Dennis is bring the Democratic Party back to number 1

Those who left our party because they thought the party was leaving it's principles are coming home to support Dennis.

I got this in an email today.

3RD PARTY LEADERS SUPPORT DENNIS
Natural Law Party leader and former presidential candidate John Hagelin has urged supporters to back Kucinich: “Dennis Kucinich has proven again and again that he will take a bold, principled, unequivocal stance for peace in our world. His campaign is gaining momentum across the nation and has drawn support from a broad, inclusive, and rapidly expanding coalition of voters, including young people and members of the nation’s largest third parties.” Former Green Party presidential candidate Ralph Nader has also urged support for Kucinich in the Democratic primaries.

Had to change my addie, so have been missing out, but made a contribution since, so maybe I am back on.

And now Dennis is bringing them back. Let's pull together, people. It's our nation, and it's our Party! Let's take it back!

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

and am now supporting Kucinich...this is exactly true.

Dennis Kucinich can bring in the former democrats that the Democratic party has alienated over the past 10 years.

Thank you Mr. Hagelin!

...who's comoing back to the Democratic fold because of DK!!!

Selling Kucinich short - should the media elect our president, or should we? http://www.townonline.com/cambridge/news/opinion/cam_colccpennms10012003.htm


http://www.pepeace.org/tmpl/gandhi.html


http://www.kucinich.us/glbt.htm


http://www.kucinich.us/students.htm

turned independent coming back for only one reason and one reason only~ DK!! :)

I am SOOO jazzed for DK...PHX is gonna throw him such a magic party...get ready everyone!!!!

check this out.....

peace
DR

ROY SCHEIDER ENDORSES DENNIS
Roy Scheider, the popular actor known for many TV and movie roles including "Jaws” and "All That Jazz," has thrown his support behind the Kucinich campaign and has pledged to help. Scheider told us: "Our country has taken 18 steps backward in every area we've made progress. Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate I see who does not speak in half-truths. He tells the whole truth."

LINDA BLAIR, TOO
Vegan/animal rights activist and actress (“The Exorcist”) Linda Blair has also endorsed Kucinich. 



Endorsements are coming in so fast, it could make anyone’s head spin!

i know they don't all have to, but it would be a nice gesture.

(FWIW)

Now let's hope we don't give you a reason to go back. ;)

FWIW, I'm working on a project with 2 other women who've also switched back from Green specifically to support Dennis in the primary.

What about the 20% in the middle, those who are moderates and voted for Gore but would never vote for a far leftist like Kucinich?

What percentage do we account for? The independents. Not 3rd party. Not any party. Because we don't feel that there is a party that represents us. Some of us vote in general elections. Some don't bother to vote at all, because they don't like the options. Or because they've totally lost hope in the system. What percentage of the voting age population do we represent?

I've always voted. Sometimes dem, sometimes 3rd party, even when I didn't like any of the choices. When, for the first time in 25 years of voting for people as the lesser of two bad choices, I finally found a candidate I could actually support, I reregistered. I joined a party. Because I believe that Dennis Kucinich is the best choice for our country, and because he is the first politician in 25 years who actually represents most of where I stand.

When I go to Kucinich meetups, I meet a broad spectrum of folks supporting him. Many, many members of peace organizations; no surprise there. Many dems; yellow-dog dems and progressive dems. Some Dean converts. A bunch of folks from 3rd parties who are reregistering with the democratic party in order to support Kucinich. Young people just entering their role as voters. And plenty of independents like me; folks who have never supported a party ever. Until now. There are plenty of voters out there who have found hope in the process. Finally.

What % do we represent? And should the democratic party determine that we aren't significant enough to be a voice, or to be represented, and brush us aside for the middle? Is there still room under the big tent, or does that tent only cover the center, leaving us out in the storm? If so, who can blame the rest of the voters for finding 3rd party alternatives?

First of all, let me say this: if Kucinich is the candidate, trust me, I'll vote for him, donate to him, and work my ass off for him.

