silence Lyndon LaRouche. He is getting even less ceverage than Kucinich. That must mean that they know that his message would resonate with the masses.

[RichM]

25. Do you know what "affirming the consequent" is?

It's a logical fallacy. You just committed it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

[foo_bar]

39. actually the original poster committed the fallacy

of circular reasoning (the establishment fears Kucinich's policies because of his unrealized widespread appeal; Kucinich's widespread appeal is unrealized because the establishment fears Kucinich's policies). Freddie was simply accentuating the illogic with an old-fashioned reductio ad absurdum.

[Mairead]

42. Trust me, I committed no such fallacy.

Tho your ability to characterise a position could use a bit of work.

The establishment fears Kucinich's policies because of their nature. So they do their level best to see to it that he and his policies are derided relentlessly.

No circularity there.

[RichM]

43. ** chuckle ** Well, though you worded this thrust very skillfully, there

are still holes in it.

First, you cleverly used the words "fears" & "unrealized widespread appeal" (or permutations thereof) in both halves of your first sentence. This does make it sound as though there's something 'circular' in the vicinity. But both times you used those words, you introduced slight distortions.

It would be more accurate to word it thusly: the establishment fears Kucinich's policies because of his potential widespread appeal; Kucinich's potential appeal is unrealized because the establishment impedes public airing & understanding of Kucinich's policies.

When worded like that, there's nothing circular about it, and there's no fallacy.

Surely, you'd concede that there IS such a thing as an "Establishment;" that they recognize ideas that are potentially adverse to their interests; that they will use whatever power is at their command to crush, marginalize, or otherwise defeat such ideas? Aren't there numerous examples of this, throughout history?

As far as Freddie goes: He did this -
If A then B.
B.
::Therefore A.

That's affirming the consequent.

[genius]

26. Dennis is hot. They're afraid of him.

We need him and I'm voting for him.

[jsw_81]

27. Nobody is trying to "silence" Kucinich

The fact is that he's a fringe candidate with zero chance, and fringe candidates don't get much attention in either party.

[SeveneightyWhoa]

28. Working HARD?

Gee, it seems to me like they're not working at it at all. It's coming rather naturally. Getting 1% of the Democratic vote can do that to a Democratic candidate.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

31. Correction:

beat Edwards in Washington, Maine, and Hawaii.

[sangha]

41. Still, the point remains

They don't have to work hard to NOT cover him. All they have to do is NOT assign anyone to cover him.

This is what happens every primary. As it gets further along, the media assumes that the field is narrowing, and they cover fewer and fewer of the candidates. I don't think it's a grand plot. Theyre just ignoring him becuase they're a herd of dumb cows who couldn't possible imagine they might be wrong about any candidate, never mind DK.

[Dookus]

29. The media haven't marginalized Dennis Kucinich...

Dennis Kucinich marginalized Dennis Kucinich. His views and positions are simply far outside the mainstream of American political thought. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it doesn't win elections, which results in a lack of media coverage.

[eridani]

30. So the 51% of Republicans who favor universal health care

to the Bush tax cuts are 'too far outside the mainstream?' Splain that, if you can.

Kucinich defines the mainstream on NAFTA/WTO.

http://sierratimes.com/03/12/29/ar_carlworden.htm

I am a Christian conservative who voted for Bush in 2000, and I write for a largely conservative and excellent Internet news and opinion publication called The Sierra Times. Remarkably, the positive responses I received from that article ran 8 to 2, 2 being those who said I was dead, absolutely DEAD wrong. The fact that largely conservative readers responded as positively as they did, means I am not wrong, and I am sticking to my prediction that Howard Dean will be sworn in as the 44th President of the United States.

The issue that I believe will put Dean right over the top will be his condemnation of NAFTA/GATT, free trade, and his pledge to end our participation in the World Trade Organization. If Dean wants to win by a comfortable margin, all he has to do is THAT. The massive number of red states that voted for Bush last election will turn to blue, and Dean will waltz into the White House like a halfback who strolls untouched into the end zone. End of game.

Of course, I have no idea what Dean’s position is on free trade, NAFTA/GATT or the WTO. As far as I know, he hasn’t said. Maybe he’s saving that for the finishing shot. I’m speculating of course, but Mr. Dean, if you are reading this, I just gave you the keys to the White House.

[corporatewhore]

35. his anti NAFTA/WTO stance is popular amongst left and right

if you dont believe me check out the texas gop platform they want to get out too

[bobthedrummer]

36. Dennis has had an effect on the other candidates

several of them borrowed heavily from what Dennis has been saying from the beginning of the campaign.

[wal]

37. Kerry / Kucinich in '04

Dennis Kucinich is sensible, patriotic, and Green.
Anyone with an agenda that ostensibly challenges the power of big oil/ car/ jet engine business is going to be marginalised by the powers that be and their minions, the press.
Nevertheless, I believe he would make a great VP on the Kerry ticket.
Kerry's quiet dignity and conservative liberal approach would alleviate voter fear. Which reminds me, when Kerry wins on Tuesday, are all the Deaniacs, and Clarkians, etc., going to come onside and start rooting for him?


Kerry / Kucinich in '04

[tameszu]

38. Look, if Kucinich could not win more than 20% support on DU

when Dean, Clark, and Gep were still in, why do you think he has any significant ordinary appeal?

DU is WAY out of the mainstream--witness that Kerry couldn't pull together a plurality lead here until both Dean and Clark had dropped, not to mention that LIHOP theories have strong support--and is presumably to a great degree innured to the "whore" corporate media. If Kucinich cannot win the support of more than a relatively limited hardcore here, then there is no way he could win the Dem primary, nevermind the general election.

I think he knows this himself--that he is not out to win, but to raise issues. And that's wonderful--I think he has added a decent amount to the dialogue, even if I think some of his ideas are not well-thought out. But if you want to support his mission, then please appreciate his contribution to what it is, and emphasize the dialogue, not the horserace as the corporate infotainers would like us to do.

[Mairead]

44. You're making a lot of unsupportable assumptions

I won't bother to detail them again, since they've been detailed often enough. What we know from surveys is that some unknown but large percentage believes that they are alone in appreciating his policies. I.e., they believe that they themselves are smart enough to see how important and attractive his policies are, but that everyone else is too dumb to do the same thing. And that, my friends, is Media Inc at work, doing their relentless little best to tell us that we're alone in the world.

[corporatewhore]

48. well my old school con green and libertarian friends dont go here

different party they do how ever go and volunteer w/me to go and spread the word about kucinich

[revcarol]

51. The media and the "electables" really worked at silencing him AGAIN

today. You would think that ONE of the "electables" would speak up for fairness in the debates.The media...(my mother would wash my mouth out with soap...)

He's DANGEROUS TO THE STATUS QUO.

[Mairead]

54. "He's DANGEROUS TO THE STATUS QUO"

And THAT's the bottom line!