MSNBC BREAKING: Kucinich will run in 2008.

Scarborough just announced that Kucinich has announced he will run.

It's important that people like this run. They're not afraid to speak their minds and therefore can sometimes be ahead of their time. Remember people like Kucinich and Dean had the plan from the beginning that's now being recommended two years and 2,000 lives later.

to where they need to be. This guy knows what needs to be done.

because everybody who's thinking of running voted for this war.except Obama and Vilsack

Who testified and advised Congress AGAINST the Iraqi War.

Sharpton just adds so much color and is able to use his famous analogies to bring the points home to Americans. I think both of these men are important for the primary debates.

(Anyone But Clinton) especially since he has as much chance of become president as I do.

He brings so much to the debate and my Greenie friends too :toast:

What's Scarborough doing on in the afternoon?

Here is a link to the story;
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061211/ap_on_el_pr/kucinich2008_5

while I was interning. I went to his Katrina briefing last fall (I think late Sept/early Oct). Very interesting. I can't help but like the guy.

http://www.kucinich.us/ This must be his PAC...?

http://kucinich.house.gov/ Here's his congressional website.

He'll drop out early after contributing greatly to the debate. In the end, like last time, it'll come down to two or three candidates in the vast majority of the contests and he won't be one of them.

until the convention last time.

For some reason I was thinking he backed out and left Kerry/Edwards. But you're right, thanks.

I love the guy and will work for him. I find that there are many misconceptions about him and often times attempts to discredit him by others with incorrect information. It helps to correct when someone does not know, an old habit from the last round of Presidential elections.

would work for any of the following serious contenders in order:

Gore
Edwards
Clark
Clinton

There are many things to like about him. I saw him speak and shook his hand. I am a sucker for a good speech and was thrilled by what he said and the way he said it.

Good luck to you.

He was great when I saw him and his family was there too. The kids are adorable, Elizabeth beautiful so it was just a perfect day except for standing in the cold gully washer for 45 minutes to get in. It was worth it.

The man has absolutely no shot at winning, but hey - if it means more screen time for the Dems, that's OK with me. But he has no shot at winning at all. So really, what's the point?

How do they decide who gets to participate in the debates?

I believe all announced Democratic candidates are included in the debates by default.

He has no chance at winning, but it's about advancing his views on things like healthcare, environment, the war, among others. He had a plan for withdrawal (as did Dean) in 2004 that was virtually the same as the one being put forth now. It would have saved 2,000+ lives of American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. It's important to have those in the debate who can speak freely since they have no hope of winning and therefore do not need to cater to independents.

Howard Dean was against the Iraq Wwar before it started, but his position in 2004 seemed to be the now that we're there, we have to stay.

What makes a "serious contender"? Is it just "looking presidential"? Dennis is short, and looks a bit elvish, but Kerry looks like Herman Munster. Gore was stiff (although he doesn't seem that way now).

Is it having experience? Obama is a one term Senator, that's not much experience. Several presidents were Governors - George W. had been elected twice but had only served his first term before waltzing off to be president. He was a terrible Governor. I'm from Texas and I didn't vote for him for Governor, why would I have voted for him for president. Kucinich has been a congressman since 1994.

Is it because he is too liberal? A vegan? Or is it just because the mainstream media and the "lord high muck-etty muck, consultacracy" have decided that he is "unelectable"? They aren't the people we are. We need to overthrow these king-makers and decide for ourself. We need someone who is on our side and not out just for themselves.

Dennis worked hard during the 2004 election. He campaigned his heart out and although he only got 1 or 2 percent in the early primaries, he got higher percentages as we went along getting 17% in Minnesota and I believe a similar amount in (I think Maine) and 31.2% of the vote in Hawaii. Although his campaign criss-crossed the country, he was alway back in Washington for votes and didn't miss any important votes unlike Kerry and Lieberman who were AWOL a lot due to their campaigns.

There are some differences this time. I would guess that even if it isn't really high, Kucinich's name recognition is much higher than it was last time. Not only that he is married so there should be any kind of speculation about his sexual orientation - I know, it doesn't prove you're not gay to be married but it does usually end media speculation. But the major reason that this time is different is that he was right about needing to get out of the war and this time the majority of Americans agree with him.

You think anyone here is going to be more likely to vote for Kucinich after you've spammed the place? It just makes me think how pathetic his support must be.

...so it's not in the least about helping his candidacy. He has 0 chance at winning.

What IS important, however is dialogue. His issues are very relevant to the interests of many groups on here so it's makes sense to raise the issue and get dialogue going that includes those groups and take the focus for the moment of the hypothetical candidacies of others.

If you don't want a very thorough dialogue that *actively* includes and solicits the views of those in specific groups (GBLT, Environmentalists, Health) you probably shouldn't be on DU.

Don't try to act like you have some sort of high minded intent. You're spamming the place and creating a problem.

We love a good debate at DU. Maybe what you haven't noticed that in your extensive time here, is we don't appreciate YOUR "debate" being shoved down our throats via spamming the board. Perhaps the forums you're used to using have members who are unable to discuss things unless it's not only spoon fed to them but force fed. I can assure you this is not the case at DU.

You are in no way advancing debate. You are only creating ill will. Maybe it's YOU who shouldn't be at DU.