I'm simply saying this: Take the 2000 election, and look at the demographics. Gore and Bush just about evenly split the vote (Gore took a bit more). Gore was a centrist. If we nominate a far leftist like Kucinich, I think we'd probably 30% of the voters that we had in 2000, because according to exit polls, about half of the Gore voters considered themselves "moderates." Out of those, some would still vote for Kucinich, but I think a majority wouldn't. So where does that leave us? If we only keep 70% of the 49% we won, it leaves us with about 34% of the voters we got last time.

In order to compensate for that, we'd have to get TENS OF MILLIONS of NEW VOTERS. Do you think we can get that many people new people to vote for our candidate? Suppose we can register that many new people. Even if we can, why would they all decide to go to the left end of the spectrum? I suppose that new voters would end up statistically the same as the people who vote now, which is about 35% Dem, 35% Repub and 30% middle-of-the-roaders.

Now I'm not saying it's impossible, maybe it is. I'm just saying that if we nominate Kucinich, we'd have to get millions of new voters -- people who haven't been into politics before -- and make sure they ALL vote for our guy. Maybe that's possible, but it seems difficult to me. If we're talking about the same people who voted in 2000, we wouldn't stand a chance, because so many Gore voters wouldn't vote for Kucinich.

My family is mainstream dem and they like him.

we'll get all the Gore votes, (of which I was one!), more 3rd party and independent votes, and even a few swing/moderate repubs. No matter who we run. Because of GWBs record. With that record, he'll get the hardcore voters, but not the rest.

I certainly hope you're right. I'm not sure I agree, though, simply because the gazillion-dollar right wing propaganda machine shapes opionion in this country. Look at Bush's approval ratings: yes, they've fallen a lot, but they're still at 50%, which is just only slightly below the average. With Bush's record, his approval rating should be about 3% -- the richest 3% of the country who are the only people benefitting from his policies.

I really hope that with all my posts I'm not coming off as against Kucinich. I like him a lot and trust me, if he gets the nod, he has 150% of my support.

You come off just fine. :hi:

You make good points sensibly. And I can disagree with you and still value your perspective. Actually, I agree with you to a point; it's because the gazillion-dollar right wing propaganda machine shapes opinion in this country that I want to see Dennis win. He is their staunchest opponent, IMHO. I want to see him discussed in every american household. I want all those people out there to actually listen and consider...and I think enough of them would ((hear)) to not only evict *, but to send that propaganda machine back to the pits it ascended from.

When the general election arrives, I'll be right there bashing the GOP with you, and supporting which ever candidate is chosen. For now, I want people to sit up and take notice. To listen. Because I think it can only benefit us in the long run.

:toast:

and I hope if Kucinich is the nominee, you're saying this is November 2004: "Haha, you actually though Kucinich would've lost to Bush. Look how wrong you were!!!!" :)

while dancing to polka then we can go bowling lol. Thanks for being kind GB too.

"Even if we can, why would they all decide to go to the left end of the spectrum?"

Simple. You target voter registration efforts to those most likely to have their lives improved by a President like Kucinich. You hit Unions, homeless shelters daycare centers, YMCAs and everywhere else the truly downtrodden and disillusioned people might be. You show them the candidates and particularly the things Kucinich wants to do for them. Give them a realistic comparison, and trust me, they'll go left because the right has nothing for them.

That's true to a point; however, remember how many idiots in this country vote directly against their self-interests because they're duped by the right wing propaganda machine.

but in the end we get: fitty/fitty, once again.

the only reason the country is technically split in half is because the republicans are much better at the whole patriotic/religious guilt trip thing than the dems are. if our party could somehow manage to get those red states to understand that democrats won't turn this country into a pagan daisy chain we'd clean frikkin house. i'm not sure kucinich could convince them; especially since according to the ny times, over 40% of americans don't care at all about the iwr vote. don't get me wrong, i like kucinich, and i think he could get the votes necessary to win-- as long as dubya keeps putting his feet in his mouth and his hands in our pockets. dubya's such a retard though, and people expect so little of him i wouldn't put it past him to pull a mother theresa and trick everyone into thinking he had nothing to do with iraq, the debt, job loss... he can just blame it on his advisors, a couple of whom he will fire, producing some slick-talking miracle workers to save the day and give the right-wingers "hope". i think that would put a democratic candidate kucinich in a pickle.