You shouldn't rush to judgment.

Now as for your accusations of supporting Kucinich, he's not my candidate. I plan on working on the campaign staff for another once their campaign begins.

EDIT: (Making sure to point out which part was added). As for the "spoon-fed" bit, that's just a matter of perspective. The reality is it was a matter of soliciting the input from those groups in this 'general politics' board. That's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Dialogue is a good thing. I solicited the opinion from groups I'm interested in hearing from (Environment, healthcare, GLBT...) and you can solicit the opinion from the groups you have an interest in. That's democracy. That's dialogue. It's a beautiful thing. :toast:

I can't believe what you've edited and what you haven't. Spammers rank very low for trustworthiness.

Why would anyone believe what a spammer says he did or didn't do? And not only a non-credible spammer, but one who likes to tell other posters they don't belong here after two whole months on the board. Looks like we've gotten a great addition here. :eyes:

And I never said you don't belong here. I want you to contribute to the valuable discussion of Kucinich while it's relevant and newsworthy. Everyone's input on each candidate is valuable, especially for an announced candidate. Being Kucinich is clearly defined from the other candidates, it's relevant and valuable to get the input from the few groups that are directly tied to his liberal positions or may generally have interesting input.

The groups from which input was sought was very calculated, not random "spam." Perhaps you do not like Kucinich and so it rubbed you wrong to have a thorough discussion of him. However, while he's not in my top tier of candidate preferences, I have a great deal of respect for him having met him and spoken to him in the past on issues.

When you edit your posts after I've responded you are changing your story, especially when it changes what I was responding to. Also, when you say:



Then you are definitely telling me I don't belong here. To say otherwise now is just stupid.

And yes it was spam. Posting the same message to six different sub forums is spam, however "calculated" you seem to think it was.

Lastly, don't try to use a straw man argument like saying I'm only pissed because I don't like Kucinich. That's a truly asinine comment. I like every Dem running so far so you'll have to do better than that. I just don't like spammers who think their ideas or comments are more important than those of others. Post a message then let people respond. Don't clog up the forum posting it over and over. That, and you telling me I don't belong on a forum I've used for the last 5 1/2 years, is where I have a problem.

already have due to responding to your ridiculousness. There's no reason to post two replies to one of your comments when I can just add to the one I already have as additional thoughts come to mind.

Further, my statement about you not being on DU was an "IF" statement which means it's hypothetical, not a direct command. See English 101.

I'm done responding to you. All the points have been made. If you want a response to your redundant distortions of words, go back and reread what I've said. It's pretty explicit and there's nothing to be read into it. I mean only what I say and say only what I mean.

I was having fun, now you're taking your ball and going home. Of course, you managed to throw in some more insults and such, but I'm sure you'll edit it to "respond". Enjoy that. :)

He set up a nice netroots campaign last time that will get him out of the gate faster.

He took almost 20% of the vote in Minnesota's Caucus. There are people who want to hear the man speak.

When can I start donating money?

I was away on internship and didn't see the results for the candidates. Thanks for your Minnesota input!!!

http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20040302/ElecRslts_DFL.htm

Those aren't even all the votes...I think he actually finished with 18 percent of the vote if memory serves me right.

I'll update this comment when I have.

Edit: He took second behind Kerry with 26%. Very interesting.

Hawaii results:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/primaries/pages/states/HI/

he received 30.2% behind Kerry's 47.1%

http://www.kpua.net/news.php?id=1538

We'd have controlled the convention delegation if only the Kerry campaign people hadn't locked their delegates in a private room at the state convention so we couldn't talk to them after the first fan-out.
He won outright in Juneau and Fairbanks in the first round of caucuses.

He can get votes...or he wouldn't put himself out there. And, he's one we "Get out of Iraq" voters can rally round. He's very good on all other issues for Dems, too.

a great deal. He provides a voice that is sorely missing on the political scene and will force other candidates to heed his words. While I have another candidate of choice, my respect and adoration of a man of principle knows no bounds! Go Dennis!:yourock:

:party: :toast: :party: :toast: :party: :toast:

well...you get where I'm coming from....

Peace Majority (composite of a variety of organizations working to reduce military spending and who favor diplomacy over military intervention – see list of sponsoring organizations of Peace Majority) link:

http://www.peacemajority.org//index.html

To see a breakdown of how this score is tabulated:

Link: http://www.peacemajority.org/scorecard/scorecard.jsp?person_legislator_ID=241

Representative Dennis Kucinich:

Final Score: 151.0/152.0 votes=99%
_____________________

Senator Hillary Clinton:

Final Score: 75.0/133.0 votes=56%

Senator Barack Obama:

Final Score: 38.0/68.0 votes=56%

Senator Evan Bayh:

Final Score: 46.0/133.0 votes=35%

Senator Joseph Biden

Final Score: 70.0/133.0 votes=53%

folks who knew him from '04 are thrilled with this news!

He's going to need it. Give 'em hell, Dennis.

DK never disappoints yet always surprises.

My Hero

and that will have a snowball effect on the rest of field, who will then be forced into talking about issues they might have otherwise skirted around.

It's a shame that Kucinich doesn't seem to stand a fair chance of winning. He's probably closer to true Democratic values than any other Dems out there.