Bush that is.

...but i was just thinking about kucinich for the moment. everyone is vulnerable to bush's ridiculous antics, true. if kucinich were to be the dem nominee, he would need some fierce headlines in favor of the rest of his platform as well, seeing as how for the time being most deal with his opposition to the iwr, which apparently is not a definitive issue for most americans.

I dont hate those who voted IWR, I do like Kucinich because he was against it and has the best views. You'll be suprised he can fight as good as anyone.

he isn't my number one choice, but he is one of four candidates i am interested in. not only for his idealism and impressive record but for his strategy. he is very effective in getting his message out and riling up grassroots support. i also trust his motives... and his dedication to the issues he raises while campaigning.

We cannot ignore these important issues.

Are they so far to the right that they'll vote for Bush? If they are, then they're not really in the middle, are they.

Peace, freedom, and prosperity can only be considered 'far left' in a really, really sick society. Who benefits from maintaining that kind of pathology as the standard for national life? As we can see all around us, we sure as hell don't benefit!

Dennis doesn't even BEGIN to be a 'far leftist' except on, probably, the Free Republic's scale. But I thought we'd agreed not to use that scale.

"Peace, freedom, and prosperity can only be considered 'far left' in a really, really sick society."

I agree with that. However, I think that where Kucinich stands on fiscal issues and foreign affairs is just too far left for the American electorate.

I explain myself in post number 15.

You only addressed the moderate alignment of some of the Gore voters and what percentage of the electorate they represent, but that doesn't really evaluate the issues subject carefully. You mentioned fiscal & foreign affairs issues so I'll discuss those.

Regarding fiscal policies, it would easy to believe that his policies wouldn't sell with Americans, because we've been carefully trained by the media to think that everyone loves privatization and such. However, if you go back and look at what happened in Cleveland, you'll see that the decision to keep MUNY municipally-owned was made by the citizens. They made the decision and Kucinich backed them up, at great personal cost.

Regarding other fiscal matters, I really don't see how they won't sell with the American public. At this point, millions have lost their jobs due to corporate malfeasance, and those millions of people don't live in bubbles, they have families and friends that share their stress and struggle... all of these people are sympathetic with Dennis' message of the need for regulation. I'm not sure what other fiscal policies you may be referring to so I'll leave that for now and move on to foreign affairs.

To be sure there is a hardcore small percentage of Americans who are bu$h junta loyalists and they'll agree that preventive wars are just A-OK. However this is clearly not the majority of the public. The demonstrations before the Iraq war were a clear indication that most people did not support it. Military experts did not support it. Intelligence experts did not support it. I know about all the polls but I don't buy that stuff. Zogby was off by as much as 14% in some polls before the 2002 midterms. AFAIC, polling firms are used more often to help shape public opinion than to reflect it.

People wanted us to go to the UN before the invasion. People don't want to approve this $87 billion. People want the soldiers home - they want the US out and the UN to take over. If there is some other foreign policy issue which voters would disagree with him on I don't know what it is.

From what I've seen, read and heard, the majority of the people not voting are not just lazy, and neither are they 'far left'. Judging by most accounts, the reason they avoid politics altogether is because they've been burned by leaders repeatedly selling their interests out once they get into power. Dennis is the antithesis of that kind of politician, which is why he was able to unseat Republicans for state office and congress, in a conservative area.

Independents have been burned by Bush and are supporting Kucinich. Greens have recognized that there is now a Democratic candidate with integrity and real American values, and more and more are supporting Kucinich. I fail to comprehend why a lot of people in his own party don't.

It doesn't matter that we got so many protesters; sometimes the minority is simply more vocal. For example, the Christian Right is incredibly vocal, but luckily they're not even close to a majority. Polls lately have been clear that the majority of voters no longer thought the war in Iraq was necessary, so that's good news for us. However, with the way the right wing media is playing up this latest "discovery of weapons of mass destruction," I'm be surprised if the numbers didn't turn back around in Chimp's favor. I know it's bullshit, but the bullshit spewed by the right wing propaganda machine controls thought in this country, unfortunately.

As far as fiscal issues, you mentioned the reasons that people will be upset with Shrub's policies, but that doesn't mean they'd like Kucinich's. The vast majority of the public agrees with the welfare reform of a few years ago, so any talk of rolling that back will kill us. And by the way, if the economy comes roaring back, I think we won't stand a chance, regardless of our nominee.

First he won by 56% Then whe won by about90%. Then he won by 86%. Thousands participated. Then they stopped doing the polls. I guess they felt the other candiates simply didn't have a chance.

You know, when they are ranking candidates according to polls.

Internet polls don't have random samples, so they don't mean anything. You may get only the supporters of one candidate who decide to participate. A scientific poll gives every single person and equal chance of being asked. So internet polls can't be used to judge political opinion. If you read the disclaimer on them, they say so themselves.

As an example, in 2000 I saw plenty of AOL polls just a couple days before the election that had Bush ahead by 20% - 40%. Obviously, that didn't bear the slightest resemblence of what happened in the election. It just meant that much more of Bush's supporters decided to participate.

is when they support the candidate of your choice...
:evilgrin:

If the poll puts our candidate ahead...then its scientific...right??
LOL

<attempt at humor>
Peace
DR

McGovern, even Eugene McCarthy, and I want to elect DK. Could be there are a lot of older Dems like me who've been radicalized by the Bush* coup and all that's followed. I know some who have and I'm betting there are more of us than anyone imagines.

I bet there is too, my dad likes DK too.

Remember 68% didn't see a difference and didn't vote in the last election. Without Dennis, it's a guaranteed win for the Republicans who do vote.

So many people in this country don't vote because they're not political; not interested in politics. If we did manage to get them to vote, what makes you think they'd all be leftists, or even democrats? I think they'd fall statistically the same as the rest of the population, which is about 35% Dem, 35% Repub, and and 30% independent. How come everyone assumes that if we get those people interested in politics, they'd all be on our side? Remember, that group contains just as morons who would vote against their self-interests as the voting population.

Dont worry I am not going give you your typical Clark bashing, I dont do that. What makes you think a general will appeal to the american people. Like I know about Ike and US Grant but Kosovo wasnt as well known as those two wars. I am just saying military experience as a general is an honorable asset but it doesnt assure victory.

I agree with you there. However, I think it would help him a great deal, especially since for some stupid reason people seem to think of Bush as a "good war-time leader."

btw in my book being a vet is good.

One doesn't have to be a leftist to appreciate the logic of returning to bilateral trade as opposed to the labor-killing WTO / NAFTA.

One doesn't have to be a leftist to agree that funding programs such as the V22 Osprey are a waste of money, same for star wars missile defense.

One doesn't have to be a leftist to see that launching unilateral preventive wars isn't a good way to handle foreign policy.

One doesn't have to be a leftist to think that free airtime for candidates and instant runoff voting would be good for elections.

One doesn't have to be a leftist to think that corporate farms should be cut down so that family farms aren't run out of business. The part about the corporate farms being massive contributors to pollution is a lefty issue, but not the part about letting family farmers continue to do what they do.

That was just off the top of my head... I'm sure there's more in Dennis' agenda that appeals to independents, libertarians, and even republicans.

with that message! There's a movement underway to show the moderates and even centrist Republicans everything you've said here, and heaven knows I haven't been nearly as concise with it as you were in this message!

Clark/Kucinich in 2004. Watching DK on c-span, he REALLY has a handle on the domestic issues, and he's got fire, AND he SMILES!!